Komen Defunded Planned Parenthood Because They Didn’t Perform Mammograms

Some of the early accounts of this ever developing story was that Susan G. Komen discontinued funding to Planned Parenthood over an ongoing Congressional investigation. Now the President of the organization says that the defunding was in large part because Planned Parenthood did not offer mammograms at all, rather, they performed mammogram referrals. How much money does it take to make a mammogram referral?

“First and foremost, it doesn’t really have anything to do with that,” she said, adding that she didn’t know “very much” about the investigation because she works “20 hours a day focusing on our mission.”

So why did Planned Parenthood lose funding? Brinker says it has to do with the fact that they do not provide mammograms to women, but only provide mammogram referrals. “It was nothing they were doing wrong,” she explained. “We have decided not to fund, whereever possible, pass-through grants. We were giving them money, they were sending women out for mammograms. What we would like to have are clinics where we can directly fund mammograms.”

Imagine that. An organization whose sole purpose is to fight against breast cancer wanting to give their money to organizations that actually aide in fighting breast cancer.

The Washington Post story goes on to say that Komen will continue to fund three chapters of Planned Parenthood because they are the only source of breast health services in their respective areas. So it seems that the narrative that Susan G. Komen is some sort of right-wing extremist, anti-abortion group doesn’t really hold water, now does it?

With lefties the facts don’t matter. All they see is that abortion proponents will be receiving less money; and to them, that’s the bottom line. Lucky for them they have friends like Nanny Bloomberg who said he was giving Planned Parenthood $250,000. Good for him, put your money where your freaking mouth is Mikey.

And then there’s this. Since cutting funding to Planned Parenthood, Susan G. Komen has seen an increase in their donations by 100%. I wonder if this was money they would have been getting all along had they not been funding the abortion mill? On the other side, Planned Parenthood has seen their donations spike to more than make up for what they’ll lose from Komen.

Gotta protect women’s bodies and all that nonsense.

Also at Wizbang:

Thoughts on Abortion

Planned Parenthood vs. Women: PP Getting It’s Thug On!

Rep. Jackie Speier Slams Susan G. Komen On The House Floor

Komen sez goodbye to Planned Parenthood


Enhanced by Zemanta
Wizbang Weekend Caption Contest™
Thoughts on Abortion
  • Notice how the story has changed now that reporters pointed out that Komen’s $7.5 million grant to Penn State falls into the same category of “organization under investigation” that Komen claimed was the reason they defunded PP’s efforts to pay for mammograms for poor people?

    Komen’s $7.5 Million Grant to Penn State Appears to Violate New Policy

    Susan G. Komen for the Cure, which recently announced that it is ending grants to Planned Parenthood for breast cancer screening because of a controversial investigation launched by an anti-abortion Republican congressman, currently funds cancer research at the Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center to the tune of $7.5 million. Like Planned Parenthood, Penn State is currently the subject of a federal government investigation, and like the Planned Parenthood grant, the Penn State grant appears to violate a new internal rule at Komen that bans grants to organizations that are under investigation by federal, state, or local governments. But so far, only the Planned Parenthood grants appear to have been cancelled.

    Now, suddenly, it was never about the investigation… no, no, no… even though that’s what they said less than 24 hours ago.

    Liars. You can tell the have been infiltrated by the religious extremists from the right – they’ve taken up “lying through their teeth”… as only the right can do.

    • TWB

      Stephen, are you even paying attention to the story? At all? 

    • Stephen, what is the URL to the source of your quote? I can’t tell whether the quote is from a media source or from someone else’s blog.

      • jim_m

         Stephen never links to his sources.  Then he wonders why no one believes him.

        And is there anything discrepant between wanting to fund mammograms directly and not wanting to fund an organization under federal investigation?

        Stevie cannot wrap his feeble brain around the fact that both might just be true.

    • Sky__Captain

      L’il Stephen appears to have copy-and-pasted from a Mother Jones article without giving any credit – a clear violation of Wizbang’s Terms of Service.

      Nice going, Dumbass.

      • It’s because he knows what a crap source Mother Jones is.

        • Notice that none of the ingnuts can cite anything untrue about the quote, they just throw stones at the quoter.

          Do they know these are ad hominem arguments? No, they dont’ know the meaning of the word. TFS…

    • retired.military

      Gee Stephen’s argument about the religous right causing the defunding of mammiograms to the poor just got blew out of the water. 

      • And this guy is the chief idiot.

  • So… they’re paying for mammograms.  PP doesn’t… do mammograms?  They refer them out?

    You know, it’s really, really hard for me to get upset about them pulling funding from PP.  There’s no rule that says once you donate money that you’ve got to keep donating it – no matter where else you might want to spend it.   

    After all, it’s a friggin’ DONATION.  Not a tax, not a perpetual obligation.  You can give it, or not, and you owe the recipient pretty much nothing as far as an explanation goes when you stop giving.  I think it’d be polite to give one, but it’s certainly not mandatory.  

    Of all the things going on in this country, in the world, this shouldn’t even register.  But that it does to such an issue – to me – points out how obsessed we are with trivial bullshit when faced with much larger issues that we have little to no control over.  Far better to concentrate on something that (for better or worse) we can express outrage over and quickly forget than start paying attention to the larger things which have much more impact on our lives that won’t be forgotten in a few days to a week.

    • herddog505

      JLawson[I]t’s a friggin’ DONATION.  Not a tax, not a perpetual obligation.  You can give it, or not, and you owe the recipient pretty much nothing as far as an explanation goes when you stop giving.  I think it’d be polite to give one, but it’s certainly not mandatory.


      The left has their feelings hurt because somebody has decided to stop paying tithes to the Holy Church of Abortion.  So, we get the expected indignant screeching:

      “Rightwing religious bigots!”

      “Women and children will DIE!”

      “Politicization of health care!”


      “Off with their heads!”


  • cosmic93

    There are TWO lies here.
    First of all, Komen’s own initial claim was that this was all about the investigation.  Now they’re claiming something different – they can’t even get their own story straight.
    Secondly, contrary to the author’s claim, many PP locations DO offer mammograms, or offer a referral to a provider WHO WILL BE PAID BY PP.  So the money WAS going through directly to screening services.  That’s why some local affiliates are keeping their money – they’re the only people who even offer the service in their area.  Now, if the truth was that no PP gives mammograms, that couldn’t be possible, could it?

    • Ezra Klein reports that, out of the 19 chapters of Planned Parenthood that received money from Komen, only 3 provide mammograms. PP chapters other than those 19 are not relevant to the story.

      Also, what it the point of Komen giving money to a PP chapter if that chapter is just going to give the money (at least some of it) to a third party that actually provides mammograms? Komen wants to directly pay for mammograms, instead of using a middle party. What is wrong with that?

      • jim_m

        What’s wrong with that?

        Obviously it is eliminating the opportunity for a leftist organization to skim money off the top and use it to further a political agenda rather than actually help people.

        This was never about the women for planned parenthood.  It was always about the money.

    • TWB

      Actually Cosmic, I didn’t say they didn’t give mammograms, that’s what the President of Komen said reported by Ezra Klein of the Washington Post which I have linked. Now I’m sure if PP had been performing mammograms as you say, Komen would have continued funding just as before. Lefties are trying their hardest to label Komen as some sort of right-wing fringe group. Hilarious.

  • TomInCali

    Cripes, really?

    First of all, as previously pointed out, Komen is changing their story now that it’s shown to be full of crap. And are they going to follow their highly touted policy with regard to Penn State? Or are they going to forget their policy now that their public rationale has changed?

    Second, the “donations up 100% over 2 days” is a pointless statistic. How are they measuring that, and how much money is that? Do they normally get $50K over 2 days, and they got an extra $50K? If you want to use that statistic to show they’re getting support, you need to compare it to how much PP has increased their donations too.

    Next, how is it that Brinker is aware of this new observation, and that PP doesn’t perform mammograms, but no one else knows this? The top public health official nationally for Komen has resigned over this, so apparently she wasn’t in the loop on this new finding. Other top Komen officials have resigned or threatened to. Multiple inside sources at Komen have told the media that PP was targeted for months and the rationale was retconned. Did Brinker do her investigation on her own? Oh, except she said she “didn’t know ‘very much’ about the investigation because she works ’20 hours a day focusing on our mission.’

    You guys are actually smarter than this. At least some of you are expressing approval purely on the basis of PP taking a hit. That’s more honest than those of you pretending to believe the rationale. If this was liberal influence cutting funding to a conservative organization, I can’t believe that you’d be defending an organization whose explanations change daily based on the circumstances.

    • TWB

      Tom, I can only speak for myself, but I’m not defending Komen. To be quite honest with you I never knew that they supported PP to begin with. I wish that were not the case. As for their real reason for defunding? We can only go by what they’ve said. As for expressing approval at PP taking a financial hit, yes, if you’re against abortion, as I am, you’re going to be happy that they take a hit. But as I said in the post, there’s more than enough lunacy out there like Nanny Bloomberg to make up for it. I have no illusions, as I’m sure most of the writers here at Wizbang do either, that Susan G. Komen is an ally of Conservatives or Republicans.

      I just think it’s fun to watch liberals get all worked up and in a tizzy over one of their sacred cows.

    • Oysteria

      “Next, how is it that Brinker is aware of this new observation, and that PP doesn’t perform mammograms, but no one else knows this?”

      I knew it. I’ve known it for a long time. In fact, it’s been my contention that PP uses it to fudge their figures on income. So when someone goes to PP for an abortion, but also gets a referral to a mammogram clinic, PP claims half the income for the abortion and half for “a mammogram”.

  • Wild_Willie

    Where is the snooty canadian Hyper? He was ranting and railing yesterday about how we wanteed women to die, etc. I guess he is waiting for his talking points. So droll.  ww

  • lance_f

    To be fair though PP does not do mammograms they do screening and show women how to do self exams which are very important for early detection. At risk women are then sent to clinics for mammograms.

  • ackwired

    And today the president of Komen is saying that they will continue to fund Planned Parenthood because they have changes their guidelines to only include investigations that have proven culpability.  It sounds like there is a story for everybody.

  • Pingback: Two Can Play at That: What Komen Can Teach Us about Boycotts | Christ and Pop Culture()

  • Pingback: Two Can Play at That: What Komen Can Teach Us about Boycotts (Updated)()