Federal Funds to Fight Sex Trafficking Could Go to Big Abortion Businesses, Say Activists

By Samuel Smith, Deputy Managing Editor Friday, May 20, 2016

An activist walks past a car taking part in a convoy of around 140 vehicles leaving for Hungary from Vienna, September 6, 2015, to distribute aid to migrants and to collect refugees to bring back to Austria. People taking part run the risk of violating laws on human trafficking, police said, but officers were there at the meeting point outside a football stadium just to provide security and guide traffic. | (Photo: Reuters/Heinz-Peter Bader)

One of Corker's aides told the Daily Signal that "all the funds authorized in the amended version of [EMSI] will flow through the appropriations process, which [is] fully covered by the Helms restriction."

However, McClusky points out that the Helms Amendment has a reputation for not being adhered to in the field and that there is a real need for stronger pro-life protections. Plus, the Helms Amendment only governs the use of U.S. taxpayer dollars and does not have authority over money coming from foreign governments and businesses.

"That is why we would like to see that if we are contributing and establishing an entity like this, no funds should be going to abortion because of the fungibility argument. With what oversight we would have, American taxpayer dollars should not be used in anyway to subsidize abortion," McCluskey asserted. "We are having that fight on the national level when we go up against Planned Parenthood. That is why it is so disappointed that Senators Corker and McCain are setting us up for this fight on the international level for years to come."

"You would expect this from folks who are advocating for abortion but this is coming from our people," Mancini noted. "They are pro-life and they are not helping victims of trafficking or the pro-life cause."

It is believed pro-life protections were not added to the initiative because other countries have indicated that they will not take part in the initiative if it includes pro-life protections.

"Whenever a country gives foreign aid, it should be given to things that reflect the principles of that country. If other countries disagree with those principles, maybe they aren't the ones to partner with," McClusky said. "Offering abortion to women who have been trafficked is further making them victims. It is not helping them. The U.S. should not be partaking in that. We shouldn't be creating more victims, we should be helping the ones that are out there."

The addition of the EMSI provision to such a critical piece of legislation that specifies the budget and expenditures of the Department of Defense comes without warning to pro-life organizations.

While the House version of the NDAA passed on Wednesday without the EMSI provision included, the Senate version with the EMSI has yet to be voted on.

"While we would like to see it struck [down] on the Senate floor but there is not a pro-life majority in the Senate right now. There is a Republican majority but not a pro-life majority," McClusky explained. "When you have somebody like Senator Corker and McCain, while well-intentioned, they can't turn around and vote against their own bill. It would be very difficult I think to strike in the Senate."

Experts at the Heritage Foundation are also calling for stronger pro-life provisions to be added to the initiative.