Lawmakers oppose Biden admin. rule change targeting crisis pregnancy centers
Pro-life advocacy organizations and over three dozen federal lawmakers are criticizing the Biden administration's proposed rule changes that they fear may prevent pro-life pregnancy centers from receiving taxpayer money.
In a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking published in the Federal Register on Oct. 2, the Office of Family Assistance, Administration for Children and Families and the Department of Health and Human Services outlined proposed amendments to the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program to "strengthen the safety net and reduce administrative burden."
The program distributes grants to states, who then pass them on to organizations and agencies that work to achieve at least one of the four purposes of the initiative as laid out in the statute.
Get Our Latest News for FREE
The purposes of TANF are to "(1) provide assistance to needy families so that children may be cared for in their own homes or in the homes of relatives; (2) end the dependence of needy parents on government assistance by promoting job preparation, work and marriage; (3) prevent and reduce the incidence of out-of-wedlock pregnancies and establish annual numerical goals for preventing and reducing the incidence of these pregnancies; and (4) encourage the formation and maintenance of two-parent families."
The proposed changes establish a "reasonable person standard" that requires all funds distributed under the program to support expenditures that a "reasonable person would consider to be within one or more of the enumerated four purposes of the TANF program."
When analyzing efforts to "prevent and reduce the incidence of out-of-wedlock pregnancies and establish annual numerical goals for preventing and reducing the incidence of these pregnancies," the proposal states that "jurisdictions have sought to claim other expenditures under TANF purpose three where the connection to preventing and reducing out-of-wedlock pregnancies appears to be far more tenuous or even non-existent."
"Programs that only or primarily provide pregnancy counseling to women only after they become pregnant likely do not meet the reasonable person standard because the connection to preventing and reducing out-of-wedlock pregnancies is tenuous or non-existent, and therefore do not accomplish purpose three," the notice stated.
The proposal adds that states providing funding for these programs through "crisis pregnancy centers or pregnancy resource centers" must "show that the expenditure actually accomplishes the TANF purpose."
The rule would require states also to show "that prior expenditures by the state or another entity for the same or a substantially similar program or activity actually accomplished the TANF purpose, or that there is academic or other research indicating that the expenditure could reasonably be expected to accomplish the TANF purpose."
Critics of the rule responded in a series of statements released after the comment period closed Friday.
A group of federal lawmakers expressed concern about the proposed rule change in a letter to Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra published Friday.
Spearheaded by Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith, R-Miss., 10 senators signed on to the letter: Sens. Steve Daines, R-Mont.; Mike Lee, R-Utah; J.D. Vance, R-Ohio; Mike Braun, R-Ind.; Roger Wicker, R-Miss.; James Lankford, R-Okla.; Josh Hawley, R-Mo.; John Kennedy, R-La.; Roger Marshall, R-Kan.; and Eric Schmitt, R-Mo.
Signatories from the U.S. House of Representatives include Reps. Chris Smith, R-N.J.; Debbie Lesko, R-Ariz.; Michael Guest, R-Miss.; Erin Houchin, R-Ind.; Mary Miller, R-Ill.; Alex Mooney, R-W.Va.; Jeff Duncan, R-S.C.; Warren Davidson, R-Ohio; Blaine Luetkemeyer, R-Mo.; John Moolenaar, R-Mich.; Larry Buchson, R-Ind.; Jim Baird, R-Ind.; Jim Banks, R-Ind.; Clay Higgins, R-La.; Keith Self, R-Texas; Garret Graves, R-La.; Robert Aderholt, R-Ala.; and Eric Burlison, R-Mo.
Urging the administration to "withdraw it immediately," the coalition of 11 U.S. Senators and 18 members of the House warned that the proposal "undermines the TANF program by targeting pregnancy centers and alternatives to abortion programs and threatening to strip them of tens of millions of dollars of funding, depriving pregnant women in need of compassionate assistance for themselves and their unborn babies."
The lawmakers expressed concern that "the Proposed Rule focuses specifically on States that direct TANF funds to pregnancy centers and alternatives to abortion programs." They maintained that pro-life pregnancy centers "provide services that fulfill all four purposes of TANF" and suggested that "HHS is targeting pregnancy centers for their pro-life mission rather than for any kind of misuse of Federal funds."
"HHS' singling out of pregnancy centers for performing post-conception pregnancy counseling also reveals a glaring hypocrisy, making the Proposed Rule arbitrary and capricious. Planned Parenthood affiliates reported expending $1.04 million in TANF funds in 2018," they wrote. "Planned Parenthood performs abortions, for which the expenditure of TANF funds is prohibited, yet curiously, HHS does not raise concerns, or demand special justification, for States that have provided TANF funds to Planned Parenthood affiliates."
Katie Daniel, the state police director for the national pro-life grassroots group Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, criticized what she calls "Biden's twisted attempt to hinder pregnancy centers' ability to serve women in need."
In a public comment, the Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America and the research organization Charlotte Lozier Institute argued that the proposed rule is "not viewpoint neutral."
"Specifically, it implies that Pregnancy Resource Centers are ineligible for TANF funding," the public comment reads. "What is worse, the rule does not make the same
implication about any other entity or organization. By definition and reputation, Pregnancy Resource Centers operate based on a pro-life point of view. Courts have found that 'viewpoint discrimination' is an egregious form of content discrimination."
Human Coalition, which operates a network of pro-life pregnancy centers, slammed the proposed changes to the TANF program in a statement shared with The Christian Post.
"By attempting to remove pregnancy centers from funding, this discriminatory proposal callously blocks pregnant women in need from resources when they need it most," said Human Coalition National Director of Public Policy Chelsey Youman.
"The administration completely disregards the fact that these centers meet program goals by providing aid to needy families, promoting job preparation and marriage, and encouraging two-parent families," Youman added. "Pregnancy centers across the country have created a giant safety net of care and assistance for women in need, and this life-affirming care and support is absolutely a worthy use of our tax dollars."
"Instead, the Biden administration is cutting this lifeline in the name of abortion. Stripping funding from these centers would hurt vulnerable women — especially low-income women and women of color — and undermine healthy families."
Ryan Foley is a reporter for The Christian Post. He can be reached at: [email protected]
