Activists in
Florida say Florida governor Jeb Bush, the Republican
brother of president George W. Bush, allowed moral concerns
about premarital sex to shape his decision to cut
$30,000 from the state's cervical cancer
elimination task force, The Miami Herald reports. The money was cut from a
seven-member task force charged with studying whether an
experimental vaccine that aims to prevent sexually
transmitted human papillomavirus infections, which has
been linked with virtually all cases of cervical
cancer, would be effective in curbing cancer cases. Since
the vaccine aims to prevent infections, it would be
given to children before they become sexually active.
Bush is accused
by activists and some Democratic lawmakers of
pulling the money from the program because he fears such a
vaccine would encourage young people to engage in
premarital sex. Religious groups in the state also
oppose the vaccine for the same reasons, the Herald
reports. State representative Anne Gannon, the
Democrat who asked for the funds for the task force, says
Bush's veto of the funding stemmed from his
fear of criticism from right-wing and religious groups
if he had supported the funding.
Bush's
spokesman, Russell Schweiss, said the governor's veto
of the funds was strictly a move to contain health
costs in the state's budget, but Paul Hull of
the Florida Division of the American Cancer Society says he
finds it difficult to believe that $30,000 was a
"budget buster" for the state.
"We look at cervical cancer as a public health issue.
It's not a moral issue," he told the Herald.
The Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention says HPV is the most
common sexually transmitted disease in the United States,
and notes that at least 80% of all sexually active
women will be infected with the virus at some point in
their lives. A recent study by the University of Texas
found that 64% of parents would approve of giving their
children an HPV-prevention vaccine if it were to
become available. Most of the parents opposed to the
vaccine cited moral or religious grounds, saying
either that it would encourage their children to have sex or
that their children will not be sexually active and
would not need protection against HPV.