The Associated Press explains why, even in tough economic times, cash-strapped states are refusing federal abstinence-only dollars. Is Congress listening?

The Associated Press is just out with a major story about how in tough economic times, cash-strapped states are refusing federal tax dollars for abstinence-only programs. The story is one more in a long line of damning pieces of evidence about the failures of abstinence-only programs, the waste of tax dollars they represent, and should be a wake up call to Congress.

AP reporter Kevin Freking writes:

Skeptical states are shoving aside millions of federal dollars for

abstinence education, walking away from the program the Bush

administration touts for slowing teen sexual activity. Barely half the states are still in, and two more say they are leaving. Sex. Abortion. Parenthood. Power. The latest news, delivered straight to your inbox. SUBSCRIBE Some

$50 million has been budgeted for this year, and financially strapped

states might be expected to want their share. But many have doubts that

the program does much, if any good, and they’re frustrated by chronic

uncertainty that it will even be kept in existence. They also have to

chip in state money in order to receive the federal grants. Iowa

Gov. Chet Culver, a Democrat, made his decision to leave based on the

congressionally mandated curriculum, which teaches "the social,

psychological and health gains of abstaining from sexual activity."

Instructors must teach that sexual activity outside of marriage is

likely to have harmful psychological and physical effects. "It

was just too strict," said Emily Hajek, policy adviser to Culver. "We

believe local providers have the knowledge to teach what’s going to be

best in those situations, what kind of information will help those

young people be safe. You cannot be that prescriptive about how it has

to be taught." A federal tally shows that participation in the

program is down 40 percent over two years, with 28 states still in.

Arizona and Iowa have announced their intention to forgo their share of

the federal grant at the start of the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1.

Readers of Rewire certainly understand the waste, fraud and abuse that abstinence-only programs represent, and the inherent danger they are to teens who are not getting accurate information about their sexual health. This AP story, likely appearing in thousands of newspapers across the country tomorrow morning, and to be featured in radio and television newscasts, will help Americans better understand what they intuitively already do — abstinence-only is a complete failure and waste of their tax dollars.

"The funding stream became inconsistent. We didn’t know from one

quarter to the next whether we’d be getting the rest of the money,"

said Elke Shaw-Tulloch of the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare.

"We got to the point where we didn’t have any infrastructure to put the

money to use. At the same time, there was mounting evidence the

abstinence programs weren’t proving to be effective." Throw in a

rising pregnancy rate among 15-19 year-olds in Idaho — 2,543

pregnancies in 2006 compared with 2,396 in 2004 — and state officials

decided last summer it was time to get out.

Study after study has demonstrated abstinence-only’s ineffectiveness, and as the AP points out, the Mathematica report in particular is being cited by some of the states as a reason to stop the programs.

In April 2007, a federally funded study of four abstinence-only

programs by Mathematica Policy Research Inc., found that participants

had just as many sexual partners as nonparticipants and had sex at the

same median age as nonparticipants. The four programs had taught

students about human anatomy and sexually transmitted diseases, helped

them improve their communication skills, manage peer pressure, set

personal goals and build self-esteem. For Colorado, the study

results sealed the decision to get out of the program. Dr. Ned Calonge,

the state’s chief medical officer, said Mathematica’s methods were the

gold standard for scientific studies. "To show no benefit

compared to nothing. That was striking," Calonge said. "These are tax

dollars that are going for no useful purpose, and it would not be

responsible for us to take those dollars."

See Rewire’s extensive coverage of the failures of abstinence-only programs here.