Image: ©iStockphoto.com/jml5571

To bring down the high chlamydia infections rate among Tennessee teenagers, an anti-abortion pregnancy center in Athens, Tenn., has proposed spending federal tax dollars on a life-sized version of the Game of Life.

The “Teen Life Maze” is just one of the ideas put forth by a cluster of crisis pregnancy centers that are receiving government grants to conduct abstinence education as part of President Obama’s health-care reform law.

Records obtained by The American Independent show that the government is paying for abstinence programs run by centers that promote dubious medical information. For example, crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs) receiving funding through the program claim that “reliable studies” have shown a link between abortion and breast cancer.

One of the centers says it seeks to help students understand “the lack of effectiveness of condoms/birth control in STD protection and pregnancy.”

TAI previously reported that a South Dakota anti-abortion CPC that requires its volunteers to be Christians received funding under a program created by Obama’s stimulus bill.

Between 1996 and 2009, taxpayers spent more than $1.5 billion on abstinence-only education, paid for by federal grants and state matching funds, according to the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States. In 2004, Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) released a report that found that these programs often contained false or distorted information about sex and reproductive health, such as claiming that condoms have a high failure rate at preventing HIV and pregnancy, women who have abortions have a high risk of becoming sterile, and HIV can be transmitted through sweat and tears.

Shortly after taking office, Obama moved to cut off federal funding for most abstinence-only education.

However, during the intense negotiations over the health-care-reform bill in 2009 and 2010, Congress attached a $250 million grant program for abstinence-only instruction (granting up to $50 million annually, through 2014). Under the program, state health departments apply for abstinence funding and can then allocate sub-awards to various organizations across the state, including county health departments, schools, community groups, and faith-based nonprofits.

So far, at least three anti-abortion CPCs have received funding through this provision. They’re all in Tennessee, which has the nation’s 11th highest teen birth rate, according to new data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

In January, the Tennessee Department of Health announced it was dividing $3.2 million in abstinence funding among 13 agencies through 2014 to “support comprehensive, evidence-based and medically accurate community-based education programs.”

A total of about $650,000 of that money was awarded to the three CPCs: Full Circle Women’s Services in Athens, Life Choices Pregnancy Support Center in Dyersburg, and Women’s Care Center of Rhea County, Inc., in Dayton. Per the terms of the grant program, each grant recipient has to match 75 percent of the award.

When they’re not teaching teens not to have sex, these centers are seeing women – sometimes teens – facing unplanned, and often unwelcomed, pregnancies. They seek to discourage abortion, offering women various services including counseling and free pregnancy tests. The websites of two of the centers – Full Circle Women’s Services and Life Choices Pregnancy Support Center – feature an array of misinformation about abortion, including claims that abortion causes breast cancer and depression.

Despite widespread rejection of an abortion-breast cancer link from major medical institutions such as the American Cancer Society, the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the National Cancer Institute, these CPCs imply that there is a connection, claiming on their websites that “a number of reliable studies have demonstrated connection between abortion and later development of breast cancer.”

According to the American Cancer Society, “At this time, the scientific evidence does not support the notion that abortion of any kind raises the risk of breast cancer or any other type of cancer.”

Both Full Circle Women’s Services and the Women’s Care Center are affiliated with Care Net, a national network of crisis pregnancy centers that prohibits its members from recommending, offering, or referring “single women” for contraception

Whereas proponents of comprehensive sex education encourage teaching teens how to protect themselves against unplanned pregnancy and diseases while acknowledging that condoms are not guaranteed to work 100 percent of the time, abstinence-education advocates often claim that teaching about proper condom use offers young people a “false sense of security.”

On their websites, Full Circle, Life Choices Pregnancy Resource Center, and the Women’s Care Center cite identical statistics emphasizing what they portray as the lack of effectiveness of condoms. These centers tell readers that “consistent” condom use during vaginal sex reduces the risk of “HIV by 85%”; human papillomavirus “by 50% or less”; and gonorrhea, Chlamydia, herpes, and syphilis “by about 50%.” The statistics come from various studies compiled by the Medical Institute, a nonprofit organization whose advice for preventing STDs is: “Avoid sexual activity if you are single. Be faithful to one uninfected partner for the rest of your life.”

Richard A. Crosby, a professor and chair at the Department of Health Behavior at the University of Kentucky College of Public Health, told TAI that these statistics are misleading.

“These are not statistics that are widely supported by the literature,” Crosby said. “They are confounded by a lack of accounting for the correct use of condoms. Consistent use alone is not enough. … When you do not account for the correct use, you have an underestimate of the effectiveness.”

Crosby, who has received federal grants to research HIV prevention, is currently working on a “highly controlled, rigorous” study funded by the National Institutes of Health to determine the value of consistent and correct condom use in preventing three common STIs: Chlamydia, gonorrhea, and trichomoniasis.

“All of these numbers are way low,” Crosby said, referring to the pregnancy centers’ statistics (with the exception of the rate of condom-use effectiveness at preventing HPV, which he said is supported by studies). He said the claim that condoms are 85 percent effective in reducing HIV infection is “really misleading” and not supported by many research studies that isolate for consistent and correct use.

‘Innovative Approaches’

Full Circle Women’s Services – awarded $154,200 – is the anti-abortion pregnancy center that proposed trying to curb teen sex with a giant “Teen Life Maze.” The center cited the game as one of its “innovative approaches” to abstinence instruction in a grant application submitted to the Tennessee health department in May 2011. The maze is described as a “large game board of rooms designed to let teens experience the consequences – both positive and negative – of life choices. It is effective in that teens get to play along in seeing firsthand the results of good decisions and bad decisions ranging from making trips to the doctor for a lifelong STD or the satisfaction in staying on course and graduating from high school.”

In a subsequent document, the center explained that inspiration for the game comes from Georgia, where life mazes have been hosted in several schools across the state, and that Full Circle was “in the planning stages of bringing this event to Athens.”

Other innovative approaches proposed by Full Circle include hosting a game show about the risks of having sex and screening the film Look Before You Leap, described in the proposal as “an adrenaline rush of drama, action, and humor that takes relationship education to extreme heights.”

Full Circle, founded in 1998, has been offering privately financed abstinence-education services to mostly elementary and middle schools in McMinn County for a few years now. In its grant proposal, the center explained that the extra cash would be used to hire more educators. Currently, the center’s program, called On TRAC (Teaching Teens Responsibility and Consequences), relies on abstinence curriculum called “Think on Point” and “Life on Point,” created by On Point, a youth-development group in Chattanooga, Tenn

“Think on Point” is a five-day program offered once a year to sixth- through ninth-graders during physical education class. According to the program description, “[t]he curriculum includes homework assignments, in-class handouts, role-playing activities, and focused small-group discussion. … Lessons at every grade level discuss the topics of abstinence, sexually transmitted diseases, media influence, and standards and boundaries; other more specific themes include pregnancy, pornography, abuse, value and self-worth, and the essence of real love.”

“Life on Point” is designed to dig deeper into risky activities. The center also proposed bringing five-day abstinence instruction to older teens in high school life skills and health classes.

All of the abstinence-only programs funded under Tennessee’s Affordable Care Act grant had to submit short- and long-term program objectives. Full Circle Women’s long-term goals include curbing rates of teen pregnancy, school dropouts, and STDs in McMinn and Meigs counties, and also a “decrease in percentage of children being raised by single mothers below the poverty line.” Short-term goals include “increased knowledge of STDS and pregnancy risks” and “understanding the lack of effectiveness of condoms/birth control in STD protection and pregnancy.”

To make the case for giving Full Circle money to target 10- to 17-year-olds in McMinn, Meigs, and Polk counties (in southeastern part of the state), Full Circle’s grant application cited statistics showing STD rates among teens are high in the area, including “Tennessee Department of Health reports that the number of reported cases of Chlamydia in McMinn County has increased a staggering 1200% from 1994-2007.”

Full Circle Women’s Services Executive Director Anne Montgomery turned down TAI’s request for an interview.

In line with the eight-point federal guidelines of abstinence education, the other two CPCs receiving Affordable Care Act funding similarly offer plans to educate teens about the repercussions of sexual activity and advocate abstinence as the only means to avoid those repercussions.

Here is part of how the Women’s Care Center promotes its abstinence program, called The Edge:

While “until marriage” may sound like practically forever, let’s get a little perspective on this. The average age of initial marriage in the United States is 26 years old. That gets even lower in more rural areas. And the payoff of sexual abstinence is that you have the rest of your married life to enjoy your sexuality without having to suffer the consequences of emotional baggage, crotch-crippling STDs, or teen pregnancy. That sounds to me like a pretty good deal.

Among the desired outcomes of Life Choices Pregnancy Resource Center’s abstinence-until-marriage program, Right Choices of West Tennessee, are “increased knowledge regarding the effects of teen sexual behavior and sexually-transmitted diseases” and “increased commitment to abstinence until marriage.”

The directors of Life Choices Pregnancy Support Center and the Women’s Care Center did not return requests for interviews.

Earlier this month, the CDC released new data showing that America’s teen birthrate is the lowest it has been since 1946. The Guttmacher Institute, a proponent of comprehensive sex education, credited that drop, in part, with improvements in contraceptive use.

But Valerie Huber, executive director of the National Abstinence Education Association, said high rates of STDs among teens means the abstinence-only message is still necessary.

“While teen birth rates have reached historic lows, STD rates among teens are at historic highs, so condom-centered education is certainly not sufficient to deal with even the physical consequences of sexual activity since 2 of the 4 most common STDs are easily transmissible with a condom,” Huber told TAI in an email. “Sexual Risk Avoidance (SRA) abstinence education makes sense from a public health perspective and also as an approach that both resonates with teens and protects them from any of the consequences of sexual activity, not the least of which is pregnancy.”

U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette (Photo via http://degette.house.gov)

“The researchers found higher lifetime cancer risks for people living closer to the wells,” reads the letter from DeGette and Rep. Henry Waxman. “They also concluded that these nearby residents have a higher risk of experiencing neurological and respiratory health effects, such as headaches, throat and eye irritation, impaired lung capacity, dizziness, fatigue, numbness in the limbs, and tremors.”

The study that DeGette, D-Colorado, and Waxman, D-California, referenced was based on a three-year review of the Battlement Mesa area of Garfield County where several companies are drilling for natural gas that a class-action lawsuit claims is endangering the community.

Escalated levels of ozone pollution have been recorded in the Uintah Basin in Utah and the Green River Basin in Wyoming near oil drilling sites and researchers say residents living near hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking,” operations in the Piceance and Denver-Julesberg basins in Colorado are also susceptible to dirtier air, which can impair breathing and worsen respiratory problems such as asthma.

Regulators at all levels of government are trying to establish safe standards for air emissions from fracking, which the EPA has also, at least preliminarily, linked to ground water contamination in Wyoming. Opponents of oil and gas drilling contend existing regulations are too lenient and that they are not adequately enforced. A recent report found there were 516 spills in Colorado last year and only five of them resulted in fines for the companies that allowed them to happen.

Gov. John Hickenlooper recently convened a task force to “help clarify and better coordinate” the regulatory jurisdiction between state and local governments but his critics claim the task force is a Trojan horse, designed to take away rights from local governments and instead leave their fates up to the allegedly inept state system. Boulder County, Longmont and Colorado Springs have already temporarily halted drilling activity while Commerce City, Erie and Aurora, Arapahoe County, Douglas County, Elbert County, El Paso County and Huerfano County are vying for their own regulations.

DeGette and U.S. Rep. Jared Polis, D- Colorado, have previously asked President Obama to strengthen federal environmental and public health standards to protect against the risks associated with fracking. In speeches this year and last, Obama has emphasized natural gas as a key resource in his “all-of-the-above” strategy to reduce the nation’s reliance on foreign oil.

Many Coloradans are protesting the increased drilling in the state, and asking for the federal government to stave off oil and gas development in the North Fork Valley and other locales.

Here is DeGette and Waxman’s letter in its entirety:

April 3, 2012

The Honorable Lisa Jackson
Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Ariel Rios Building
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20460

Dear Administrator Jackson:

EPA is working to finalize new standards for oil and gas operations to reduce emissions of smog-forming volatile organic compounds and toxic air pollutants that can cause cancer and other serious health effects. As you consider these standards, we ask that you consider a new study from the Colorado School of Public Health that raises concerns about the potential public health impact of air emissions from unconventional gas drilling operations. The findings from this study, while preliminary, reinforce the importance of your forthcoming rules and the need for additional research.

Scientists at the Colorado School of Public Health examined three years of air monitoring data in Garfield County, Colorado and concluded that residents living near natural gas wells may face increased exposure to benzene, a known human carcinogen, and other toxic chemicals, such as ethylbenzene, toluene, and xylene. The researchers found higher lifetime cancer risks for people living closer to the wells. They also concluded that these nearby residents have a higher risk of experiencing neurological and respiratory health effects, such as headaches, throat and eye irritation, impaired lung capacity, dizziness, fatigue, numbness in the limbs, and tremors.

The authors concluded:

[P]reliminary results indicate that health effects resulting from air emissions during development of unconventional natural gas resources are most likely to occur in residents living nearest to the well pads and warrant further study. Risk prevention efforts should be directed towards reducing air emission exposures for persons living and working near wells during well completions.

We support the responsible and safe production of U.S. oil and natural gas resources. The good news is that we can control potentially harmful air emissions from drilling operations by implementing proven technology and best practices already in use today. We hope that you will consider the results of this new study in your rulemaking, and we look forward to reviewing EPA’s new rules once finalized.

Sincerely,

Henry A. Waxman
Ranking Member

Diana DeGette
Ranking Member

Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations

“I was stunned to find out that Komen announced it had decided to cut funding to Planned Parenthood, which is the largest provider of women’s health care in the country,” DeGette said. “I was pleased when they reversed that decision. But I am concerned about how Komen is making its decisions.”

DeGette explained that she has had concerns about Komen decision-making for a while and that its perilous up-and-down journey through some of the murkier reaches of the abortion-politics swamp this week demonstrated confusion at the heart of the organization.

“As the attacks on Planned Parenthood [in Congress] revved up last year, Komen was touting the fact that it didn’t support stem cell research, even though they know stem cell research shows great potential to treat breast cancer.”

DeGette elaborated that thought in a release sent out minutes ago.

I have grave concerns that last fall, seemingly during the same time they decided to change [the funding policy to cut off Planned Parenthood], Komen also enacted a new policy of refusing to fund the pursuit of lifesaving ethical embryonic stem cell research (ESC), despite a history of recognizing its great potential. Given the massive resources of their organization and the great potential of ESC [to bolster] breast cancer treatment and [the search for] cures, it is deeply disturbing that Komen has turned its back on this research because of the same political pressures that led them to the original Planned Parenthood decision.

A politically-motivated grant process has no place in the pursuit of life-saving screenings, treatments, and research.

DeGette has long been an advocate for stem cell research and re-introduced her Stem Cell Research Advancement Act last year. The act passed the House and Senate years ago but fell victim to a George W. Bush veto. The legislation would establish a more permanent legal framework in which scientists could conduct stem cell research without being subject to the start-and-stop political pressures that shape life on Capitol Hill.

DeGette said she was “very glad” that Colorado’s Komen affiliates “stood up for science-based care” when they asked to be excluded from — and when Aspen Komen rejected altogether– the ban on funding Planned Parenthood and did so based on the statistically proven vital work Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains has done over the years to detect and head-off breast cancer among thousands of Coloradans with severely limited health care options.

DeGette said the Komen story this week was a wake-up call.

“I can’t tell you, we had such an outcry. My website and Facebook accounts were just full of messages,” she said.

“My daughter is 22 and she said this was the first time in her life she donated to Planned Parenthood. People need to be assured this major organization [Komen] is making science-based decisions.

DeGette said it was clear this week’s funding flap was part of a larger messaging battle.

“You know I sit on the Stearns committee doing the investigation into Planned Parenthood,” DeGette said, referring to the Planned Parenthood audit called by Florida anti-abortion Rep. Cliff Stearns and based on a mostly debunked Americans United for Life report on alleged Planned Parenthood misdeeds and corruption. The Stearns investigation was the reason Komen initially gave for throwing Planned Parenthood off its funding rolls.

“Listen, some Republicans in Congress have had a vendetta against Planned Parenthood for years, but 97 percent of what that organization does is well-women visits. For many of those women all over the country these are the only type of annual checkups they receive. There is no public tax money being spent on abortion and abortion is a small part of Planned Parenthood’s mission.

“I have been saying for years that these lawmakers don’t just oppose abortion. They oppose birth control and disease prevention for women. It’s the 21st century and we’re arguing about birth control?

“A lot of Americans woke up this week and said, ‘wow, the GOP agenda really is extreme. It’s about opposing contraception and mammography.’

“We want Komen to get back to science-based funding decisions”

DeGette is the head of the congressional Pro-Choice Caucus and has been a lead critic of the attacks on Planned Parenthood launched on Capitol Hill this year. Together with California Rep. Henry Waxman, she denounced the Stearns investigation as “unwarranted” and as a legalistic cover to “harass and shut down an organization simply because Republicans disagree with the work that it does.”

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.

The letter comes on the heels of news that roughly two dozen of Udall and Bennet’s colleagues in the Senate have signed on to a letter strongly urging Komen, the high-profile marketing firm behind the breast-cancer pink-ribbon campaign, to reverse the decision it announced this week to cease funding Planned Parenthood breast cancer screening and education efforts.

The Senate letter has reportedly drawn support from a wide spectrum of Democrats, including moderates like Montana’s John Tester. It decried the Komen decision as the latest front in the partisan political battle launched against Planned Parenthood this year that has driven moves inside and outside of government to strip funds from the reproductive healthcare and abortion provider.

“It would be tragic if any woman– let alone thousands of women– lost access to these potentially life-saving screenings because of a politically motivated attack,” the letter reads.

The support the letter has garnered reflects the increasingly high-level pushback Komen has received this week. News outlets have reported the intense back-and-forth that erupted in the wake of the announcement as it unfolded and as it played out on the internet, where supporters and detractors have waged furious social media messaging battles.

Denver Komen is one of select foundation affiliates across the nation that have asked for a waiver from the controversial decision to cut Planned Parenthood funds and has made the case in its public statements for its continuing to fund Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains (PPRM), pointing to the vital role the embattled organization plays in fighting breast cancer here.

PPRM provides distinctly cost-effective service for Komen. Its Front Range clinics were responsible for 19 percent of all the breast cancer detected through Denver Komen funding last year and it received only $125,000 or 4.3 percent of the $3 million Denver Komen awarded to nonprofits spread across the region, from Douglas County just south of Denver north to the Wyoming border.

Komen also notes that the state budget this year was slashed for the Breast and Cervical Cancer Screening Program provided by the Women’s Wellness Connection Program, leaving nearly 5,500 women in Colorado without access to services and opening the door to nearly 90 cases of cancer. In such an environment, Komen suggested, cutting off Planned Parenthood funding would be irresponsible.

There is no word yet on whether members of the U.S. House will weigh in formally on the Komen funding question. Calls to members of Colorado’s delegation were not immediately returned.

Colorado Congresswoman Diana DeGette is the head of the Pro-Choice Caucus and has been a lead critic of the often specious attacks on Planned Parenthood launched on Capitol Hill this year.

Indeed, although Komen has said its decision to pull funding from Planned Parenthood was not motivated by abortion politics, it cited as the cause a controversial congressional investigation launched by Florida Republican Rep. Cliff Stearns into twenty years of Planned Parenthood finances. Komen said that its new grantee criteria preclude funding any organizations under investigation.

Yet the Stearns audit of Planned Parenthood was spurred mainly by anti-abortion activists working off of a largely discredited Americans United for Life report brimming with lurid accusations that, for example, Planned Parenthood abetted human trafficking and child prostitution operations.

DeGette, together with California Rep. Henry Waxman, denounced the congressional investigation as “unwarranted” and as a legalistic cover to “harass and shut down an organization simply because Republicans disagree with the work that it does.”

“We are aware of no predicate that would justify this sweeping and invasive request to Planned Parenthood,” Waxman and DeGette wrote in a letter to Stearns last September as the investigation was being proposed. “It would be an abuse of the oversight process if you are now using the Committee’s investigative powers to harass Planned Parenthood again. Your fervent ideological opposition to Planned Parenthood does not justify launching this intrusive investigation.”

In a Thursday call with reporters, Komen CEO Nancy Brinker walked back reference to the Stearns investigation. The Washington Post reports Brinker said the decision not to continue funding Planned Parenthood “had very little to do with the ongoing congressional probe” but was based primarily on the fact that some Planned Parenthood clinics do not provide mammograms.

“We have decided not to fund, wherever 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.”

Northern Colorado Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains clinics will continue to draw funds, as will clinics in Texas and Southern California, Binker said, because “they are the only provider” of breast health services in the areas they serve.

News outlets and blogs have pointed to the fact that national Komen leadership has been tilted recently by a growing number of hardcore pro-life executives and board members, such as Senior Vice President Karen Handel, who came on last April after running as an anti-Planned Parenthood candidate for governor in Georgia’s Republican primary, and prominent Komen Advocacy Alliance board member Jane Abraham, who is also general chairman of the anti-abortion lobbying organization Susan B. Anthony List.

Leadership at Susan B. Anthony includes former arch-social conservative Colorado Congresswoman Marilyn Musgrave. The group has played a key role in the effort to “defund” Planned Parenthood nationwide. This year it kept a running state-by-state scorecard tracking the roughly $60,399,000 in federal and state funding stripped from Planned Parenthood affiliates in eight states.

“Our efforts during the federal budget fight gave Planned Parenthood a black eye,” the organization boasted.

The Atlantic reported today that sources inside Komen are beginning to confirm that the new policy cited to cut off funding to Planned Parenthood– whether ultimately tied to on-site mammogram services, congressional investigations or something else– was adopted specifically to cut off Planned Parenthood and that that effort was spearheaded by anti-abortion personnel led by Handel.

Ties among Komen executives and Congressional Republicans are sure to be scrutinized in the coming days.

Komen board member Jane Abraham’s husband, Spencer Abraham, for example, may draw looks. He was Energy Secretary under George W. Bush and last year joined Republicans in the House, including House Energy Committee member and Planned Parenthood investigator Cliff Stearns, in denouncing the government program that guaranteed loans to Solyndra solar panel company. Abraham’s law firm recently teamed with Florida law firm Roetzel & Andress to form DC-based lobby shop Abraham & Roetzel, which has offices in Columbus, Ohio and Tallahassee, Florida.

Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains told the Colorado Independent this week that the Denver Komen affiliate has been a “strong advocate” for the work Planned Parenthood does in Colorado.

More than 80 percent of PPRM patients have no health insurance and 62 percent live at or below the federal poverty line.

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.

The report, commissioned by Reps. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., Edward Markey, D-Mass., and Howard Berman, D-Calif., notes that, as of Dec. 15, the Republican-led 112th Congress voted a record 191 times on legislation that would undermine environmental protections.

The House averaged more than one anti-environmental vote for every day Congress was in session during 2011, which equates to more than one out of every five of all roll call votes, the report found.

Rep. Cory Gardner

Gardner was one of at least a dozen Republicans on the Energy and Commerce Committee who made public statements indicating that they question or reject the scientific consensus that climate change is predominantly human caused.

“Rep. Cory Gardner admitted that the climate is changing but said that he does not ‘believe humans are causing that change to the extent that’s been in the news,’” according to the report (pdf), which notes that House Republicans also voted to block the EPA from regulating carbon pollution from power plants and oil refineries, and they voted to prevent the EPA from working with the Department of Transportation and the automobile industry to develop fuel economy standards for vehicles.

The report also calls out Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton, R-Mich., who introduced the Energy Tax Prevention Act of 2011, which seeks to overturn the EPA’s finding that climate change endangers human welfare and to upend the Supreme Court’s decision that the EPA has the authority to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. The bill also prohibits the EPA from enforcing existing greenhouse gas reporting requirements to collect emissions information.

“During the floor debate about the Upton bill, the House Republicans voted against several Democratic amendments to restore [the] EPA’s authority to address climate change. Only one Republican supported an amendment offered by Rep. Jared Polis, D-Colo., to allow the EPA Administrator to suspend the bill’s prohibitions if impacts from climate change affect public health.”

The attacks on climate science aren’t exactly a surprise.

In 2010, Gardner and fellow Colorado Republican U.S. Reps. Scott Tipton, Doug Lamborn and Mike Coffman signed a “No Climate Tax Pledge” in which they promised to oppose “any legislation relating to climate change that includes a net increase in government revenue.”

That same year, Native Alaskans and environmental groups successfully appealed to the Environmental Appeals Board to overturn a permit the EPA issued to Shell Oil Co. for exploratory drilling in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas off the coast of Alaska. During an appropriations debate, the House obstructed the Appeals Board from using government funds to invalidate the permit.

“Rep. Cory Gardner then introduced H.R. 2021, the Jobs and Energy Permitting Act, which makes significant revisions to Clean Air Act provisions relating to [Outer Continental Shelf] activities,” the Waxman, Markey and Berman report states. “The bill limits EPA review of a permit application to six months; it eliminates any appeal to the Board, forcing all appeals to be brought in federal court in Washington, D.C.; it blocks EPA from requiring pollution reductions from support vessels, which often comprise the bulk of emissions from a drilling operation; and it provides that the impact of emissions from [Outer Continental Shelf] sources must be measured at the shoreline, where the emissions are diluted, rather than at the source, as current law provides.”

At the time, House Republicans said the purpose of H.R. 2021 was to accelerate the permitting process in the Arctic Ocean. But the bill was drafted so that it also applied to both the Pacific and Atlantic coasts despite objections from officials in California, Delaware and other states.

“This bill will create tens of thousands of jobs, increase energy security, and lessen our dependence on foreign oil,” Gardner said in a press release at the time. “It will add billions of dollars in salary to Alaska and other states over the next several decades, bringing good paying jobs to our country.”

The EPA isn’t the only agency in the GOP’s crosshairs. The House targeted the Department of the Interior with 35 votes meant to weaken its authority and the Department of Energy with 31 of them.

The report goes on to detail how the House proposed to slash funding for the Fish and Wildlife Service, cut clean-energy programs, curtail reviews of the Keystone XL pipeline, allow unsafe disposal of toxic coal ash, transfer public lands to a mining company, remove protections for forests and wetlands, repeal water quality standards, and promote loopholes for polluters.

On Dec. 7, the House passed the Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act, or H.R. 10, which requires approval from both houses of Congress before federal agencies can implement any significant rule, including those to protect the environment and public health. “In effect, this bill would force Congress to re-legislate provisions in the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, and other laws that require the agencies to conduct significant rulemakings. If Congress fails to act on a rule, the new rule would not go into effect, delaying important safeguards and wasting years of scientific inquiry, stakeholder comment, and agency staff resources,” the report contends.

Among the 191 votes highlighted in the report, 94 percent of Republican members voted for the anti-environment position, while 86 percent of Democrats voted for the pro-environment position.

Rachel Boxer, the spokeswoman for Gardner, and Joanna Burgos, spokeswoman for the National Republican Congressional Committee, did not return messages seeking comment for this story.

Rep. Diana DeGette

The seven-member SEAB panel released a draft in August that called for more industry transparency and disclosure of the chemicals used in the controversial drilling practice sometimes referred to as “fracking.” Critics say it can contaminate groundwater, which industry officials deny. The makeup of the panel previously had been criticized by scientists who felt it leaned too heavily toward industry interests.

DeGette and Reps. Henry Waxman and Edward Markey want to hear more about the findings in an open committee hearing.

“To date, the committee has not held a single hearing on the topic of hydraulic fracturing and natural gas development, despite the importance of natural gas to our energy future and widespread public concern about air and water pollution from natural gas production,” the three Dems wrote (pdf) Upton today. “The SEAB report is a good place to start. We request that you schedule a hearing on this issue as soon as possible.”

Fracking is mostly regulated by state agencies, including the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (COGCC), which is holding a hearing on proposed new chemical disclosure rules next month.

Rep. Cliff Stearns, R-Ocala (Pic via stearns.house.gov)

An attorney for the group partially responsible for a recent congressional investigation into Planned Parenthood says the group has targeted the chain of health clinics as part of a strategy to end abortion.

Kellie Fiedorek, a staff attorney for Americans United for Life, tells The Florida Independent the group is pleased that a report she helped craft about Planned Parenthood has led to congressional action. The report was given to members of Congress in the hopes that lawmakers vote to defund Planned Parenthood. Fiedorek says Americans United sought to “document fraud and abuse” in Planned Parenthood as a tool for Congress to look into a possible investigation.

Planned Parenthood is frequently under attack by anti-abortion groups because some of the clinics provide legal abortions. Planned Parenthood has called Americans United’s report “ideologically driven.” The group has also said that many of the claims are either misleading or inaccurate.

Rep. Cliff Stearns, R-FL, who chairs a subcommittee on oversight and investigations, recently followed through with Americans United’s request and launched an investigation into Planned Parenthood’s finances and policies.

Women’s health advocates and members of Congress are condemning his actions. This week, Democratic National Committee chair Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz “accused Republican colleagues on Wednesday of launching a ‘burdensome and politically motivated, big-government investigation’ of Planned Parenthood.” Reps. Diana DeGette, D-Colo., a ranking member of the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee and Henry Waxman, D-Calif., have stated that the investigation is part of a “Republican vendetta.”

Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill., issued a press release calling the investigation “needless and politically motivated.” She said that “instead of attacking unemployment, Republicans are waging a war against women.” Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., called the investigation an “abusive witch hunt by Republicans” that is “an unconscionable waste of taxpayer dollars, and harassment of a trusted healthcare provider for millions of women and families in Connecticut and across the country,” in a recent press release.

Americans United’s Fiedorek says these abuses “have been going on for 20 years,” and that Planned Parenthood is “ridden with abuse.” She claims the group has been “over-billing the government” for years.

“There are so many red flags,” she says.

In a recent email to supporters, Planned Parenthood Federation of America President Cecile Richards called the investigation “harassment and intimidation.” Richards said the investigation is “an effort to undercut Planned Parenthood and undermine Planned Parenthood health centers’ ability to provide essential care to the women, men, and teens who rely on them.”

This week, Planned Parenthood recieved another blow from Congress. The House GOP unveiled a spending bill on Thursday that would “eliminate the Title X family-planning program, ban federal funding to Planned Parenthood Federation of America (unless the organization ends its abortion services), redirect teen-pregnancy-prevention programming funds to abstinence-only sex-education programs and ban private insurance companies from covering abortion,” The American Independent reports.

Fiedorek attended the Care Net conference this week in Orlando, where she was among several voices expressing excitement over the recent anti-Planned Parenthood measures. Abby Johnson, also an attendee, even went as far to say that Planned Parenthood was “working with the devil.”

U.S. Rep. Cliff Stearns, a Florida Republican and chairman of the House Oversight and Investigations subcommittee, is moving forward with plans to launch an investigation of Planned Parenthood, a national chain of women’s health clinics.

Stearns told our sister site, The Florida Independent, back in July that such an investigation was possible, after the release a report arguing that lawmakers should defund Planned Parenthood. The report was written by Americans United for Life, an anti-abortion group. As The Independent reported, Americans United called upon Congress to hold an investigation into Planned Parenthood’s finances and practices. While Planned Parenthood called the report false and “ideologically driven,” Stearns did not rule out launching an investigation.

Sarah Kliff of Politico reports that Stearns has already asked the president of Planned Parenthood to provide the committee with a range of documents.

According to the letter sent to Cecile Richards, the president of Planned Parenthood, Stearn’s “committee has questions about the policies in place and actions undertaken by the [Planned Parenthood Federation of America] and its affiliates related to its use of federal funding and its compliance with federal restrictions on the funding of abortion.”

According to a recent statement from Planned Parenthood:

Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) expressed disappointment that Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-FL), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations for the House Energy and Commerce Committee, has put politics before lifesaving health care by launching what appears to be a politically motivated investigation and demanding an onerous amount of records from PPFA and its 83 affiliates, some going as far back as 13 years. …

“At a time when the American people need jobs, some members of Congress are instead misusing their political power to go after health care access for the most vulnerable women in the country,” said Richards. “We are certain that the millions of women and men who count on Planned Parenthood will make their voices heard and speak out, just as they did during the budget battle in the spring.” …

Congressman Henry Waxman (D-CA), the ranking member of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, and Congresswoman Diana DeGette (D-CO), the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations in a letter to Congressman Stearns, wrote, “We are aware of no predicate that would justify this sweeping and invasive request to Planned Parenthood. The HHS Inspector General and state Medicaid programs regularly audit Planned Parenthood and report publicly on their findings. These audits have not identified any pattern of misuse of federal funds, illegal activity, or other abuse that would justify a broad and invasive congressional investigation.”

Stearns has asked Planned Parenthood for a host of documents, including auditing records and written policies.

Stearns has disapproved of Planned Parenthood for some time. This year he introduced the Informed Choice Act, which The Independent reported “would authorize grants ‘to nonprofit tax-exempt organizations for the purchase of ultrasound equipment to provide free examinations to pregnant women needing such services, and for other purposes.’” In essence, his bill would have given money to crisis pregnancy centers, which aim to discourage women from having abortions, so they could buy ultrasound equipment.

In their letter to Stearns, DeGette and Waxman note that they believe this investigation to be one more cog in an ongoing smear campaign against Planned Parenthood. They wrote, “This year, House Republicans have voted twice to strip Planned Parenthood of federal funding. You strongly supported these efforts, stating that ‘defunding Planned Parenthood should be a fiscal and moral priority for Congress.’ You also unfairly smeared the organization when you claimed that Planned Parenthood is ‘willing to use public funds to commit a federal crime’ and is ‘willing to ignore the law in promoting its service.’ … It would be an abuse of the oversight process if you are now using the Committee’s investigative powers to harass Planned Parenthood again. Your fervent ideological opposition to Planned Parenthood does not justify launching this intrusive investigation.”

Two House Democrats, including one from Colorado, are looking to question a pair of investors about solar panel manufacturer Solyndra’s financial flameout in Northern California.

U.S. Reps. Diana DeGette, D-Colo., and Henry A. Waxman, D-Calif., sent a letter Monday to Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee Chairman Cliff Stearns requesting that executives from two of Solyndra’s largest private investors, Argonaut Private Equity and Madrone Capital Partners, be called to testify at a hearing Friday or in the future.

“One important question for the Committee to examine is whether there were sound reasons to make an investment in Solyndra,” they wrote. “Some sophisticated and experienced private venture capital investors thought the answer was yes, and they invested over $1 billion in Solyndra – twice the support provided by the federal government. The Committee would benefit from hearing the views of these private investors as we assess the merits of federal decisions regarding the Solyndra loan guarantee.

“In particular, we ask that you seek testimony from Argonaut and Madrone, the two top private investors in the company,” they wrote. “Representatives of each, Argonaut Managing Director Steve Mitchell, and Madrone Founder and General Partner Jameson McJunkin, served on Solyndra’s board and should be well acquainted with the company. Mr. Mitchell and Mr. McJunkin could provide the Committee with perspective on why Solyndra attracted so much private capital, Solyndra’s representations about its economic prospects, and the external factors that have been affecting the U.S. solar industry.”

Solyndra’s bankruptcy and its laying off of 1,100 workers have left the solar industry with a black eye, and enflamed conservatives who are blasting the Obama administration over its $535 million loan guarantee to the Fremont, Calif., company. As Fortune magazine points out, Argonaut is among several firms that invested nearly $1 billion of equity in Solyndra, but most of it came before the Department of Energy provided Solyndra with loan guarantees. Argonaut Private Equity is funded through the George Kaiser Family Foundation, whose namesake is a major donor and political ally of President Obama.

“None of that $1 billion has been ‘reworked’ to the benefit of Solyndra’s equity investors,” Fortune Senior Editor Dan Primack wrote in a column posted online yesterday. “They all are subordinate to the federal loan, and will likely get wiped out. What Drudge and others are referring to, however, is $75 million in debt financing that Solyndra raised after the DoE loan. Basically, the company was floundering and this was a last-ditch effort to turn the company around. The primary debt providers were Argonaut and another existing Solyndra investor called Madrone Capital Partners. This is the money that has priority to the feds (assuming anyone ultimately buys Solyndra’s assets).”

Stoking the partisan flames are media misrepresentations engulfing the Solyndra story. It was a credit committee consisting of financially astute civil servants under the Bush administration that actually selected the solar manufacturing company for the loan guarantee program. Solyndra was one of 16 projects chosen out of 143 submissions. The same credit committee approved the loan guarantee in 2009, when Obama was in office, after the application worked its ways through the committee’s checks and balances.

Still, there are many questions to be asked and lessons to be learned from Solyndra’s collapse. Solyndra Chief Executive Brian Harrison and Chief Financial Officer W.G. Stover Jr. are expected to testify Friday before the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee, of which DeGette is a ranking member.

Whether Solyndra’s executives made misleading statements or omissions in their dealings with federal officials will be an area of focus. DeGette, according to the Los Angeles Times, is upset Solyndra executives told her this summer that the company would double its revenue this year. “I’m perplexed how they could be in my office in July telling me things were looking better and filing for bankruptcy two months later,” DeGette said.

Solyndra is the third solar company to file for bankruptcy in the last few months as a consequence of falling demand from European countries that have cut subsidies for the industry, worsening macroeconomic conditions, and excess capacity combined with low pricing from competition in China that have hit the sector hard.

Colorado U.S. Representative Diana DeGette on Thursday sent a letter to Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Cliff Stearns urging him to invite Brian Harrison, president and CEO of Solyndra, to testify before an investigative subcommittee of which she is a ranking member.

“Less than two months ago, Mr. Harrison met with us and other Committee members to assure us that Solyndra was in a strong financial position and in no danger of failing,” DeGette wrote with California Representative and Committee Ranking Member Henry Waxman. “At that time, [Harrison] said the company was projected to double its revenues in 2011, there was ‘strong demand in the United States’ for its shipments, and the company was expected to double the megawatts of panel production shipped this year. These assurances appear to contrast starkly with his company’s decision to file for bankruptcy last week.”

Silicon Valley-based solar panel maker Solyndra was a new-energy darling of the Obama 2009 stimulus package. The company received roughly $530 million in government loans and yet went belly up last month.

The events seemed to confirm the worst fears and suspicions of green energy critics who see the sector as a money hole, a land of hyped hope and dreams that provides fertile ground for get-rich-quick schemes and government-business insider graft.

Stearns this week said he “smelled a rat” in Solyndra from the beginning and pointed to the fact that Solyndra investor George Kaiser was an Obama campaign donor. The Energy Department downplayed the accusations, saying that Solyndra support was in the pipeline during the Bush administration and the Obama team merely finished the deal.

More likely, Solyndra appears to have made the kind of business bets that can make or break a company and that broke Solyndra.

As the New York Times reported, the company’s panels don’t use silicon, which was a much more costly commodity in 2009 when the loan guarantee was approved than it is now. And the cylindrical design of the Solyndra panels was meant to cut installment costs and improve efficiency by more easily catching the sun. Manufacturing those special panels, however, proved too costly.

The Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee will conduct its hearing on the Department of Energy’s loan guarantee program and Solyndra on September 14th.

DeGette’s letter:

Dear Chairman Stearns:

We understand that you have scheduled a hearing on September 14, 2011, to examine the Department of Energy’s 2009 loan guarantee to Solyndra and the recent announcement by the company that it is planning to file for bankruptcy. We hope this hearing will help the Committee understand whether mistakes were made in the handling of this loan and how Congress can improve loan guarantee program and develop appropriate policies to promote clean energy technologies.

We are writing to request that you invite Brian Harrison, chief executive officer of Solyndra, to testify at the hearing. Less than two months ago, Mr. Harrison met with us and other Committee members to assure us that Solyndra was in a strong financial position and in no danger of failing. At that time, he said the company was projected to double its revenues in 2011, there was “strong demand in the United States” for its shipments, and the company was expected to double the megawatts of panel production shipped this year. These assurances appear to contrast starkly with his company’s decision to file for bankruptcy last week.

Any thorough examination of the Solyndra loan guarantee should include the opportunity to ask Mr. Harrison about his representations. He did not convey to us the perilous condition of the company and the Committee should know why.

Thank you for your consideration of this request.

Sincerely,

Henry A. Waxman Diana DeGette
Ranking Member Ranking Member
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.