Everyone is looking forward to change under the Obama administration. Some dream of universal health care, others of Supreme Court appointees who will protect Roe v. Wade, and still others for federal action on the gay marriage issue.
But one of the most controversial issues to come out of the current administration isn’t any of the above. Rather, the emergence of Bristol Palin as abstinence education’s spokeswoman will bring another reproductive issue—government-subsidized birth control—to the fore.
Children of the Revolution
Following the sexual revolution of the 1960s, college campuses have been able to provide students with affordable and effective birth control methods because of agreements with pharmaceutical companies. The 2005 Deficit Reduction Act, however, effectively made it more difficult for drug companies to offer these large discounts.
Since then, brand name contraceptive pills and devices have jumped in price. What was once an affordable three to ten dollar monthly expense for college students—less than they would probably have spent on beer and coffee—is now thirty to fifty dollars, according to TIME reporter Kate Rooney. And because college students won’t stop having sex any time soon, despite Ms. Palin’s most valiant efforts on that front, these high costs bring with them a new set of problems.
Plan B
The most recent public kerfuffle over contraception focused around Plan B emergency contraception, also known as the morning after pill. Consequent from that debate and despite protests of those who say that Plan B is abortion lite, the morning after pill is now more readily available than primary contraception. It is unclear whether the rise in Plan B’s use is due to its increased availability or the higher costs of birth control pills and devices, but both factors probably play a role.
With young women being turned away from their college health clinics empty-handed because they can’t afford pills or intrauterine devices (IUDs), the burden of cost falls to other outlets, like Planned Parenthood, in the form of Plan B, abortions, and in some cases, unwanted children.
He Said, She Said
The original version of the 2010 budget proposal sent to Congress by the Obama administration included the Medicaid Family Planning State Option, which would have set aside $200 million for reproductive health care coverage in an effort to forestall the approximately $9.1 billion of taxpayer money that goes to teen pregnancy costs every year.
But despite support form House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a “firestorm of criticism” from several members of Congress led the administration to scrap the proposal. At the head of the opposition was House Minority Leader John Boehner, who wondered aloud how money spent on contraceptives would stimulate the economy.
In return, Planned Parenthood Federation of America President Cecile Roberts pointed out that the provision would have expanded health care services and cancer screenings to all women, including those who have lost their jobs due to the economic downturn. Now, more than 3,700 people have signed a petition to reinstate the provision in the next government health act.
Is Big Brother Buying the Condoms?
Planned Parenthood’s championing the Medicaid Family State Option, as well as Senator Boehner’s arguments against the bill, are both placeholder arguments for larger issues. It’s not as if condoms aren’t readily available, so we’re not talking about birth control here; we’re talking about what stance the government should take toward the sexual practices of its citizens.
We want the government to stay out of our bedrooms and not pass judgment over whom we sleep with and how, but we also want the government to foot the bill. In order for there to be any consensus on this issue—or any other issue, for that matter—liberals and conservatives alike need to realize that they can’t have it both ways. All government funding comes with strings attached, strings in the form of regulations. Conversely, all regulation must be supported in other ways to avoid the problems of unfunded mandates.
