I am deeply disappointed by the gross mischaracterizations of the strategy, its rationale, and my involvement in it. I openly acknowledge my role in the matter and continue to believe our decision was the best one for Komen’s future and the women we serve. However, the decision to update our granting model was made before I joined Komen, and the controversy related to Planned Parenthood has long been a concern to the organization. Neither the decision nor the changes themselves were based on anyone’s political beliefs or ideology. Rather, both were based on Komen’s mission and how to better serve women, as well as a realization of the need to distance Komen from controversy. I believe that Komen, like any other nonprofit organization, has the right and the responsibility to set criteria and highest standards for how and to whom it grants.
What was a thoughtful and thoroughly reviewed decision – one that would have indeed enabled Komen to deliver even greater community impact – has unfortunately been turned into something about politics. This is entirely untrue. This development should sadden us all greatly.
A fuller quote tells a slightly more in-depth story than the quote the AP used. Note the italicized part.
I am deeply disappointed by the gross mischaracterizations of the strategy, its rationale, and my involvement in it. I openly acknowledge my role in the matter and continue to believe our decision was the best one for Komen’s future and the women we serve.Susan G. Komen for the Cure Vice President for Public Policy Karen Handel • Resigning, and admitting her role in the Planned Parenthood saga that led to a high-profile reversal last week. Handel was long the target of criticism, as she had previously run for office in Georgia on an anti-Planned Parenthood platform. The statement is Handel’s first public statement on the matter; Komen’s founder and CEO, Nancy Brinker, had previously claimed Handel hadn’t played a major role in the saga. Though the policy decision predated her, Handel’s own words, and her continuing decision to support the policy, refute that. EDIT: A fuller quote from the letter tells a slightly different story. Read the letter here.
A quick Quipol on Komen for the Cure, the Planned Parenthood controversy, and the group’s decision to switch course. What do you think?
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.Susan G. Komen for the Cure • In a statement revealing they’ve reversed their decision on Planned Parenthood, adding: “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’s now less clear why Planned Parenthood lost the Komen funding. Komen had initially told the Associated Press that Planned Parenthood could not receive funding because it was under government investigation. But today, in no uncertain terms, [President Elizabeth] Johnson indicated that the decision actually had very little to do with an ongoing congressional probe.
“First and foremost, it doesn’t really have anything to do with that,” she said, adding that she didn’t know “very much” about the investigation because she works “20 hours a day focusing on our mission.”
So why did Planned Parenthood lose funding? Brinker says it has to do with the fact that they do not provide mammograms to women, but only provide mammogram referrals. “It was nothing they were doing wrong,” she explained. “We have decided not to fund, whereever possible, pass-through grants. We were giving them money, they were sending women out for mammograms. What we would like to have are clinics where we can directly fund mammograms.”
Think they’re telling the truth about this?
Susan Komen would not give in to bullies or fear. Too bad the foundation bearing her name did.Writer Judy Blume • Discussing the decision by Susan G. Komen for the Cure to cut off its funding to Planned Parenthood, because the organization was under investigation by a governmental organization — a decision met with much frustration and derision from Komen critics, who saw it as a transparent push to move away from a group associated with abortions, though associated with many other things. This has not been a banner day for the Komen foundation, which has raised $1.9 billion for breast cancer research and programs, but may have hurt its long-term reputation with the move — founder Nancy Brinker (whose sister was Susan G. Komen) was grilled by Andrea Mitchell on MSNBC today over the change. With word flying that the group changed its rules to specifically target Planned Parenthood (the “governmental organization” is Rep. Cliff Stearns, a noted anti-abortion activist) and an alleged shift to the right among its staff, activists feel that, with this move, the organization is politicizing a cause that otherwise has wide support. Thoughts? source (via • follow)
Copyright 2009-2013 Ernie Smith • Ask us stuff! • E-mail us • Follow us on Twitter • Follow us on Facebook
