“Gosnell” to be released October 12

Ever since seeing the rough cut of the film Gosnell last year, I’ve looked forward to the film’s release. Financing and finding a distributor took awhile. Finally, a release date has been set for the drama based on the trial of Kermit Gosnell: October 12, 2018.

Anyone looking for a sensationalized Gothic horror story can look elsewhere. This is a crime story, with much of the background taken from the Gosnell grand jury report. The focus for much of the movie is on the investigators and prosecutors, none of whom has an axe to grind one way or the other regarding the right to life. The story is about ordinary people, doing their jobs diligently, who are brought up short when political considerations get in the way of investigating homicides.

The portrayal of Kermit Gosnell is chilling in its restraint. It would have been easy for the screenwriters to render him in caricature. They didn’t.

I don’t know where the film will be screened locally, but I’ll watch for it.


The producers of the film are the authors of Gosnell – The Untold Story of America’s Most Prolific Serial Killer. Here’s my review of the book from 2017. 

 

Another Round of Abortion Provider Contracts Coming to Exec Council

The New Hampshire Executive Council will take up ten family planning contracts on Wednesday, November 8, three of them with known abortion providers.

The Council meeting is scheduled for 10 a.m. in the Council chambers on the second floor of the State House in Concord.

The contracts themselves are for non-abortion services.  The Equality Center in Concord is on track to receive $179,800; the Lovering Center in Greenland is on the list for $222,896. Those amounts are divided between state and federal funds. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England is set to receive a cool half-million dollars, all of it from New Hampshire general funds.

This is the same Planned Parenthood affiliate that spent $2 million dollars on “public policy” in 2016, and yet is urging the Council to send more money, hashtagging their appeal “#fundPP.”

That $2 million figure is no longer available to the public on PPNNE’s annual report, where that number has been rolled into the “patient services” category, the better to obscure it. Drill down into the contract, though, and there it is: first you go to the Council page, then you find the meeting agenda, then you find the contract listing, then you click on the contract number, then you scroll down to page 646. Thus do we carry out transparency in government.

Note the million dollars for fundraising, too, as PPNNE urges the Councilors to #fundPP lest health care be denied to patients. No reports that fundraising and public policy might take a hit.

Page 644 of the same contract confirms that PPNNE enjoyed more than $22 million in revenue in 2016.

The last time the abortion providers were at the Council table, the contracts were for HIV/AIDS-related programs. Every Councilor but David Wheeler (District 5, R-Milford) voted to award the contracts.

Contact information for each Councilor is available at the Executive Council web page: Joe Kenney in District 1 (R-Union), Andru Volinsky in District 2 (D-Concord), Russell Prescott in District 3 (R-Kingston), Christopher Pappas in District 4 (D-Manchester), and David Wheeler.

Governor Sununu has a contact page as well. He has no vote on the contracts, but the Department of Health and Human Services staff that negotiated the contracts answers to him.

Lest We Forget
  • Any public funds – family planning funds, for instance – received by an abortion provider who also provides health care, help to subsidize abortion. Those funds keep the lights on, pay salaries of support staff, and let the organization pay lobbyists to try to keep abortion unregulated.
  • Why do PP and its smaller counterparts stake the health care of so many women on abortion, which is supposedly a minuscule part of their business? Because the current business model is working, thanks to timid state officials. For abortion providers to remain government contractors without involving taxpayers in abortion, they would have to stop embedding abortion with health care in such a way that a strike against abortion or abortion funding meant casualties for authentic health care.
  • Recall that then-Councilor Chris Sununu, along with Joe Kenney and Dave Wheeler, voted to reject a PP contract in August 2015. At that meeting, Kenney and Sununu both cited the Center for Medical Progress videos as a factor in their vote. Those videos feature PP employees from affiliates elsewhere in the country discussing trafficking in body parts, with a PP medical professional describing her willingness to alter abortion procedures not to provide the best care to women but to extract the most lucrative intact fetal organs.

 

A notable D.C. vote

The U.S. House voted by a very narrow margin today to pass a health insurance act (H.R. 1628) which faces grim prospects over in the U.S. Senate. Among other reported provisions, the act passed today would prevent federal funds from going to abortion providers including Planned Parenthood for one year.

Some things might be de-funded under the act, but women’s health isn’t one of them.  From Steven Ertelt at LifeNews.com:

“The pro-life bill would eliminate more than $390 million (over 86%) of over $450 million in annual federal funding to Planned Parenthood, from all mandatory spending programs. The measure also redirects funding to community health centers which outnumber Planned Parenthood facilities 20 to 1 and offer a wider array of health care services, but not abortion. AHCA also repeals Obamacare abortion subsidies, adds reforms to give states more flexibility and lower costs, and provides families more options.”

But as I mentioned – now it goes to the Senate.

Members of Congress Shea-Porter and Kuster voted against the measure.


 

A good vote in D.C. (opposed by both N.H. Senators)

Vice-President Pence broke a tie in the U.S. Senate yesterday. What passed, thanks to him and 50 Senators, was effectively a repeal of an Obama policy penalizing states that refuse to do business with abortion providers. H.J. Res. 43 is the name of the repeal resolution.

Senators Shaheen and Hassan of New Hampshire were perfectly happy with the Obama policy and they voted against the repeal.


The former president signed his policy on his way out the door, almost literally: it went into effect two days before he left office. Marjorie Dannenfelser of the Susan B. Anthony list has called it his parting gift to Planned Parenthood. Last month the House, led by Rep. Diane Black, voted to repeal Obama’s policy. The Senate effort was led by Sen. Joni Ernst.

I hope that by the time you read this, President Trump’s approval will have made repeal a done deal.

What repeal does NOT do: change the amount of any appropriation for family planning under Title X. Repeat: zero effect on the amount of money the federal government allocates to states for family planning programs (which, to hear some folks talk, is all there is to women’s health).

What repeal WILL do: allow states to decide for themselves, without any federal penalty, whether to grant Title X family planning contracts to agencies that perform abortions.

That’s it.

Planned Parenthood hates the repeal resolution. Their respect for women apparently ends when a woman decides to resist the abortion providers reaching into her wallet.

I’m one such woman. I know that abortion isn’t health care. And I’m not alone.

 

Update: buffer zone case dismissal being appealed

On April 18, attorneys for the plaintiffs in Reddy v. Foster filed notice of appeal to the United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit, asking that the recent dismissal of the case by a lower court be set aside. Briefs and arguments for the appeal are still months away.


In Reddy, seven pro-life plaintiffs challenged the constitutionality of New Hampshire’s buffer zone law, which authorizes abortion providers to prohibit peaceful pro-life witness outside abortion facilities. Federal Court Judge Joseph Laplante recently dismissed the case, ruling that plaintiffs did not have standing to sue since no abortion provider had yet posted a zone.

Even with the dismissal of the lawsuit, peaceful pro-life witness outside New Hampshire abortion facilities without posted buffer zones remains protected under the First Amendment. If you see a zone posted, please note the location and send me a message at ellen@leavenfortheloaf.com.


See Leaven for the Loaf’s coverage of buffer zone developments since 2013.