[ News Flashes | Net News Home Page ]
Global "Gag Rule" Threatens International Family Planning
from Susan Yanow
Rep. Chris Smith of New Jersey, one of the proponents of the so-called "Partial Birth Abortion Ban," has attached a "global gag rule" in the State Department Reauthorization bill (HR 1757). The global gag rule would disqualify foreign nongovernmental organizations from receiving U.S. family planning assistance if they -- even with non-U.S. funds -- perform legal abortions or lobby on the issue of abortion.
Please Call Your Representative Immediately to tell him that you support international family planning and oppose the global gag rule in any bill. Ask him to vote against HR 1757.
The main number at the U.S. House of Representatives is 202-225-3121.
Fact Sheet
The Smith global gag rule aims to defund multilateral and foreign nongovernmental organizations that, with their own non-U.S. funds, provide abortion services beyond cases involving life endangerment of the woman, "forcible" rape, or incest; lobby their government on issues concerning abortion; or violate the abortion law of any foreign country.
The Global Gag Rule Is Unnecessary
No U.S. foreign aid funds are used to perform abortion. Abortion funding is explicitly prohibited in both the annual appropriations law and the underlying authorizing statute (Helms amendment). USAID has been scrupulous in complying with the law. Even Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) agrees that the Helms amendment "stopped direct funding" of abortions.
(Cong.Record, 2/13/97, H-547)
No U.S. foreign aid funds are used to promote abortion. According to Vice President Gore:
"Our administration believes that the United States Constitution guarantees every woman within our borders the right to choose...We are unalterably committed to that principle. But let us take a false issue off the table. The United States has not sought, does not seek, and will not seek to establish any international right to abortion."
(National Press Club, 8/25/94)
The Global Gag Rule is Anti-Family Planning
The main purpose of the global gag rule, allegedly, is to address the issue of "fungibility." The argument is that in order to ensure that U.S. funds do not indirectly support abortion, it is necessary to exclude from participation in the U.S. population aid program all foreign NGOs that provide legal abortion services or provide information about it to their own governments with their own funds.
But raising a concern about "fungibility" in such a narrow context is disingenuous. It is clear that the real targets are family planning services and those organizations most qualified to deliver them.
If indirect support for abortion were the issue, then family planning funds would not be the only target of the Smith amendment. Several kinds of development assistance go to a multi-service clinic in India, for example, where legal abortion services also are available. But under the Smith amendment, the clinic stands to lose only its U.S. family planning funds - on the grounds that they would "free up" other funds for abortion. The family planning funds, however, provide no more and no less "indirect" support for abortion than child survival or other health funds do.
If indirect support for entities that subsidize abortion were the issue, then the Smith amendment would apply equally to NGOs and foreign governments. The Smith amendment exempts foreign governments from the family planning aid restrictions even though aid to foreign governments is as "fungible" as aid to NGOs - maybe more so. Under the amendment, family planning funds could go to countries where abortion is not only legal but also subsidized at government clinics - such as Russia, Egypt, Jordan, Costa Rica, and South Africa - but could not go to NGOs that provide legal abortion services.
The Global Gag Rule Is Anti-democratic and Imperialistic
It is akin to the Istook amendment, which was roundly defeated during the 104th Congress. Istook sought to gag private nonprofits from engaging in advocacy with their own funds if they received federal government grants. Similarly, the Smith amendment gags foreign NGOs from talking to their own governments with their own, non-U.S. funds about abortion law or policy, even when it might involve discussions of making abortion safer. The Smith amendment is written to exempt U.S.-based organizations because it would almost certainly be unconstitutional.
The global gag rule is anti-democratic. The Smith amendment would stifle democracy-building, an activity that the United States explicitly holds as a priority for foreign assistance programs in general. Promoting democratic participation is one of the four priority areas established by USAID. Conditioning the receipt of U.S. funds on an NGO's willingness to be silent - regardless of the subject - would directly undermine the widely supported effort to empower NGOs. In this case, moreover, silencing of popular participation would have a disproportionate impact on women's groups, which traditionally have had little or no voice in political debate in developing countries.
The global gag rule is the ultimate in cultural imperialism. The Smith amendment purportedly is designed to prevent the exportation of the Clinton administration's so-called "international abortion crusade." To the contrary, current law respects the sovereignty of foreign governments, including their abortion policy, by leaving it to those governments to protect or prohibit services and information about abortion. Indeed, it is the Smith amendment that would insist on the exportation of a particular ideology.
The amendment aims to prohibit foreign NGOs from using their own funds to engage in free speech about abortion and to provide abortion services where it is legal. Nearly 40 countries receive U.S. population aid where abortion may be legally performed in cases beyond life, rape, and incest (the only exemptions permitted by the Smith amendment).
Prepared with the assistance of the Washington office of The Alan Guttmacher Institute May 1997
[ News Flashes | Net News Home Page ]