Komen drops plan to cut Planned Parenthood grants
U.S. Sen. Patty Murray, center, speaks at the Seattle Planned Parenthood branch on Friday. Murray had planned to discuss Susan G. Komen Foundation’s recent decision to rescind their funding to Planned Parenthood’s breast exam services, but Komen announced a reversal of their decision early Friday morning. Photo by The Associated Press.
Originally published February 3, 2012 at 10:37 a.m., updated February 3, 2012 at 11 p.m.
NEW YORK (AP) — For leaders of the nation’s pre-eminent breast-cancer charity, it was a firestorm they didn’t see coming — and couldn’t withstand.
Susan G. Komen for the Cure on Friday abandoned plans to eliminate funding for Planned Parenthood. The dramatic retreat followed a three-day furor that resounded across the Internet, in Congress and — perhaps most tellingly — among Komen affiliates who openly rebelled, suggesting the leadership had bowed to anti-abortion pressure.
“We want to apologize to the American public for recent decisions that cast doubt upon our commitment to our mission of saving women’s lives,” a Komen statement said.
As first reported by The Associated Press on Tuesday, Komen had adopted criteria excluding Planned Parenthood from future grants for breast-cancer screenings because it was under government investigation, citing a probe launched by a Florida congressman at the urging of anti-abortion groups.
“We will amend the criteria to make clear that disqualifying investigations must be criminal and conclusive in nature and not political,” Komen said Friday. “That is what is right and fair.”
As a result, Komen said, “we will continue to fund existing grants, including those of Planned Parenthood, and preserve their eligibility to apply for future grants.”
Komen officials were unavailable for further comment on how they came to change their plans. There was no indication that the organization had come under pressure from its corporate partners. But many of Komen’s own affiliates nationwide had objected to cutting off the grants, which totaled $680,000 in 2011. An Aspen, Colo., affiliate announced Thursday that it would defy the new rules and continue grants to its local Planned Parenthood partner, while all seven of Komen’s California affiliates said they “strongly opposed” the planned cutoff.
In addition, Komen was inundated with negative comments via emails, on Twitter and on its Facebook page. Many of the messages conveyed a determination to halt gifts to Komen — organizer of the popular Race for the Cure events —because of the decision.
Meanwhile, Planned Parenthood was reporting an outpouring of donations, large and small, that totaled $3 million between Tuesday evening and Friday afternoon. Planned Parenthood said the funds would be used to expand its breast health services, which already provide nearly 750,000 breast exams each year.
Planned Parenthood’s president, Cecile Richards, said in a telephone news conference that she was astonished by the flow of donations and the often emotional support expressed for her organization on the Internet.
“This was simply a story, when it broke, it just caught fire,” she said. “This kind of political bullying — folks are just saying, ‘Enough.’”
Anti-abortion groups had pressed Komen for years to end its partnership with Planned Parenthood, even to the extent of recalling pink Bibles that were benefiting Komen and boycotting its Race for the Cure events.
Abortion foes applauded earlier this week when the funding cutoff was reported, and were dismayed by Friday’s turnaround.
“The Susan G. Komen Foundation has caved in to the demands of radical abortion apologists,” said Douglas R. Scott Jr., of Life Decisions International, which had been mulling whether to remove Komen from a “boycott list” of Planned Parenthood partners.
Scott said Komen should have anticipated a backlash once word of its funding cutoff plans became public.
The charity, Scott said, “has either engaged in a nasty ruse ... or it is led by the most naive people on earth.”
Charmaine Yoest, president of Americans United for Life, accused Planned Parenthood of employing a “scorched-earth strategy to force compliance with their pro-abortion agenda.”
“I don’t find it surprising that Komen is dancing around trying to get their way out of this,” said Yoest, a breast-cancer survivor. “Who wants to go up against a billion dollar organization which is perfectly capable of using thug tactics against even their friends?”
In Washington, Rep. Cliff Stearns, R-Fla., said he would press ahead with his investigation of Planned Parenthood, including assertions that it has improperly used public funds for abortions.
Republican presidential hopeful Rick Santorum, a former senator from Pennsylvania and a staunch foe of abortion, said he was disappointed by Komen’s shift. “It’s unfortunate that public pressure builds to provide money to an organization that goes out and actively is the No. 1 abortion provider in the country,” he said.
But members of Congress who support abortion-rights were elated by Komen’s statement.
“It’s a great day when our deeply held belief that breast cancer can only be wiped out if we all work together has triumphed over right-wing politics,” said Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif.
It’s possible that Komen may, in the coming years, find ways of cutting ties with Planned Parenthood by other means. Komen founder and CEO Nancy Brinker, in a news conference Thursday, spoke of shifting more grant money to organizations which provide mammograms themselves — in contrast to Planned Parenthood’s practice of referring women elsewhere for mammograms.
Asked about this Friday, Richards said she was optimistic the renewed partnership would endure because of the close relationships between many Komen and Planned Parenthood local affiliates.
Nowhere was that solidarity more evident than in Aspen, where the Komen affiliate had placed an ad in a local newspaper declaring that it would defy the national edict and continue grants to its Planned Parenthood counterpart.
Marcia Goshorn, president of the Komen board in Aspen, said she was thrilled at Friday’s turnaround by the national leadership.
“I think they listened, and I’m proud of that,” she said.
Komen said it was immediately starting an outreach to its affiliates and supporters to get the charity back on track.
“We urge everyone who has participated in this conversation across the country over the last few days to help us move past this issue,” Komen’s statement said. “We do not want our mission marred or affected by politics — anyone’s politics.”
Experts on the nonprofit world followed the week’s events with keen interest and marveled at the rapid spread of the backlash against Komen.
“It is very tough for non-profits that are caught in these culture wars to figure out what to do,” said Stacey Palmer, editor of The Chronicle of Philanthropy. “I think they (Komen) underestimated how many women who supported them really cared deeply about this issue ... I don’t think they expected that kind of reaction.”
Among those welcoming the Komen shift was New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who made a $250,000 donation to Planned Parenthood after the funding cutoff was announced.
“I’m glad that in the end they came to the right decision,” said Bloomberg, who told MSNBC he will also continue to support Komen and urged others to do the same.
In the end, he said, “this is maybe a refresher to all of us” that both groups “do great work.”


Comments
Sequoia 1 year, 3 months ago
I think Komen's board of directors really mis-stepped. They ignored their own Staff's advice and tried to turn their cancer research organization into a political organization. Now they're trying to go back. The company's mission suffered because a couple board members thought they could use their position at Komen to trump up their political profile, but the organization itself rebelled because the board's political posturing hurt the organization's mission. This is what happens when you put movement conservatives in charge. Everything looks political. Every decision gets run through a "liberal vs. conservative" frame. And you get stuff like this. Pointless waste of time and pointless antagonism.
Sequoia 1 year, 3 months ago
theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/02/who-is-behind-susan-g-komens-split-from-planned-parenthood/252327/
"According to Jezebel's Erin Gloria Ryan, however, the influence of another key player in the Komen organization goes a long way in explaining its decision to defund: Karen Handel, who ran for governor of Georgia in 2010 and lost, despite an endorsement by none other than Sarah Palin, has been Komen's senior vice president for public policy since April 2011. On her campaign blog (fire up the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine because, curiously, these pages don't exist anymore), Handel wrote: "I will be a pro-life governor who will work tirelessly to promote a culture of life in Georgia. ... I believe that each and every unborn child has inherent dignity, that every abortion is a tragedy, and that government has a role, along with the faith community, in encouraging women to choose life in even the most difficult of circumstances. ...since I am pro-life, I do not support the mission of Planned Parenthood."
Handel even "promised to eliminate funding for breast and cervical cancer screenings provided by" Planned Parenthood, according to Jezebel."
Movement conservatives see everything through the lens of the "movement" they are working on. That's why they make bad decisions.
Of course, when you think about all the pro-life donations Komen took in in the last couple days, for no reason (which I'm sure they won't give back), maybe movement conservatives aren't the dumb ones after all.
JMO 1 year, 3 months ago
Handel even "promised to eliminate funding for breast and cervical cancer screenings provided by" Planned Parenthood
Now there's a good attitude for the vice president of a charity devoted to finding a cure for cancer.
Sequoia 1 year, 3 months ago
Finally, more prominent conservatives are asking the right questions about the shortcomings of "the movement." Listen to us. The "movement" is over. We are the future of conservative thought. How much longer are you going to let TV programmers, entertainers and hack writers tell you what to think? It's not too late to save yourself the embarassment (and money) of being a movement tool.
ideas.time.com/2012/02/02/what-is-a-conservative/?slide=what-does-a-conservative-believe#is-there-a-crisis-in-the-conservative-movement-5
Sequoia 1 year, 3 months ago
Indeed. I don't think the conservative movement has done a particularly good job getting public policy results based on these beliefs. They're too busy demonizing "liberals," so they miss opportunities to work with others to advance these principles. The movement has become so lost up its own backside that it has failed.
tonto_goldberg 1 year, 3 months ago
Graceful's comments notwithstanding, here is what the link actually has to say about that.
"But the conservative defense of the country’s founding principles is incomplete so long as it fails to apply them to the pressing challenges of our day: to show, rather than just say, that those principles amount to timeless wisdom. Conservatives have barely begun to outline a plausible alternative to Obamacare. Our economic ideas too often seem like well-developed answers to the problems of 1981. We have failed, and in some ways have hardly tried, to persuade black, Hispanic and Asian citizens that our philosophy promotes the interests of the whole nation. And none of us is quite sure what to do about the intolerable fact that in our society, familial stability seems increasingly to be becoming a luxury good.
Conservatives may be able to defeat Obama without meeting these challenges, but we will not be able to achieve the more profound objectives to which that defeat is only a means."
tonto_goldberg 1 year, 3 months ago
That's a strange connection to try to make. You've somehow missed the most important single piece of American exceptionalism.
The founding principles were about putting together an entirely new form of government, something no one had done before and no one has done since. We have no hereditary monarch and all of our government is either elected or appointed by elected officials. Those elected officials serve a defined term of office, and we have an orderly transition from one administration to the next. Our government is never closed down by a monarch or a no-confidence vote so we don't have any period of limbo without a functioning government.
You may not like what is currently happening with this administration, but it is temporary. People come and go, but governments last a long time.
spelchek 1 year, 3 months ago
You have it backwards. They misstepped getting involved with PP in the first place. They tried to quietly back out and PP went on the war path labeling Komen an organization that doesn't care about women's health. PP will do the same to others if they dare pull their funding too.
spelchek 1 year, 3 months ago
Let this be a lesson to potential or current donors in how PP will react if you try and pull your funds.
JMO 1 year, 3 months ago
What exactly did PP do? They lost their funding. Lots of people reacted negatively. They got their funding back. But PP itself didn't seem to do anything but collect and be grateful for donations.
asb 1 year, 3 months ago
PP didn't have to do anything, KOMEN's own people and supporters hit the roof and the foolishness was undone.
Sequoia 1 year, 3 months ago
Only something like 19 percent of Komen's fundraising actually goes to cancer research. Most of it goes to "education." Really? People need that much "education" (advertisement) about cancer?
All I see from Komen is a bunch of corny, pink, feel-good hoopla that allows corporations to act like they care. No offense to anyone who is fighting cancer themselves, but how often do you hear anything from Komen about the environmental chemicals that cause cancer? Never. That would embarass their donors and hurt fundraising.
Please review our Policies and Procedures before registering or commenting
Or login with:
OpenID