Abortion Opponents Are Targeting a Signature G.O.P. Public-Health Initiative

Abortion Opponents Are Targeting a Signature G.O.P. Public-Health Initiative

Introduction

At a World AIDS Day event last year honoring George W. Bush, the former President, wearing a suit and tie and a red solidarity ribbon, settled into a chair onstage, microphone in hand. “It takes a lot to get me back to Washington,” he said, “and PEPFAR is it.” Formally known as the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, PEPFAR is easily one of the most successful foreign-policy initiatives in modern U.S. history. Created by Bush in 2003, at the height of the AIDS epidemic in Africa, the program is credited with saving as many as twenty-five million lives by investing in medicines and treatment networks. “I’m here to say as loud and clear as I can, Congress must fund PEPFAR,” Bush told his audience. “And you know what? It works, with verifiable results.”

Funding and Support

Funding PEPFAR has never been a problem for Congress, which approved spending nearly seven billion dollars on the project this year, and more than a hundred and ten billion dollars since its inception. The program works with the United Nations, national governments, and community organizations to provide antiretroviral drugs, train medical workers, and build health-care networks in more than fifty countries where H.I.V. remains a significant challenge. Its support in the United States is not only bipartisan but has historically cut across ideological and religious lines. Numerous Catholic and evangelical Christian institutions have joined liberal groups in praising the effort, even though it was established at a time when many social conservatives were demonizing patients who contracted H.I.V. from intravenous drug use or same-sex relationships. PEPFAR rose above such objections in an effort that Bush, who often talks about his Christian faith, called “a work of mercy.”

Reauthorization and Opposition

Congress typically reauthorizes PEPFAR for five years at a time. It did so most recently in 2018. The deadline for the next reauthorization is the end of September. For now, clinics and other health-care organizations that receive PEPFAR money to combat H.I.V./AIDS can provide abortions, using funds from other sources, in keeping with the laws of their home countries. But, this year, U.S. abortion opponents are demanding new conditions that would prevent partner organizations abroad from performing abortions—or even discussing abortion as an option—if they receive PEPFAR money. Emboldened by the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision, the Family Research Council; Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America; and Heritage Action for America, an advocacy arm of the Heritage Foundation, say they will penalize politicians who support an unreconstructed PEPFAR on the scorecards that they maintain on each member of the House and Senate, which some voters use to assess a candidate’s loyalty to the cause.

Impact and Concerns

“There’s no evidence that any organization is using any U.S. money, PEPFAR or otherwise, to do any abortion-related activity,” Jen Kates, the director of the Global Health and H.I.V. Policy Program at K.F.F., an independent research organization, told me. What has changed, she said, is the intensity of abortion politics. PEPFAR is “mired in this larger post-Dobbs political environment. The political stakes seem to be much higher and more acute. Things don’t look very promising.” Although support for PEPFAR remains strong, momentum for reauthorization has, indeed, stalled. “The surest sign of a broken Congress is when it can’t even agree on things that both parties agree on,” Tom Malinowski, a Democratic former member of Congress who spent more than a decade as the Washington director of Human Rights Watch, told me. Prohibiting PEPFAR recipients from providing or discussing abortion “won’t prevent a single abortion,” he said. “It will just end U.S. support for programs that have saved millions of lives.”

Conclusion

To combat the politicization of PEPFAR by opponents who, Connor said, don’t understand the program, advocates from faith groups and health organizations are using every bit of access they can muster on Capitol Hill. “We feel like an overwhelming number of congressmen and women would vote for a five-year reauthorization without hesitation if we could remove the hostile overtones of this stuff,” she told me. Or, as George W. Bush said at a twentieth-anniversary commemoration of PEPFAR in February, “All I ask is, look at the results. If the results don’t impress you, nothing will impress you.”

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being
• SDG 5: Gender Equality
• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

• SDG 3.3: By 2030, end the epidemics of AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, and neglected tropical diseases and combat hepatitis, water-borne diseases, and other communicable diseases.
• SDG 5.6: Ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights as agreed in accordance with the Programme of Action of the International Conference on Population and Development and the Beijing Platform for Action and the outcome documents of their review conferences.
• SDG 10.3: Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory laws, policies, and practices and promoting appropriate legislation, policies, and action in this regard.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

The article does not explicitly mention specific indicators to measure progress towards the identified targets. However, some potential indicators could include:

• Number of lives saved through investments in medicines and treatment networks for HIV/AIDS.
• Availability and accessibility of antiretroviral drugs and healthcare networks in countries with significant HIV/AIDS challenges.
• Extent of support for PEPFAR from bipartisan and diverse ideological and religious groups.
• Extent of political opposition and demands for new conditions on PEPFAR funding related to abortion.
• Continued funding and reauthorization of PEPFAR by Congress.

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Behold! This splendid article springs forth from the wellspring of knowledge, shaped by a wondrous proprietary AI technology that delved into a vast ocean of data, illuminating the path towards the Sustainable Development Goals. Remember that all rights are reserved by SDG Investors LLC, empowering us to champion progress together.

Source: newyorker.com

Join us, as fellow seekers of change, on a transformative journey at https://sdgtalks.ai/welcome, where you can become a member and actively contribute to shaping a brighter future.