Komen apologizes, reverses Planned Parenthood ban
From Susan G. Komen for the Cure:
“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.
The events of this week have been deeply unsettling for our supporters, partners and friends and all of us at Susan G. Komen. We have been distressed at the presumption that the changes made to our funding criteria were done for political reasons or to specifically penalize Planned Parenthood. They were not.
Our original desire was to fulfill our fiduciary duty to our donors by not funding grant applications made by organizations under investigation. We will amend the criteria to make clear that disqualifying investigations must be criminal and conclusive in nature and not political. That is what is right and fair.
Our only goal for our granting process is to support women and families in the fight against breast cancer. Amending our criteria will ensure that politics has no place in our grant process. We will continue to fund existing grants, including those of Planned Parenthood, and preserve their eligibility to apply for future grants, while maintaining the ability of our affiliates to make funding decisions that meet the needs of their communities.
It is our hope and we believe it is time for everyone involved to pause, slow down and reflect on how grants can most effectively and directly be administered without controversies that hurt the cause of women. We urge everyone who has participated in this conversation across the country over the last few days to help us move past this issue. We do not want our mission marred or affected by politics – anyone’s politics.
Starting this afternoon, we will have calls with our network and key supporters to refocus our attention on our mission and get back to doing our work. We ask for the public’s understanding and patience as we gather our Komen affiliates from around the country to determine how to move forward in the best interests of the women and people we serve.
We extend our deepest thanks for the outpouring of support we have received from so many in the past few days and we sincerely hope that these changes will be welcomed by those who have expressed their concern.”
I think the core of the statement is here:
“We will amend the criteria to make clear that disqualifying investigations must be criminal and conclusive in nature and not political. That is what is right and fair.”
That’s pretty basic stuff: A politically motivated, barely active “investigation” cannot be used as an excuse to deny funding to programs central to your organization’s avowed purpose. That rule is so basic and fundamental that when it’s violated, as Komen violated it, you have to believe the decision was being driven by something else. And despite Komen’s denials, I think it’s clear what that “something” was.
I’m sure we’ll now see a backlash among conservatives disappointed and angered by Komen’s reversal, as well as triumphal celebration by pro-choice advocates. That’s too bad on both fronts. If the argument is that breast-cancer advocacy should not be tainted by politics, then let’s not taint it by politics.
UPDATE: Here’s part of the press release just sent out by the Atlanta chapter of Susan G. Komen for the Cure:
The Board of Directors of Susan G. Komen for the Cure Greater Atlanta Affiliate understands and supports the need to have strict policies pertaining to the grant of Komen funds, but sometimes policies have unintended consequences. We called on the national organization to revise the new guideline providing that an applicant, or its affiliates, that is under a formal investigation for financial or administrative improprieties by local, state or federal authorities would be ineligible to receive a Komen grant. We disagreed with the premise that an organization cannot apply for funding while under investigation. We believed this to be a nebulous and open-ended criteria for funding that would require Komen to make judgment calls about organizations before any finding of wrongdoing. This type of prejudgment would have made the Komen organization vulnerable to criticism that it was making funding decisions based on political factors, which simply cannot be allowed.
Komen National has agreed to amend the criteria to make clear that disqualifying investigations must be criminal and conclusive in nature and not political. That is what is right and fair. Komen will continue to fund existing grants, including those of Planned Parenthood, and will preserve Planned Parenthood’s eligibility to apply for future grants. This modification will maintain the ability of our affiliates to make funding decisions that meet the needs of their communities.
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Guides
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2012 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
456 comments Add your comment
ProgressivePeach
February 3rd, 2012
11:45 am
Karen Handel is toast. She’ll be lucky to get a job at Starbucks once the dust settles on this PR disaster.
USinUK
February 3rd, 2012
11:46 am
so which is it?
they don’t care about their fiduciary responsibility?
or they don’t really care about wimmen?
(bottom line: they care about their big, fat salaries)
HDB
February 3rd, 2012
11:47 am
Karen Handel grabbed a handful…and MISSED!! That’s what happens when conservatives overreach!!
USinUK
February 3rd, 2012
11:48 am
“We extend our deepest thanks for the outpouring of support we have received from so many in the past few days and we sincerely hope that these changes will be welcomed by those who have expressed their concern.””
meh.
I never donated to them before because of their low donation:research ratio … this little episode did nothing to make me want to change that.
jewcowboy
February 3rd, 2012
11:50 am
Karen Handel’s tenure at Komen appears to be just as successful as her gubernatorial campaign. Perhaps she can blow a wad of cash and have Palin come in to cheer everyone up.
stands for decibels
February 3rd, 2012
11:50 am
From Susan G. Komen for the Cure:
Are you sure this isn’t from Emily Litella?
USinUK
February 3rd, 2012
11:52 am
Adam – from downstairs – “Contrary to this nonsense I see about how liberals make pittance for donations to charity”
there’s donating … then there’s claiming …
jewcowboy
February 3rd, 2012
11:52 am
USinUK,
“I never donated to them before because of their low donation:research ratio”
BINGO!
Quagmire
February 3rd, 2012
11:53 am
Karen Handel – the hostile takeover didn’t work for the part-time christians(gopers). Another Georgia politican with egg on her face!!!!!
jewcowboy
February 3rd, 2012
11:55 am
Adam,
From downstairs:
” Did you see the new Walther PP the Komen Foundation was funding? it’s got a pink barrel!”
http://thinkbeforeyoupink.org/?page_id=13
Odis
February 3rd, 2012
11:56 am
Continue to speak up and speak out against injustice and lies Americans!
WrteStufLA
February 3rd, 2012
11:58 am
Serves Komen right that this particular PR abortion turned out to be bloodier than one performed on the Octomom during the third trimester …
Welcome to the Occupation
February 3rd, 2012
11:58 am
Wow.
And to think, Ms. Handel could have brought her considerable leadership skills to the state of Georgia. What a pity.
larry
February 3rd, 2012
11:59 am
This is going to make the conservatives’ head spin. First, excellent job numbers and now Komen reverses its decision on funding for Planned Parenthood.
I think i hear their heads starting to whirl around now.
jconservative
February 3rd, 2012
12:00 pm
Komen made a basic mistake. An investigation by Congress is always a political action. Everything Congress does is political.
If Komen caved to Republican pressure that was a political mistake.
Those out to eliminate “choice”, if I may use the code word, are on the wrong side of history. Before choice is eliinated a woman’s right to vote must first be eliminated.
For the record I am pro life, but I also live in the real world.
Aquagirl
February 3rd, 2012
12:00 pm
Are you sure this isn’t from Emily Litella?
lol—sfd wins an internet!
Oh, Kyle Wingfield and the menz over there are hoppin’ mad, including one who claimed to have sent “Koman” a check yesterday. Yeah, sure you did buddy. Right-wing nuts have always turned out in droves for the three day walk. /eyeroll
Middle-aged Man
February 3rd, 2012
12:00 pm
I called it. Now move on.
larry
February 3rd, 2012
12:01 pm
And to think, Ms. Handel could have brought her considerable leadership skills to the state of Georgia.
And considering who we got stuck with, that says a lot.
Brosephus
February 3rd, 2012
12:08 pm
jcon
AMEN!!! Sometimes, you make too much sense to post here, bro.
Quagmire
February 3rd, 2012
12:09 pm
Maybe Ms Handel wasn’t qualified enought to get things done:-))
Thug
February 3rd, 2012
12:12 pm
mission accomplished
Ivan
February 3rd, 2012
12:14 pm
” If the argument is that breast-cancer advocacy should not be tainted by politics, then let’s not taint it by politics.”
Were that the actual case, Jay, you’d have never written anything about it.
ty webb
February 3rd, 2012
12:15 pm
the”ban” actually worked out for both entities briefly. Reports are that both received boosts in donations…maybe they should stage one every other month.
jewcowboy
February 3rd, 2012
12:18 pm
ty webb,
“maybe they should stage one every other month.”
The “new” Coke marketing plan for ta-ta’s.
getalife
February 3rd, 2012
12:20 pm
Keep that great news coming Jay
“‘We Want To Apologize To The American Public’
Stop the war on women cons.
Today
Joe Hussein Mama
February 3rd, 2012
12:21 pm
From below:
Reality 2, Karen Handel 0
Brosephus
February 3rd, 2012
12:22 pm
eyes
I’d still shed a tear for her or anybody else who was diagnosed. Cancer is worse than the honey badger because it really doesn’t give a sh*t who it attacks. The honey badger won’t attack an elephant, or any super preadator. Cancer, on the other hand, will attack whomever it so chooses.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
February 3rd, 2012
12:23 pm
Jay, I agree that this is not a pro-choice victory in the sense that it is not an endorsement of pro-choice. It is however a victory for all to celebrate that women’s health and bodies should not be held hostage to politcal discourse based on a religious belief that seems to be expanding far beyond a discuss of what constitutes the start of life.
Brosephus
February 3rd, 2012
12:23 pm
Jay
Thanks for yanking the post and making mine look like I’m talking to people who are not there. All we need is a nutzoid brother here who’s good with weapons.
theyeshaveit
February 3rd, 2012
12:24 pm
Bro,
You’re right.
stands for decibels
February 3rd, 2012
12:24 pm
Kyle Wingfield and the menz over there are hoppin’ mad
I’m so there, dude.
ty webb
February 3rd, 2012
12:24 pm
“Stop the war on women cons.”
so getalife stands up for female conservatives? or is it female convicts?
md
February 3rd, 2012
12:25 pm
And the Court of Public Opinion is still in session……..
Too funny how so many “know” why such and such was done…………
getalife
February 3rd, 2012
12:28 pm
A great day for our country means a horrible day for you cons.
We are back and you cons do not know what you are talking about.
Kentucky Jacket
February 3rd, 2012
12:29 pm
Well, although I am pro-life, I understood, and sympathized with the pro-choice side on this one…it is terrible when other causes that are apolitical become colateral damage in politically charged decisions…
And I understand the elation that the pressure from the pro-choice groups caused them to reverse their decision.
But I did take pause when I heard the following: That Planned Parenthood does not do any breast cancer screenings, and only refer.
http://www.lifenews.com/2011/04/18/komen-admits-planned-parenthood-grants-dont-get-women-mammograms/
If that is the case, wouldn’t the money be better going to someone who can actually perform the screenings? And, how exactly is that money that Planned Parenthood gets actually used? I would further assume (and I know what happens when you do) that Doctors probably pay or donate for the privilage of being on the referral list (maybe not, because if they are low income cases, they may not be willing to accept Medicaid). But that could be another potential income source for Planned Parenthood, directly related to the Susan G. Komen grant, to be spent for whatever they want.
Even further, if it is true that donations spiked to Susan G. Komen (as I heard on the radio, don’t see an internet article) after the decision to cut the grant to planned parenthood, that they reversed the decision in spite of pro-life groups answering the challenge to meet the drop in donations from pro-choice groups.
It also hurts me to see them take a stand, and bow to pressure…I have much more respect for someone who is staunch in their convictions, though I may totally oppose them, than someone who tests the wind to see what they should believe at the moment (and I’m sure that at one time or another, we all wish we would have taken a more firm stand on our beliefs)
It is disheartening to see them take a stand either way, because now that a stand has been taken, and reversed, one side of an extrememly charged and passionate political battle will be reluctant to give to a good cause, and that hurts everyone.
Peadawg
February 3rd, 2012
12:31 pm
I actually respected them more for standing up for something they believed in (against abortion) than I do now that they’ve succumbed to political correctness.
TGT
February 3rd, 2012
12:33 pm
As Kyle so cleverly alludes to, why does Komen need to give a reason for not funding PP, and what, if any reason would ever satisfy the left?! What about other organizations that refuse to give money to PP? Are they “playing politics” as well? It is the left that politicized this move, not Komen. And how is this decision (the reversal) not political, but the previous one was?!
If the argument is that breast-cancer advocacy should not be tainted by politics, then let’s not taint it by politics.
This is not about breast-cancer advocacy, this is about abortion. Jay and the rest of the looney left have made that very clear.
ty webb
February 3rd, 2012
12:35 pm
the Komen foundation should have just said we don’t want to donate to any abortion provider, and not hidden behind the investigation.
Normal
February 3rd, 2012
12:37 pm
Ty,
You’re a hoot
southpaw
February 3rd, 2012
12:38 pm
tywebb @12:24
getalife stands up for female “againsts.”
ty webb
February 3rd, 2012
12:38 pm
normal,
how am I a “hoot”?
RB from Gwinnett
February 3rd, 2012
12:39 pm
No backlash from me, Jay. It’s just not that hard to put them back on the “no donations from me” list they came off of for a day. All you liberals can fund them all you want and keep pretending they’re about breast cancer screening and not the leading abortion provider in the country (probably the world).
How about we call McDonalds a health food store too because the sell fruit cups? Sound fair?
getalife
February 3rd, 2012
12:39 pm
Looks like the left are energized this cycle.
The gop attacked every voting group like they are trying to lose.
The gop deserve to lose.
Oscar
February 3rd, 2012
12:41 pm
They will eventually get the message right. At least we can hope.
ragnar danneskjold
February 3rd, 2012
12:44 pm
They said everything except “we will continue to fund abortion providers.”
Doggone/GA
February 3rd, 2012
12:45 pm
“the Komen foundation should have just said we don’t want to donate to any abortion provider”
And what, exactly, does abortion have to do with breast cancer?
Granny Godzilla
February 3rd, 2012
12:45 pm
Apology Accepted.
But that won’t let them back into my wallet.
Seen the trailer for the documentary comming out about SGK?
Food for thought.
Aquagirl
February 3rd, 2012
12:46 pm
If that is the case, wouldn’t the money be better going to someone who can actually perform the screenings?
No, because you want to provide more first-tier screening in breast exams, which don’t require expensive equipment. (Mammograms are not the initial test, calling them “screening” is inaccurate.) That’s like saying you should only be able to get an AIDS test someplace that has a full medical facility.
It’s much more cost-effective (and effective in general) to make screening as accessible as possible. Those who need further follow-up can be routed to facilities with more expertise and equipment.
ty webb
February 3rd, 2012
12:48 pm
Doggone,
It doesn’t. But if the Komen foundation is prolife/antiabortion(whatever label you want), they have a right to donate or not to donate anywhere they choose. Same thing with prochoioce/proabortion groups.
Adam
February 3rd, 2012
12:49 pm
Nice non-apology apology, Komen. Free to apply for future grants? As long as some Republican wants to have an investigation, they violate your rules.