obama-Everett Collection-Shutterstock.com

25 politicians who received the most money from Planned Parenthood

As congressional hearings on Planned Parenthood continue and the federal budget deadline looms, it’s not too difficult to know where some politicians stand on supporting the abortion profiteer.

The Blaze reported on the top 25 recipients who have fiscally benefitted from the coffers of America’s largest abortion chain.  The head of the abortion class will be no surprise to most: Barack Obama has received more money from Planned Parenthood since donations have been tracked.

Screen Shot 2015-09-21 at 11.33.10 AM

While the numbers total years of giving, it is important to note that some of the most vocal supporters of Planned Parenthood are on this list. The Blaze reports:

Considering the Democratic Party’s official “pro-choice” stance, it comes as no surprise that Planned Parenthood’s donations would skew toward the Democrats. For example, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, during the 2014 election cycle, PP gave $892,000 to Democrats and $3,100 to Republicans. The 2012 election cycle was even more generous to the Democrats, with $1.2 million to Dems compared to $26,600 to GOPers.

After adding up the annual individual candidate numbers from the Center for Responsive Politics, here are the 25 federal politicians who have received the most Planned Parenthood campaign cash from 1990 (the first year for which data was available) through the end of August.

The list includes several other pro-abortion politicians, such as Sen. Barbara Boxer from California, who has been a vocal proponent of abortion her entire career; and senators Claire McCaskill (D-MO) and Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), lawmakers who frequently echo Planned Parenthood in political debates. Defending the abortion profiteer is probably easier to do, however, when Planned Parenthood is lining the campaign pocketbooks of these politicians.


Of greatest concern in this current political season is not even the outgoing President Obama, but the front runner to replace him on the Democratic side. Hillary Clinton shows up as number three on the list.

Screen Shot 2015-09-21 at 11.33.27 AM

In business, such alliances would be labeled as an ethical conflict-of-interest; however, this is politics, and Planned Parenthood will do almost anything to keep abortion alive and babies dead.

Below is the full list, provided by The Blaze.

White House

No. 1: Barack Obama

PARTY: Democrat
FEDERAL OFFICE: Former (2005-08) U.S. senator from Illinois; President of the United States (2009-present)

U.S. Congress

No. 2: Timothy Bishop

PARTY: Democrat
FEDERAL OFFICE: Former (2003-15) U.S representative for New York’s 1st Congressional District

U.S. Congress

No. 3: Hillary Clinton

PARTY: Democrat
FEDERAL OFFICE: Former (2001-09) U.S. senator from New York; Former (2009-13) secretary of state; Candidate for 2016 Democratic presidential nomination

U.S. Congress

No. 4: John Kerry

PARTY: Democrat
FEDERAL OFFICE: Former (1985-2013) U.S. senator from Massachusetts; Failed 2004 Democratic presidential nominee; Secretary of state (2013-present)

U.S. Congress

No. 5: Diana DeGette

PARTY: Democrat
FEDERAL OFFICE: U.S. representative for Colorado’s 1st Congressional District (1997-present)

U.S. Congress

No. 6: Louise Slaughter

PARTY: Democrat
FEDERAL OFFICE: U.S. representative for New York’s 25th Congressional District (1987-present)

U.S. Congress

No. 7: Jeanne Shaheen

PARTY: Democrat
FEDERAL OFFICE: U.S. senator from New Hampshire (2009-present)

U.S. Congress

No. 8: Barbara Boxer

PARTY: Democrat
FEDERAL OFFICE: Former (1983-93) U.S. representative for California’s 6th Congressional District; U.S. senator from California (1993-present)

U.S. Congress

No. 9: Kirsten Gillibrand

PARTY: Democrat
FEDERAL OFFICE: Former (2007-09) U.S. representative for New York’s 20th Congressional District; U.S. senator from New York (2009-present)

U.S. Congress

No. 10: Stephanie Herseth Sandlin

PARTY: Democrat
FEDERAL OFFICE: Former (2004-11) U.S. representative for South Dakota’s At-large Congressional District

U.S. Congress

No. 11: Patty Murray

PARTY: Democrat
FEDERAL OFFICE: U.S. senator from Washington (1993-present)

U.S. Congress

No. 12: Sherrod Brown

PARTY: Democrat
FEDERAL OFFICE: Former (1993-2007) U.S. representative for Ohio’s 13th Congressional District; U.S. senator from Ohio (2007-present)

U.S. Congress

No. 13: Dan Maffei

PARTY: Democrat
FEDERAL OFFICE: Former (2009-11; 2013-15) U.S. representative for New York’s 24th Congressional District

U.S. Congress

No. 14: Mark Udall

PARTY: Democrat
FEDERAL OFFICE: Former (1999-2009) U.S. representative for Colorado’s 2nd Congressional District; Former (2009-15). U.S. senator from Colorado

U.S. Congress

No. 15: Nita Lowey

PARTY: Democrat
FEDERAL OFFICE: U.S. representative for New York’s 17th Congressional District (1989-present)

U.S. Congress

No. 16: Lois Capps

PARTY: Democrat
FEDERAL OFFICE: U.S. representative for California’s 24th Congressional District (1998-present)

U.S. Congress

No. 17: Ann Kirkpatrick

PARTY: Democrat
FEDERAL OFFICE: U.S. representative for Arizona’s 1st Congressional District (2009-11; 2013-present); Candidate for 2016 Democratic nomination for Senate to challenge incumbent John McCain (R)

U.S. Congress

No. 18: Russ Feingold

PARTY: Democrat
FEDERAL OFFICE: Former (1993-2011) U.S. senator from Wisconsin; Candidate for 2016 Democratic nomination for Senate to challenge incumbent Ron Johnson (R)

U.S. Congress

No. 19: Patrick Murphy

PARTY: Democrat
FEDERAL OFFICE: U.S. representative for Florida’s 18th Congressional District (2013-present); Candidate for 2016 Democratic nomination for Senate to replace retiring incumbent Marco Rubio (R)

U.S. Congress

No. 20: Timothy Walz

PARTY: Democrat
FEDERAL OFFICE: U.S. representative for Minnesota’s 1st Congressional District (2007-present)

U.S. Congress

No. 21: Debbie Stabenow

PARTY: Democrat
FEDERAL OFFICE: Former (1997-2001) U.S. representative for Michigan’s 8th Congressional District; U.S. senator from Michigan (2001-present)

U.S. Congress

No. 22: Claire McCaskill

PARTY: Democrat
FEDERAL OFFICE: U.S. senator from Missouri (2007-present)

U.S. Congress

No. 23: Al Franken

PARTY: Democrat
FEDERAL OFFICE: U.S. senator from Minnesota (2009-present)

U.S. Congress

No. 24: Tom Udall

PARTY: Democrat
FEDERAL OFFICE: Former (1999-2009) U.S. representative for New Mexico’s 3rd Congressional District; U.S. senator from New Mexico (2009-present)

U.S. Congresss

No. 25: Amy Klobuchar

PARTY: Democrat
FEDERAL OFFICE: U.S. senator from Minnesota (2007-present)

  • MamaBear

    Follow the money and you will understand their positions.

    • Djinnenjous

      To be fair, it cuts both ways: who’s to say they didn’t have such strong pro-abortion leanings that PP responded by funding them? Six of one, half a dozen of the other. Either way, two kinds of pro-abortion filth collided somewhere down the line to create a baby-killing Voltron.

      • Jenn Erich

        To be fair, what cuts both ways? Of course PP “donated” to politicians who are pro-abortion. That goes without saying. Six of one, half dozen of the other makes no sense in this case. I’ll see your idiom and raise you an idiom: the proof is in the pudding. All 25 of the top recipients of PP’s “donations” are Democrats. Yes, follow the money usually leads to the truth. Abortion is evil. Taking money from taxpayers and giving it to a huge for-profit business is evil. It’s another evil to then give that money to politicians who support them to ensure more pro-abortion pro-PP politicians get elected. The money is to help ensure their reelection because PP is scared to death of the electorate figuring out their illegal child-sacrifice baby butchering operation, that it will be exposed in the light and we will vote in prolife politicians who will be the end of their evil doings. And on top of it, the #1 recipient has the veto pen!

  • Djinnenjous

    You know, I see an awful lot of men on that list, Planned Parenthood. I wonder: when these guys speak about their views do prominent pro-abortion women like Cecile Richards and Hillary Clinton scream at them to shut up because they’re not women, and not-women don’t get an opinion about abortion?

    End Patriachy, and all . . . right?


    • An-Ole-Di-Hard

      As a women I was amazed to see so many women on the list. (ha ha) But, I thought of Clinton laughing at Trump’s comment about his knowing more about women’s issues than she does. She may know about cramps and Mammograms, but when it comes to respecting and loving a child–which should be a natural instinct in women–Trump beats her hands down. Funny how these pro-abortion women crowing the loudest have few to zero children themselves.

  • WorldGoneCrazy

    Those are mugshots for Hell, right there.

    Love to know how much Sebellius got when she was KS governor or after. (We know she got a lot from Tiller, some directly, but most indirectly.)

  • TimP.

    So now we know why these politicians love abortion!! What a ponzi scheme!!

  • An-Ole-Di-Hard

    Science has proven life begins at conception & at Exodus 21: 22-25 God’s Word warns: anybody responsible for causing the death of an unborn child, the consequences will be soul for soul, life for life. This leaves no doubt that an unborn baby–at any stage, is a human being, a living soul. Those who take life are deserving of life in prison. As for God’s condemnation, He is capable of handing out His own justice.

    • da bear

      You had best check #22 again. “When men have a fight and hurt a pregnant woman, so that she suffers a miscarriage, but no further injury, the guilty on shall be fined as much as the woman’s husband demands of him and he shall pay in the presence of the judges. But if injury ensues, you shall give life for life,…” Seems to me, the life for life is that of the wife, as the miscarriage was covered earlier.

      • da bear

        Also seems to me, the above mentioned miscarriage is an accidental aspect of the men fighting. Perhaps the more appropriate scripture verse is the one Whoopie missed in her por-abortion ramble. Yopu know- the scripture that says, “Thou shalt not kill.” Clear enough to me.

  • fitzy94

    No. 6, Louise Slaughter! Such an apt name. No. 7, Jeanne Shaheen, D. NH has no shame! All Democrats and all voted against the ban on abortions at over 20 weeks.
    If the government is giving $500 million to Planned Parenthood, and they in turn give it back to the Democrats, what in the world do they need government funds for? Why are tax payers as a whole funding the Democratic party? In the guise of equal opportunity, (I don’t know the correct term), shouldn’t tax payers be funding prolife groups?

  • tom721

    How about a general rule that, if you receive money from the federal government, you may not make such political contributions? After all, this money originates with the citizens.

    • Greeny

      Amen to that!

    • scooter

      Since it’s supposed to be illegal to spend federal money on abortions, and abortions make up half of the funding for PP, without administrative fees, I guess the objective of having half of their budget funded by the taxpayer is for political contributions. Gots to keep the money flowing for political support in killing babies.

      • Nick

        Got a source for your “%50 of Planned Parenthood’s budget is abortions” claim?

        • Bee D.

          While Planned Parenthood claims to be a women’s health care provider, its focus is chiefly on abortion. Under Cecile Richards’ leadership, Planned Parenthood’s abortions have increased, its affiliates have been forced to provide abortions, and its breast exams and cancer screenings for women – as well as adoption referrals – have dropped significantly. The abortion focus of Planned Parenthood is just one reason millions of taxpayer dollars need to be redirected to the more than 13,000 comprehensive health care clinics around the nation that provide basic health services for low-income women and their families

          • Nick

            I ask again for a source for your claims. I hate the hypocrites listed in this article as much as the next person. But until I see trustworthy sources that half of their budget is abortions, and that it is increasing and forcing people to have them, while dropping other services, it is an unverified claim.

            Don’t mistake my unwillingness to accept random strangers on their word as unwillingness to change my opinion when presented with fact that is backed up. Until then, you may as well be claiming that the Pope is Jesus returned to Earth to teach us how to play the accordion.

          • Bee D.

            Rep. Tim Walberg, R-Mich., contradicted Richard’s claim that the undercover tapes were selectively and heavily edited.

            “Planned Parenthood commissioned a report by Fusion GPS examining the authenticity of the videos,” he noted. “The conclusion of that report said the analysis did not reveal widespread evidence of, quote, ‘substantive video manipulation.’ And it shows, quote, ‘no evidence of audio manipulation.'”

            Walberg added, “Full versions of the videos are available on the Center for Medical Progress website and the CMP youtube channel.”

            He said that showed the only parts that were edited were bathroom breaks.

          • Nick

            Ok, have a good one. Apparently it’s too hard for you to give me a link to a source at all, much less a source that isn’t from a heavily religious politician who has a history of doing whatever can be done to appease his deeply religious constituency.

            You typing something == a source. A link to a website/article/study with sources linked for any statistics given is a source.

            Also, depending what state you live in, PP gets literally NOTHING in federal funding. (Now watch this, I’m going to give you a SOURCE for my claim http://www.sba-list.org/PPScoreboard) This is even a heavily biased anti-abortion at all costs website, in other parts it even outright lies about PP in order to get it 100% defunded no matter the negative impact due to PPs other services.

            See that list? Only 10 states. TEN. And it’s state money. ONE uses Medicaid. The rest of the money they spend is what they get from insurance companies for any procedures, payments from patients, or donations. But don’t let these facts get in your way.

          • Bee D.

            That’s some of the transcript from yesterdays congressional hearing.

          • Bee D.

            In his opening statement, Jordan ridiculed the notion that Republicans want to shut down the federal government over defunding Planned Parenthood.

            “We simply want to shift the money from an organization caught doing what they were caught doing … and give it to the 13,000 federally approved community health centers.”
            Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2015/09/if-videos-heavily-edited-why-did-planned-parenthood-apologize/#IVkOUEdhkcKkD88v.99

          • Bee D.

            Oversight committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, questioned how the abortion provider spent that money.

            He said Planned Parenthood made $127 million in net profits in 2014 but reduced the number of cancer screenings it performed by 54 percent from 2013-15.

            “I don’t understand why,” Chaffetz said.

            He noted the organization has “massive” salaries, with Richards making nearly $600,000 a year.

            Travel expenses were $5 million in 2013, including first-class tickets and private jets.

            He said Planned Parenthood spent $600,000 just on parties from 2012 to 2013.

            And it spent $67 million on fundraising and $22 million on lobbying, which, he said, “has absolutely nothing to do with providing a breast exam for young women.”

            “It’s a political organization, and that’s something that needs to be ferreted out.”

            According to the committee, for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2014, Planned Parenthood reported approximately $1.3 billion in total revenue, of which $528.4 million, or 41 percent, is attributed to “government health services grants and reimbursements.”

          • Bee D.

            A question looming over the hearing was whether any of the footage was in fact altered. Democrats repeatedly suggested that important passages were missing.

            But the Alliance Defending Freedom engaged cybersecurity and forensic analysis company Coalfire Systems to examine the 10 “full-footage videos” put out by CMP.

            According to their review, the videos were not manipulated. The report said any missing footage was of “non-pertinent” events like meals and bathroom breaks.

            “The Coalfire forensic analysis removes any doubt that the full length undercover videos released by Center for Medical Progress are authentic and have not been manipulated,” ADF Senior Counsel Casey Mattox said in a statement.

            “Analysts scrutinized every second of video recorded during the investigation and released by CMP to date and found only bathroom breaks and other non-pertinent footage had been removed. Planned Parenthood can no longer hide behind a smokescreen of false accusations and should now answer for what appear to be the very real crimes revealed by the CMP investigation.”

        • jongnagy

          How PP counts the percentage of abortions:

          “They arrive at that number [3%] by
          counting every service individually. When a client comes in for an abortion,
          she gets a pregnancy test (one service), a pelvic exam (second service), an STD
          test (third service), a breast exam (fourth service), a package of
          contraceptives (fifth service), and so forth. But calculated as a percentage of
          revenue generated, abortion accounts for about a third of PP’s business.”

          (Mona Charen, in today’s National Review
          Online, Feb 7, 2012)

          • Nick

            How about a non biased source? Perhaps one that isn’t cherry picking examples of PP employees that are no longer employed there, due to their negligence, as an excuse to defund the entire organization. One that obviously isn’t seeking to rectify the issues (There are obvious PP issues, I don’t deny it), but to destroy it, regardless of the numerous legitimate reasons that an abortion is a good option for the mother.

            Also, the very article you linked me proves the 50% stat is false. It claims 30%. Which has no sources backing it up, and is literally just her claiming something. Even IF that 30% were true, which I don’t think it is, but IF it is, she’s saying that the other 70% IS going to STD screening/pregnancy tests/etc but even with the vast majority going to those procedures, the entire thing needs to be pulled down?

            Do you know what an unbiased source is?

    • Freeurmindz

      RE:How about a general rule that, if you receive money from the federal government, you may not make such political contributions? After all, this money originates with the citizens.
      Yep…Seems only commons sense. Oh but wait it’s demonrats stuffing their pockets with 30k to most. So never mind about common sense. And can’t argue with EVIL.

  • ClearthoughtNY

    …always follow the monies… the answers lie within…

  • Donald Harrison

    Now I see why they need the money. They have to grease the domorats hands.

  • wfmcfp

    OK, wait! The Federal Government (you and me) give Planned Parenthood $500,000,000.00 each year (1/2 billion)…..and it then is allowed to give money to politicians????? Isn’t this a very smelly money trail?

    • Timothy Dan Tatum


  • Shirley Tutt Dambrauckas

    So, to clarify….my tax dollars go to an organization that
    I despise, which then gives those dollars to politicians whom I despise and would never support. Have I got that right? No wonder the democrats refuse to defund Planned Parenthood…..that would be cutting off the hand that feeds them.

  • Gloria Peterson Arrington

    democrats fund planned parenthood they turn around and put it in their political side then refund the taxpayer money to people who support them? We are paying for this and it has to stop I refuse that my tax money be a slush fund for this.

  • Gloria Peterson Arrington

    The Golden Rule also reminds us of our responsibility to protect and defend human life at every stage of its development,” he said, after earlier urging policymakers to use the law to protect “the image and likeness fashioned by God on every human life.” Touching on the marriage debate, Francis also said he’s concerned about “the family,” and said “fundamental relationships are being called into question, as is the very basis of marriage and the family.”

    defend human life at every stage of its development…understand?

  • James Bowles

    Why are not murder for hire charges being filed against these savage animals?

  • tom721

    If I were a liberal politician, and I defended abortion, you know, for all those reasons that they always give, how would it look if I were also on the take from PP? My position, though sincere, would look phony. Not genuine. How can these phonies look at themselves in the mirror? They should all give the money back. That’s the only way to prove sincerity. Then, we can deduct what PP gives to the politicians, from what we are forced to give PP.

    • Jenn Erich

      Really! We give them 1/2 billion dollars which is tax-free to PP. Then they give money to pro-abortion politicians to keep their murderous business open and deduct those donations from their income too. Supposedly that 1/2 billion is for women’s, ahem, health. So it’s a trick on PP’s books, claiming they make political donations from “other” money. What a crock! This will all be exposed one way or another. If they can afford to make political contributions, they can afford to operate without tax money. I repeat: Shut. It. Down.

  • Ethan Clarke

    How about charging these low-life rats with profiteering from the public’s funds=?

  • Don Konwinski

    How do the Democrats say they favor the poor and then seek so hard to murder the innocent unborn?

  • Jenn Erich

    Let’s follow this. The federal government confiscates our money, gives it to Planned Parenthood, a for-profit organization, then Planned Parenthood gives it to Democrats? The most to the guy who vetoes the budgets that would defund Planned Parenthood. Doesn’t pass the smell test. This STINKS! Can’t be legal. If you explained this funding gyration to the FBI, they would say it’s money laundering. So wrong, so so wrong. Congress? Shut. It. Down.

    • Jojo

      Amen to what you said. I would love to see a list of other for-profit agencies that the government donates two. And then follow that money trail. This is simply nuts and has to be illegal.

  • cutterguy

    I want to know who the republicans are who took the money and how they vote on defunding

    • Jenn Erich

      Well, on the list of the top 25, none are Republicans.

      • cutterguy

        I know. however, in 2014 repubs got $3,100. In 2014 gop’ers got $26,600. I want to know who the repubs were and how they vote on said defunding.

  • jongnagy

    Obama spoke at Planned Parenthood.

    believes that a baby born alive during a botched abortion could be left to die.

    Even “ex utero” (born and outside the womb) is not an issue for him.

    convenience of the mother counts not viability of the fetus.

    Does he truly know who Planned Parenthood is?

    A WSJ article, “Planned Parenthood’s
    Hostages” states:

    “The reality is that Planned
    Parenthood—with annual revenues exceeding $1 billion—does little in the way of
    screening for breast cancer. But the organization is very much in the business
    of selling abortions—more than 300,000 in 2010, according to Planned Parenthood.
    At an average cost of $500, according to various sources including Planned
    Parenthood’s website, that translates to about $164 million of revenue per

    The PP founder, Margaret Sanger, was an
    avowed eugenicist (think “racial purity”). For example, in
    “Pivot of Civilization” she referred to poor, black, and immigrant
    people as “…human weeds, ‘reckless breeders,’ ‘spawning… human beings
    who never should have been born.”

    In “Women and the New Race,” Sanger said
    that “The most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its
    infant members is to kill it.”

    Planned parenthood glorifies Sanger on its
    website and has never denounced any of her views.

    One out of three single women today are
    pregnant. Does Planned Parenthood have an educational program to teach women
    how to behave morally?

    The government investigation will pull the
    curtain aside and reveal the worms in this organization.

    • cutterguy

      And as for the argument on pregnancy due to rape and incest they account for less than 2% of all abortions in the U.S.

  • Jojo

    I agree with you. How about a rule that says if a politician receives money from any party, government sponsored or not they need to be disqualified to vote on any issue that has direct impact from all issues related to their doners. That way there would be no more buying votes. I am sick of the politicians selling out the country on key issues and prostituting themselves for votes.

  • Sally

    Now I understand where the millions of tax payer dollars are going. Amazing they vote to fund them and then get back (on average) $30,000 each.

  • gigi4747

    Louise Slaughter? What a Dickensian name for a recipient of planned parenthood money!