By Jim Lobe
WASHINGTON, Jan 23 2001 (IPS)

In one of his first executive acts as president, George W. Bush said Monday he intends to re-instate a ban on all US funding for organisations which provide abortion services or counselling to women in poor countries.

The action, heralded by a congressman at a major anti-abortion rally here and confirmed by Bush in a brief exchange with reporters, will deprive millions of dollars in government support for groups like the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) and their local affiliates worldwide.

“Thank God President Bush is moving decisively and courageously to reinstate the Mexico City Policy – to end taxpayer-financed abortion promotion overseas,” said Rep. Chris Smith, a leader among anti-abortion forces in Congress. Bush said he will act “soon”.

The Mexico City policy, which bans all US funding for overseas groups that perform abortions or even provide counselling about abortion, was first imposed by the administration of President Ronald Reagan at an international population conference in the Mexican capital in 1984 and retained by Bush’s father during his administration from 1989 to 1993.

Within two days of taking power in 1993, former President Bill Clinton, in a nod to powerful women’s constituencies who strongly support abortion rights, lifted the ban. Bush now appears poised to re-impose it, largely at the behest of the anti-abortion right which played a key role in his own election.

The precise details of the order which he will use to do it, however, remain unknown. The new White House spokesman, Ari Fleischer, acknowledged that an executive order would soon be signed but declined to say what precisely it will include. “You should wait until you receive the order,” he told reporters, adding only that Bush “opposes using taxpayer dollars to pay for abortions”.

Fleischer’s remarks, however, actually compounded the confusion over precisely what Bush intends. He did not appear to be aware that Washington has been barred from providing any funding for abortions overseas since 1973.

What was new under the Mexico City policy was the extension of the ban on abortion funding to include all organisations which provide abortion services or counselling to women, even if they use their own money to do so.

IPPF, for example, offers various kinds of abortion-related services, but most of its funding is used to provide contraception and other reproductive-health services. Under the Mexico City policy, however, all funding for IPPF and its affiliates – including for non-abortion-related services – would be cut off.

As a result, according to many abortion-rights advocates, reinstatement of the Mexico City policy is likely to have the opposite effect that Bush, Smith, and the anti-abortion movement intend in that it will reduce the ability of IPPF and other groups to provide other contraceptives and other family- planning services.

“The Mexico City policy has already cost many lives and actually increased to a large degree the number of unintended pregnancies,” said Ingar Bureggemann, the director-general of IPPF in London.

“More than 70,000 women die each year worldwide from unsafe abortion,” added Amy Coen, president of Population Action International (PAI) here. “These restrictions would make it more difficult for women to receive the care and treatment that they need.”

Nonetheless, the fact that the abortion issue – and its application overseas – has emerged as one of the very first acts of the new administration is not surprising, particularly in light of some of the more right-wing appointments made by Bush to his cabinet.

The Christian Right constitutes a major part of the coalition which brought the former Texas governor to power, and acting against abortion was the top item on its agenda. And Monday marked the annual protest here by tens of thousands of anti-abortion activists against the 1973 Supreme Court decision which legalised abortion in the United States.

Smith’s announcement and Bush’s confirmation were hailed by the protestors as they gathered before the Washington Monument, a stone’s throw from the White House.

“The first step towards ‘building a culture of life’ is to stop exporting the culture of death,” said Ken Connor, president of the Family Research Council, a leading Christian Right group. “President Bush’s action is a welcome indicator that he intends to stick to his pro-life campaign promises.”

Among other actions which the White House is reportedly considering are a review of the recent decision by the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) to approve RU-486 for use in the United States. The drug can be used to induce abortion without the aid of a doctor. Bush is also expected to move quickly to ban federal funding for certain kinds of late-term abortions.

At the same time, early moves by Bush to curb abortion rights, especially in the United States, risk making more difficult his hopes for forging coalitions with key Democrats. Poll after poll over the past decade has shown that a strong majority of US women support abortion rights, and the “gender gap” between the two parties has continued to widen. Overall, Bush lost the women’s vote by some 12 percentage points in the November elections.

“Bush has made it clear that he will use his presidential powers to undermine the reproductive rights of the world’s women,” said Kate Michelman, the president of the powerful National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League (NARAL). “Bush continues to shed his façade of moderation and has put the policy agenda of the far right on the fast track.”

“Implementing (the Mexico City) restrictions would totally contradict his pledge to operate in a compassionate, bipartisan manner and to work to reduce abortion rates,” said PAI’s Coen.

During the eight years of Clinton’s rule, anti-abortion forces led by Smith tried repeatedly and often with success after 1994, when Republicans gained majorities in Congress, to restrict or reduce US funding of family- planning groups overseas which lobby their governments to liberalise their abortion laws.

For 1996, for example, they succeeded in slashing population- related aid from 547 million dollars to 356 million dollars and placed strict limits on the amount the government could disburse each month. Because the United States has traditionally been the largest funder of family-planning programmes, the impact was dramatic in some poor countries which relied heavily on US aid.

A grand compromise worked out last year increased funding to 425 million dollars for 2001, but prohibited any of that money from being spent until Feb. 15. At the time, Smith said he hoped that Bush, if elected president, would decide not to spend any of the money.

Bush has not yet indicated what he intends to do about those funds or about continuing US contributions to the UN Population Fund (UNFPA) – some 25 million dollars for this year.

Excerpt: