Executive Councilor Chris Sununu has an op-ed in the UL this morning defending why he voted to let a contract to biggest abortionist organizations in the United States, Planned Parenthood. However, without even exploring the issue of abortion, he should really listen to his own words for the advice he should really implement. The relevant portions:
Let me be clear that I am not fan of Planned Parenthood. From their excessive administrative costs and political lobbying, to its attempts to thwart parental notification, there is no shortage of issues I have with this organization. Like most Americans, I have never supported the public funding of abortions. But contrary to popular belief, that’s not what this contract is about.
As to the first – the financial point; he should vote no. He is already admitting that he has already voted once to give money to an organization that cannot spend our money wisely – and now is on the cusp of doing it twice? Isn’t that the primary mandate of the Executive Council, to see that contract money IS spent correctly? So why vote to spend more money than what is necessary? At the very worst, why not make the demand that PPNE make structural changes as to its internal costs? After all (heh!) if Obamacare can do that to healthcare insurance company administrative costs, why can’t NH do a similar thing to healthcare providers?
In any case, while you are concerned with health providers in your district, a lot of your constituents put you into place because your predecessor spent too much. They will be remembering their top concerning, unwise spending, your own words "excessive administrative costs" and wondering: really?
"Thwart parental notification" – to the second which is the political point. So you have an organization that forcefully and vigorously not only campaigns against a pillar of the Republican platform, and this does not concern you? You have voted for an organization that is openly supportive of those that would throw you out of office (as well as your fellow Republicans)? After all, you just pointed out that they do political lobbying – is this part of the re-election calculus?
So why are you letting a contract with fungible money only to see it used for political purposes? Some of the commentors at the UL talk about ideology – why should we give contract money to an organization that has demonstrated an ideology that is counter to most NH people?
Executive Councilor Sununu, all you have to do is to listen to your own words as to listening to good advice.
He continues on – the third point: structural point:
So why must it be Planned Parenthood? Why not some other provider that doesn’t have the scrutiny of this group? That’s the exact question I asked Health and Human Services Commissioner Nick Toumpas prior to the initial vote. Unfortunately, these contracts do not overlap geographically. Every provider is assigned specific towns to ensure that disadvantaged women (many of whom don’t even own a car) don’t have to travel great distances to get their care.
You are an MIT trained engineer – as your Dad pointed out to me…
…when he was still the NH GOP Chair, he wanted more engineers in politics because they have been trained and know how to fix problems. You have identified a problem – the services are structured incorrectly geographically. You control the contracts – you have the ability at your pressure point to help remedy a problem. Use that ability, plus your engineer’s ability, to fix the problem you yourself have just enumerated.
He also identifies another problem – the fourth and a sovereign point:
If the entire state does not have coverage for these basic medical services, the rules will force federal defunding for all of the other contractors covering the remaining areas across the state. Therefore we either let Planned Parenthood provide these services over the next two years or the people in most need across the state will lose out.
You were elected to lead for NH (and not for the Feds). You were elected to do the best by NH. Is it not, then, part of your elected mission, to defend NH? The Constitution was created for the "various States" to create a Federal Government – is this not part of the process to turn that notion on its head and continue the process of turning the "various States" into mere subdivisions of the Federal government? Here you adequately describe a situation caused by the Feds and exacerbated by the Feds, that keeps NH from solving its own problem. What will you do about it (rather than just giving into it)?
And then the last point – the weakest point of all:
Governors Benson, Shaheen, Merrill, Gregg, and yes even that staunch conservative Gov. Sununu all approved this contract during their tenures. Why? They did it because they knew that so many of their constituents depended on that funding for basic medical services. They did it because they knew that this funding had nothing to do with abortions. And they did it because it was the right thing to do.
This is called the "they did it too" cover rule – an adaptation of the little kid defense when a youngster gets caught doing something wrong "Well look what Johnny did!" to make their malfeasance seem to be smaller but only by comparison. Please – you are, like your brother and your Dad, MIT trained. Certainly you can come up with something better than this?
Councilor, I am not in your district so you can take my words either seriously or not at all. But there may well be those in your District that have taken your words very seriously and may well be thinking the same things I am. They elected you to take charge and lead – not lament that the road ahead is too difficult and too fraught with problems to overcome. Frankly, given the intellectual horsepower you indeed have, show your constituents that you can power NH to a better way of meeting the needs of your constituents.
Time to tell the organization that Margaret Sanger founded for eugenics purposes that "we can do better", and then fight the fight to fund to better organization that does not resolve to use abortions as part of "planned parenthood".
It is also time to work for a NH solution to this problem. You were put there by your constituents – instead of lamenting about the situation as it is, take charge and make them proud, and change it to what it should be.
