It seems like traditional party stereotypes are entirely reversed on this one:
[Federal] program authorized $30 million in funding to states with infant HIV testing... created just two months ago yet someone has already included language in the appropriations bill to prohibit funding for the “Baby Aids” program... Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) attempted to add an amendment to restore the funding. Unfortunately, Democratic Leader Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) never allowed the amendment to be included before the bill reached the Senate floor for a vote.Not to put too fine a point on it, but like global warming science (though far more urgently), this is an issue that should not be partisan in the least. Blog attention on this in the last 24 hours has been extremly scant. Here are the only two sources I could find other than the FRC link. They're just as confused as I am. Preventative healthcare for minority children. Should be a lead-pipe cinch, right? Wrong.
I have a hunch. It is only a hunch--entirely speculative on my part. I repeat: fiction. It is, I repeat, made up; whimsical. Very possibly invalid. Thus, no fair piling on if the theory turns out to be unfair/untrue. It is not without an intuitive basis however. It is this:
Funding is being held hostage by Senate Dems as part of a larger strategy (or, in their eyes, a defense against) Republican efforts to define life as extending prior to birth, applying federal funding allocations and other rules to the pre-born. In other words, Dem agendas revolve around the biggest field of gravity in liberal politics: preserving Roe. See this for example. It would be just like politicians (of both stripes) to engage in such a battle with little thought for the collateral damage that will result in human lives--both born and unborn. It wouldn't be the first time.