Does seem poorly done. I mean if they REALLY wanted to do it smart they would of cited was the fact that said cancer tests aren't approved as acceptable screenings for cancer.
Better then nothing? Sure at least it's a plausible excuse though.
What I haven't really gotten because i didn't really read much on it, was if these polices changed before or after the senate investigation.
Which is kind of a silly investigation, since... "Has government money been spent on abortions" is an outright yes even if it is illegal.
For the procedures specifically? Probably not, but it's been used to rent the space the procedures take place in, and pay for the power used during the surgeries.
If we passed a law that outlawed government spending money on tobacco farming, I'd think we'd find it illegal to spend that money on the land and the water used to fertilize the land.
It's just a distinction not usually broached because the Republicans likely think that would lead to an end of the law, rather then an end to Planned parenthood funding.
