A letter from Rep. Chris Gibson (NY-20)

February 25, 2011 Dear ROBERT: Thank you for contacting me regarding Title X funding. It is good to hear from you. Recently, the House of Representatives approved H.R. 1, a continuing resolution (CR) to fund the federal government for the remainder of the fiscal year. I supported the continuing resolution because our nation is facing a fiscal emergency and this bill cut more than $100 billion in discretionary spending for the remainder of the FY11 fiscal year. While I was encouraged by the dollar amount that was cut, I took issue with the manner in which it carried out. In an effort to achieve $100 billion in savings, House appropriators combed the federal budget and significantly reduced some programs, while completely eliminating other programs. Family planning funds through Title X, which I support, was included in a long list of eliminated programs. I recognize that these funds go to health centers that provide important health services for woman. For these reasons, I believe the decision to eliminate this program was the wrong approach. Both parties were responsible for growing our national debt, and righting our fiscal house, will require sacrifice from all Americans. I have tried to lead by example, by suspending my family's military pension after 26 years in the Army. In an effort to make the cuts more proportional, I offered a substitute amendment that proposed an across-the-board cut to all programs within each agency. This amendment cut more than $100 billion and all programs, including defense were on the table. Importantly, it would not have eliminated any programs. While Congress has tough decision to make about each program in the upcoming budget process, I believed it was necessary for all Americans to share the sacrifice for the first major cut. While my amendment failed, I will continue to advocate for a proportional approach to our budget debate as the discussion with the Senate and the President advances. While painful at times, these cuts should be felt by all Americans. As you may know, Title X funding prohibits the use of funds for abortion procedures. Included in the continuing resolution was an amendment, which I supported, to eliminate federal funding to the organization Planned Parenthood. While this organization provides a wide variety of valuable health services for women, according to the latest data available, Planned Parenthood received more than $363 million in federal tax dollars. Additionally, reports indicate that they perform hundreds of thousands of abortions in a given a year. In line with the intent of current law, I do not support the use of tax dollars for abortion. While not every Planned Parenthood performs abortions, the umbrella organization has long blurred the lines and has proven undeserving of tax dollars. I believe we need to develop a better mechanism to ensure women have access to low cost health services, while ensuring tax dollars do not flow to abortion providers. This is an important distinction, and one that I will continue to make when discussing this difficult issue. I recognize that abortion is a divisive and deeply emotional issue for many New Yorkers. I will do my best to advocate issues, like adoption reform, that will attempt to find middle ground on this contentious issue. Thank you, again, for contacting me with your thoughts. Please don't hesitate to inform me of your concerns in the future through my website http://gibson.house.gov or over the phone at (202) 225-5614.

Sincerely, Chris Gibson Member of Congress

--That's the letter, which seems to me considerably better than the routine PR response one might expect from a congressional office. And Gibson's vote against funding for Planned Parenthood is reason enough to celebrate his defeat of Scott Murphy last November.

Comments

[Brian]

Apparently, Gibson only responds to constituents who agree with him. I wrote a few weeks regarding CPB funding and didn't even get a "routine PR response." Even his hero, Saint Jerry Solomon, and the evil Mr. Murphy gave me token responses. Gibson didn't even acknowledge it whatsoever. Shame on him.

[Bob Conner]

He may have been slow to hire people and set up an efficient office. I'd write to him again before assuming bad faith.

[Brian]

When did you send your original letter?

[Bob Conner]

Actually it was an email to an address I think I got from his Web site. His return email (which included the letter form) had this address:
Rep.Chris.Gibson@mail.house.gov

My letter was prompted by a TU editorial denouncing House Republicans for anti-abortion legislation and admonishing Gibson not to join them, which ticked me off enough to write as a constituent urging him the other way. I don't remember exactly when that was.

[Brian]

I sent my correspondance the same way... still no response.

[Brian]

I FINALLY got a response from Gibson, the day AFTER a vote on CPB funding and nearly two months after my original email. He (surprisingly) voted to preserve funding for CPB so I can’t complain too much. I just hope this excessive delay is an anomaly going forward.

[Bob Conner]

Glad he got back to you.