'Difficult To Imagine' Why Seven 'Pro-Life' Republicans Are Not Supporting Global HIV/AIDS Bill, Opinion Piece Says

Main Category: HIV / AIDS
Also Included In: Women's Health / Gynecology
Article Date: 15 May 2008 - 10:00 PDT

email to a friend   printer friendly   view / write opinions   rate article

It is "difficult to imagine" why seven Republican senators who say they are "pro-life" are not supporting legislation (HR 5501, S 2731) that would reauthorize the U.S. global HIV/AIDS program, Michael Gerson -- columnist for the Washington Post, senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and President Bush's chief speechwriter from 2001 until June 2006 -- writes in an opinion piece.

According to Gerson, Republican Sens. Jim Bunning (Ky.), Richard Burr (N.C.), Saxby Chambliss (Ga.), Tom Coburn (Okla.), Jim DeMint (S.C.), Jeff Sessions (Ala.) and David Vitter (La.) have "signed a hold letter, preventing action on the reauthorization of the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief." The senators are holding up the bill in part because of costs and in part because they are "concerned" that the program could be "used for things such as abortion referrals and needle distribution," even though the legislation "doesn't mention these possibilities," according to Gerson. He adds that the seven senators' "concerns on family planning and abstinence in the PEPFAR reauthorization are not imaginary," but the concerns "could be resolved through good-faith negotiations, as they were in the House."

Gerson adds that the senators' proposal to require that 55% of PEPFAR funding be spent on treatment "would force the program to waste money in pursuit of an arbitrary, nonsensical spending target" and that the senators' "generalized hostility toward AIDS prevention ... is destructive." If a bill came to the Senate floor "that would save millions of unborn children, one assumes that pro-life members would push to improve it, accept a few necessary compromises and then enthusiastically support the legislation," Gerson writes, adding, "It is difficult to imagine why pro-life legislation involving millions of Africans should be viewed differently."

Senate leaders of both parties, who support the bill, are feeling "little pressure to roll over" the seven senators' objections because President Bush has not made the measure his "top legislative priority," according to Gerson. Because "Bush will get most of the credit" if the bill passes, it might be "tempting" for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to "allow seven white Republicans to discredit their party by blocking a lifesaving bill for Africa," Gerson writes. However, he adds that delaying the bill until next year would result in delayed treatment and "lives lost" (Gerson, Washington Post, 5/14).

Reprinted with kind permission from http://www.nationalpartnership.org. You can view the entire Daily Women's Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery here. The Daily Women's Health Policy Report is a free service of the National Partnership for Women & Families, published by The Advisory Board Company.

© 2008 The Advisory Board Company. All rights reserved.