Export thread
Planned Parenthood finally counts medicaid revenue
#1
strawman
strawman
This year Planned Parenthood revised its annual reporting method.
Planned Parenthood does not "own" any actual centers - they merely collect money and pay affiliates for services provided. This has a number of benefits, for instance distancing itself from individual clinic mistakes, but one of the problems is that they can't profit off abortion and other clinical medicaid services.
Previously affiliates had to register as medical centers independent of Planned Parenthood, and bill Medicaid separately for abortion and other clinical services. The parent organization, however, can't bill affiliates for each abortion, so it had no way to generate revenue from clinical services.
Since they only provide about 350 thousand in-patient abortions per year out of a total of 10 million services, it would seem that trying to making money off 3% of their total services isn't worthwhile.
However, abortion is by far the most expensive clinical procedure they perform, and medicaid is paying affiliate clinics over $500 million per year to provide abortion ad other clinical services.
In previous annual reports Planned Parenthood claimed about $500 million in revenue over a year, not counting medicaid revenue its affiliates earn. Notably federal funding (about 40% of their corporate revenue) cannot be used for abortion services, but state medicaid and other government insurance can, because it's not directly from the federal government to the clinic - it has to go through the state insurance programs first.
This year is the first year they are reporting all the revenue, including medicaid and other insurance revenue, on the parent organization's annual report, which is interesting for a number of issues. It suggests that they may choose to merge with their affiliates and actually take on the task of running the organization from top to bottom.
Planned Parenthood is finally calling itself the 1 billion dollar non-profit organization that it has already been for the last several years.
http://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/annual-report-4661.htm
At least $200 million, or 20% of the entire planned parenthood budget was spent last year to perform over 333,000 abortions. It is very likely that they receive significantly more money per abortion than I've estimated (based on current insurance industry rates) because I've only accounted for the actual procedure itself, and not all the additional services provided in addition to the abortion (if you've ever read a hospital bill for a "simple procedure" then you know what I'm talking about here). Furthermore I've calculated based on first trimester abortion costs. A second or third trimester abortion is significantly more.
Planned Parenthood now carries out 40% of all the abortions performed in the US, and is climbing. It is by far the most profitable procedure they perform in their clinics, and is their primary service (the first item listed under their services chart on their website).
I'm posting this because it seems like a lot of people buy into the propaganda that Planned Parenthood provides very few abortions, often with the claim that "Abortion accounts for only 3% of all services provided by Planned Parenthood." It is an advertising claim, and should be taken with as much validity as "4 out of 5 dentist recommend brand X". When you look at the services provided to pregnant women alone, abortion accounts for 91%.
Surprising though it may seem, I used to be on the fence about Planned Parenthood. It does a lot of good - at least half their revenue does go to education, STI/STD, and cancer screenings. But when one of the first things they tell you about abortion is "Abortions are very common. In fact, 1 out of 3 women in the U.S. have an abortion by the time they are 45 years old." abortion is on every webpage, and in lists in the first thing listed, and a quarter of their 1 billion dollars comes from abortion, I have to accept that the critics aren't wrong.
Planned parenthood profits from and pushes abortion.
This change in accounting revenue signals that the revenue push for abortion services is only going to increase.
Planned Parenthood does not "own" any actual centers - they merely collect money and pay affiliates for services provided. This has a number of benefits, for instance distancing itself from individual clinic mistakes, but one of the problems is that they can't profit off abortion and other clinical medicaid services.
Previously affiliates had to register as medical centers independent of Planned Parenthood, and bill Medicaid separately for abortion and other clinical services. The parent organization, however, can't bill affiliates for each abortion, so it had no way to generate revenue from clinical services.
Since they only provide about 350 thousand in-patient abortions per year out of a total of 10 million services, it would seem that trying to making money off 3% of their total services isn't worthwhile.
However, abortion is by far the most expensive clinical procedure they perform, and medicaid is paying affiliate clinics over $500 million per year to provide abortion ad other clinical services.
In previous annual reports Planned Parenthood claimed about $500 million in revenue over a year, not counting medicaid revenue its affiliates earn. Notably federal funding (about 40% of their corporate revenue) cannot be used for abortion services, but state medicaid and other government insurance can, because it's not directly from the federal government to the clinic - it has to go through the state insurance programs first.
This year is the first year they are reporting all the revenue, including medicaid and other insurance revenue, on the parent organization's annual report, which is interesting for a number of issues. It suggests that they may choose to merge with their affiliates and actually take on the task of running the organization from top to bottom.
Planned Parenthood is finally calling itself the 1 billion dollar non-profit organization that it has already been for the last several years.
http://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/annual-report-4661.htm
At least $200 million, or 20% of the entire planned parenthood budget was spent last year to perform over 333,000 abortions. It is very likely that they receive significantly more money per abortion than I've estimated (based on current insurance industry rates) because I've only accounted for the actual procedure itself, and not all the additional services provided in addition to the abortion (if you've ever read a hospital bill for a "simple procedure" then you know what I'm talking about here). Furthermore I've calculated based on first trimester abortion costs. A second or third trimester abortion is significantly more.
Planned Parenthood now carries out 40% of all the abortions performed in the US, and is climbing. It is by far the most profitable procedure they perform in their clinics, and is their primary service (the first item listed under their services chart on their website).
I'm posting this because it seems like a lot of people buy into the propaganda that Planned Parenthood provides very few abortions, often with the claim that "Abortion accounts for only 3% of all services provided by Planned Parenthood." It is an advertising claim, and should be taken with as much validity as "4 out of 5 dentist recommend brand X". When you look at the services provided to pregnant women alone, abortion accounts for 91%.
Surprising though it may seem, I used to be on the fence about Planned Parenthood. It does a lot of good - at least half their revenue does go to education, STI/STD, and cancer screenings. But when one of the first things they tell you about abortion is "Abortions are very common. In fact, 1 out of 3 women in the U.S. have an abortion by the time they are 45 years old." abortion is on every webpage, and in lists in the first thing listed, and a quarter of their 1 billion dollars comes from abortion, I have to accept that the critics aren't wrong.
Planned parenthood profits from and pushes abortion.
This change in accounting revenue signals that the revenue push for abortion services is only going to increase.
#2
Gilgamesh
Pushes? Wrong.
Gilgamesh
Profits? Possibly.Planned parenthood profits from and pushes abortion.
Pushes? Wrong.
#3
strawman
Keep in mind I'm glad they really push contraceptive use, and a lot of money and effort goes toward that direction, but if you walk into a clinic knowing you are pregnant, you have less than a 10% chance of leaving having chosen a course other than abortion.
strawman
Catherine Adair and Abby Johnson both disagree with you, and they have both worked inside clinics.Profits? Possibly.
Pushes? Wrong.
Keep in mind I'm glad they really push contraceptive use, and a lot of money and effort goes toward that direction, but if you walk into a clinic knowing you are pregnant, you have less than a 10% chance of leaving having chosen a course other than abortion.
#4
Krisken
Krisken
I can't find anything on either of those two women that doesn't appear to be propaganda in nature.
#5
strawman
I would love to have a mainstream media (no, not fox...) outlet report on these stories, but they aren't popular, and they are definitely considered politically incorrect.
I think society has accepted the idea that abortion is not just an option, but is the right choice for women that don't have the resources for anything other than Planned Parenthood. If you're poor, unmarried, young, or in school, it seems to be socially acceptable to push for abortion.
strawman
Unfortunately I cannot either. However they are two different stories from different women who worked in different clinics at different times, so even if a mainstream journalist isn't putting their career on the line to tell their story, I don't see anything about the various claims that suggest the stories are false.I can't find anything on either of those two women that doesn't appear to be propaganda in nature.
I would love to have a mainstream media (no, not fox...) outlet report on these stories, but they aren't popular, and they are definitely considered politically incorrect.
I think society has accepted the idea that abortion is not just an option, but is the right choice for women that don't have the resources for anything other than Planned Parenthood. If you're poor, unmarried, young, or in school, it seems to be socially acceptable to push for abortion.
#6
blotsfan
blotsfan
Not trying to start anything, I honestly don't know. What does planned parenthood do for people that are already pregnant other than abortions?
Edit: never mind. missed on wikipedia that they give counseling on what to do when you're pregnant. If they do make a lot of profit from abortions, it wouldn't stun me if they push it for the sake of getting more money. While I don't think thats ok, I'd rather them do that than have it not be an option at all.
Edit: never mind. missed on wikipedia that they give counseling on what to do when you're pregnant. If they do make a lot of profit from abortions, it wouldn't stun me if they push it for the sake of getting more money. While I don't think thats ok, I'd rather them do that than have it not be an option at all.
#7
Tress
Tress
Check-ups, prenatal care, etc. Good for people without insurance, and therefore without a regular doctor.Not trying to start anything, I honestly don't know. What does planned parenthood do for people that are already pregnant other than abortions?
#8
blotsfan
blotsfan
Yeah I missed that. My b.
Though thinking about it more, I feel that my ignorance is a possible of the 10% stat steinman mentioned. If the press planned parenthood gets is focused on abortions rather than those other options, it wouldnt' surprise me if a lot of pregnant women just think of planned parenthood as a place to get abortions once you're already pregnant. If most people walk into the building planning on getting an abortion, it wouldn't be surprising that most would walk out wanting one/having one.
Though thinking about it more, I feel that my ignorance is a possible of the 10% stat steinman mentioned. If the press planned parenthood gets is focused on abortions rather than those other options, it wouldnt' surprise me if a lot of pregnant women just think of planned parenthood as a place to get abortions once you're already pregnant. If most people walk into the building planning on getting an abortion, it wouldn't be surprising that most would walk out wanting one/having one.
#9
Gilgamesh
Without Planned Parenthood helping with contraceptive and healthy pregnancy in many MANY low income neighborhoods, there would be thousands and thousands more on welfare than there already are. That's a guarnatee and an easily proven statistic.
Gilgamesh
2 faces being used suspiciously to push an agenda? Nah, I'll take my years of experience, and that of every single family and friend (and the hundred and thousands more speaking out publically) I've ever known that's used them for years to say they've always pushed for contraceptive use and helped in every way possible when someone actually becomes pregnant to insure a healthy delivery.Catherine Adair and Abby Johnson both disagree with you, and they have both worked inside clinics.
Keep in mind I'm glad they really push contraceptive use, and a lot of money and effort goes toward that direction, but if you walk into a clinic knowing you are pregnant, you have less than a 10% chance of leaving having chosen a course other than abortion.
Without Planned Parenthood helping with contraceptive and healthy pregnancy in many MANY low income neighborhoods, there would be thousands and thousands more on welfare than there already are. That's a guarnatee and an easily proven statistic.
#10
Krisken
Krisken
Not to mention that those same people pushing for anti-abortion legislation push for abstinence only programs and misinformation regarding contraceptives. It's mind boggling to me.
#11
Gilgamesh
Gilgamesh
Or clinics that charge more than a low income family can afford, which tend to be owned by family members of the politicians pushing to get rid of Planned Parenthood. Much like the Florida Senator that pushed for drug testing to be done by the state, which happened to be run by his wife.Not to mention that those same people pushing for anti-abortion legislation push for abstinence only programs and misinformation regarding contraceptives. It's mind boggling to me.
#12
Hailey Knight
Hailey Knight
Because the agenda for the leaders in the anti-abortion brigade isn't about "saving the children"; it's about punishing women for having sex.Not to mention that those same people pushing for anti-abortion legislation push for abstinence only programs and misinformation regarding contraceptives. It's mind boggling to me.
#13
GasBandit
GasBandit
Abortion is one of those areas that test my adherence to Libertarian philosophy. I'm of the opinion we should do everything we can to encourage people not to have babies they can't afford. I want - but can't quite bring myself - to say maybe there should be a federal abortion subsidy. Maybe it would cause less cognitive dissonance for me if I say tax exemption.
#14
PatrThom
PatrThom
I feel the situation is much as blotsfan describes, where the reason so many people get abortions at PP isn't so much because they were "talked into it" as because it was 91% likely their reason for going to PP in the first place (the same way you might go to Salvation Army/Goodwill for thrift shopping, or to the QuickLube for an oil change). Considering how many other organizations have set up "decoy" PP centers to entrap and misinform, I find that neither side probably has sufficient standing to say they have the moral high ground on this issue.
Since I have never spent any time behind the bulletproof glass in either sort of establishment, I have no way of definitively choosing sides in the PP v. No PP debate.
EDIT: Also I am the wrong gender to have sufficient dealings that I might collect enough data to make an informed guess. I've probably been into a PP establishment 3 or 4 times in my life. I couldn't even tell you what magazines they prefer.
--Patrick
Since I have never spent any time behind the bulletproof glass in either sort of establishment, I have no way of definitively choosing sides in the PP v. No PP debate.
EDIT: Also I am the wrong gender to have sufficient dealings that I might collect enough data to make an informed guess. I've probably been into a PP establishment 3 or 4 times in my life. I couldn't even tell you what magazines they prefer.
--Patrick
#15
Charlie Don't Surf
GOOD
Charlie Don't Surf
Planned parenthood profits from and pushes abortion.
This change in accounting revenue signals that the revenue push for abortion services is only going to increase.
GOOD
#16
blotsfan
blotsfan
Woah Charlie. I didn't even think you'd be that extreme.
#17
PatrThom
--Patrick
PatrThom
Charlie never does anything halfway.Woah Charlie. I didn't even think you'd be that extreme.
--Patrick
#18
D
Dubyamn
D
Dubyamn
I've read what those women have claimed and I believe them to be liars. Much like Ron Paul's story about an "abortion" being carried out by delivering the baby and then putting it in a trash can I do not believe that the situations they talk about have ever ever happened.Catherine Adair and Abby Johnson both disagree with you, and they have both worked inside clinics.
Keep in mind I'm glad they really push contraceptive use, and a lot of money and effort goes toward that direction, but if you walk into a clinic knowing you are pregnant, you have less than a 10% chance of leaving having chosen a course other than abortion.
#19
Krisken
Krisken
Is that what they are claiming?
Y'know, if you want to oppose a cause, you convert a whole lot more people by sticking closer to the truth than making up outlandish claims.
Y'know, if you want to oppose a cause, you convert a whole lot more people by sticking closer to the truth than making up outlandish claims.
#20
Gilgamesh
Gilgamesh
Problem is, the truth doesn't support their claims. That's why they don't try.Is that what they are claiming?
Y'know, if you want to oppose a cause, you convert a whole lot more people by sticking closer to the truth than making up outlandish claims.
#21
Krisken
Krisken
I don't think that's necessary, Gil. One can disagree with the conclusions people make or position they support, but if they stuck to the argument about the child's life they might garner more support than foaming at the mouth.
#22
Gilgamesh
Gilgamesh
That's just it though, I'm not arguing against abortion or for it. I'm saying that claiming that Planned Parenthood is pushing abortions is bullshit propaganda.
#23
strawman
strawman
The two women did not claim that live babies are being thrown in the trash.
They simply claimed that their bosses told them to encourage abortion whenever counseling a pregnant woman.
Of course you don't have to believe them, or the sites their stories appear on.
The fact that there is so much money in performing an abortion, and that the parent organization is now counting that money is income, however, suggests to me that there is more to the situation than planned parenthood wants one to believe.
They simply claimed that their bosses told them to encourage abortion whenever counseling a pregnant woman.
Of course you don't have to believe them, or the sites their stories appear on.
The fact that there is so much money in performing an abortion, and that the parent organization is now counting that money is income, however, suggests to me that there is more to the situation than planned parenthood wants one to believe.
#24
Bowielee
Bowielee
Sorry Steinman, but I wouldn't expect you to be any more unbiased on this than I would be on issues of gay rights.
#25
tegid
Or not. Consider this possibility
The reality of the thing is most probably halfway. I don't doubt that this happens locally in some clinics, but I don't think it's widespread or strongly encouraged from the top of the organization either.
tegid
The two women did not claim that live babies are being thrown in the trash.
They simply claimed that their bosses told them to encourage abortion whenever counseling a pregnant woman.
Of course you don't have to believe them, or the sites their stories appear on.
The fact that there is so much money in performing an abortion, and that the parent organization is now counting that money is income, however, suggests to me that there is more to the situation than planned parenthood wants one to believe.
Or not. Consider this possibility
In this case, they already get most of those benefits without the need to push, and pushing for abortions may mean a big effort for a relatively small increase in profits, besides the obvious negative moral implications and the possibility for very bad publicity. I am not saying that you are wrong, merely that those facts do not necessarily point to your conclusion as strongly as you seem to think.PatrThom said:where the reason so many people get abortions at PP isn't so much because they were "talked into it" as because it was 91% likely their reason for going to PP in the first place
The reality of the thing is most probably halfway. I don't doubt that this happens locally in some clinics, but I don't think it's widespread or strongly encouraged from the top of the organization either.
#26
D
Dubyamn
The Women's story is that PP pushes abortions on women like a waiter will push the fish that's about to turn. A story that is equally ludicrous and dismissible.
D
Dubyamn
Yeah sorry I wasn't clearer about that. The baby in a trashcan was a Ron Paul story that is so ludicrous that I dismiss it out of hand.The two women did not claim that live babies are being thrown in the trash.
They simply claimed that their bosses told them to encourage abortion whenever counseling a pregnant woman.
The Women's story is that PP pushes abortions on women like a waiter will push the fish that's about to turn. A story that is equally ludicrous and dismissible.
#27
strawman
So you could well assume that my bias on the issue of abortion is much stronger than my bias on the issue of gay rights, generally.
Hopefully you will generally choose critical thinking over simple assumptions, but it is more convenient to ignore things that make you uncomfortable rather than consider them honestly, isn't it? But you are in good company. There are many here who believe the opposing side is centered on propaganda and dishonesty to the point where they don't believe anything that is said or written.
strawman
While I doubt that you're actually sorry, the reality is that I support anti-discrimination for LGTBQ people in housing, employment, education, etc, and support hate crime laws against the same. However I oppose all abortions except in the case of rape, incest, or when medically necessary.Sorry Steinman, but I wouldn't expect you to be any more unbiased on this than I would be on issues of gay rights.
So you could well assume that my bias on the issue of abortion is much stronger than my bias on the issue of gay rights, generally.
Hopefully you will generally choose critical thinking over simple assumptions, but it is more convenient to ignore things that make you uncomfortable rather than consider them honestly, isn't it? But you are in good company. There are many here who believe the opposing side is centered on propaganda and dishonesty to the point where they don't believe anything that is said or written.
#28
blotsfan
blotsfan
I've never understood this. If its murder, its murder. If a woman was raped, that wouldn't justify killing someone. If a raped woman had a baby you wouldn't let her kill the child. If you're making that distinction, it seems to indicate a distinction between a fetus and a baby.However I oppose all abortions except in the case of rape, incest, or when medically necessary.
#29
D
Dubyamn
There is also the Pro-life's history of actively pushing lies and ignorance which acts against them as well.
D
Dubyamn
If the Pro-life community wants to bring forth any proof of the allegations I welcome it. Until then I am supposed to believe that out of the entire organization of hundreds of people only 2 have felt uncomfortable about their claimed "push abortions cause dead babies = sick cash" stance of Planned Parenthood?Hopefully you will generally choose critical thinking over simple assumptions, but it is more convenient to ignore things that make you uncomfortable rather than consider them honestly, isn't it? But you are in good company. There are many here who believe the opposing side is centered on propaganda and dishonesty to the point where they don't believe anything that is said or written.
There is also the Pro-life's history of actively pushing lies and ignorance which acts against them as well.
#30
strawman
To force someone who was sexually tortured to live with the extended consequences pregnancy and delivery present could be a heavier burden than murder depending on one's particular set of values.
strawman
The distinction is this: The woman had no choice to have sex.I've never understood this. If its murder, its murder. If a woman was raped, that wouldn't justify killing someone. If a raped woman had a baby you wouldn't let her kill the child. If you're making that distinction, it seems to indicate a distinction between a fetus and a baby.
To force someone who was sexually tortured to live with the extended consequences pregnancy and delivery present could be a heavier burden than murder depending on one's particular set of values.
#31
Krisken
Krisken
Yup, that's exactly the stronger case I was alluding to earlier. Each position has strengths in their argument, whether for or against the practice of abortion. That some people introduce stories which stretch the limits of the believable hurts their position. More can be gained by simply presenting a viewpoint rather than trying to shock.
#32
Bowielee
Secondly, you entirely twisted what I said, but I'm coming to expect that from you.
Bowielee
First of all, the only facts that you point out are the fact that this year there is a new line item on the planned parenthood budget report. You have provided absolutely no other support for your assertions, so your bias factors very heavily into your argument until you provide a rational argument that is backed in facts, not hearsay and possibly erroneous assumptions.While I doubt that you're actually sorry, the reality is that I support anti-discrimination for LGTBQ people in housing, employment, education, etc, and support hate crime laws against the same. However I oppose all abortions except in the case of rape, incest, or when medically necessary.
So you could well assume that my bias on the issue of abortion is much stronger than my bias on the issue of gay rights, generally.
Hopefully you will generally choose critical thinking over simple assumptions, but it is more convenient to ignore things that make you uncomfortable rather than consider them honestly, isn't it? But you are in good company. There are many here who believe the opposing side is centered on propaganda and dishonesty to the point where they don't believe anything that is said or written.
Secondly, you entirely twisted what I said, but I'm coming to expect that from you.
#33
Espy
Espy
Personally I'm with Hillary C. I want abortions to be safe, legal and rare. I am against late term abortions. Having seen my child in the womb at those ages I just don't have a choice but to believe that at that point it's ending a life. I do think that in order to achieve what Hillary is talking about we need better sex education from all fronts, schools and parents so that people understand better about birth control. I'm not against Planned Parenthood nor do I think they are perfect but I hope that if they did for any reason look at abortion as a money maker that they would re-evaluate that view, but I know from my experience our local PP spends an awful lot of time trying to prevent unwanted pregnancies.
#34
PatrThom
It would be hypocritical in the extreme if I were to then turn around and say, "...except for foeti."
--Patrick
PatrThom
I've already stated in another thread that I believe there are times when justifiable homicide would be appropriate, or even necessary.I want abortions to be safe, legal and rare.
It would be hypocritical in the extreme if I were to then turn around and say, "...except for foeti."
This, of course, is the best possible solution, and should be respected as good advice, regardless of the source.our local PP spends an awful lot of time trying to prevent unwanted pregnancies.
--Patrick