Is It Waste, Cruelty or Control? Yes.

By Marlene Reiss, Scottsdale North Field Director

An article this week reported that the Trump administration has destroyed $9.7 million dollars of contraceptives already purchased by U.S.A.I.D. with taxpayer dollars for low-income countries.

The reason? “The administration will no longer supply abortifacient birth control under the guise of foreign aid” and “President Trump is committed to protecting the lives of unborn children all around the world,” even though none of the contraceptives are abortifacient. In fact, contraceptives like the pill, IUDs, and hormonal implants stop pregnancy by preventing ovulation or fertilization. So, to be clear, contraception is NOT abortion. But conflating the two makes it easy to chip away at women’s autonomy, bodily and otherwise.

The administration refused offers made by several domestic and international organizations to buy or accept a donation of the contraceptives at no cost to the government. Instead of at least attempting to recoup taxpayer dollars, it cost an additional $167,000 taxpayer dollars to destroy the contraceptives.

Is it waste, cruelty, or simply an attempt to roll back female autonomy? All of the above. But mostly the latter, at least according to Project 2025 and Turning Point USA.

Anti-reproductive health lawmakers have blocked Right to Contraception Acts in several states, including Arizona. Just last year, when HB 2678 was introduced, Senate Majority Leader Sonny Borreli was asked about limiting access to contraception. His answer? “Bayer Company invented aspirin. Put it between your knees,” implying that contraception would not be an issue if women were not having sex. And there you have it.

In 1960, when the FDA approved oral contraceptives, the opposition raised fears of “sexual anarchy” encouraging female promiscuity. The reality, however, has been that for the past 65 years women could finally exercise control over their own bodies, plan their families, and start professional careers. It was a good run, but about to come to end. Fast forward to 2022 when the Dobbs decision overturned Roe, and it’s since been a steady chipping away at women’s rights to bodily autonomy.

Make no mistake - they’re coming for contraception and they’re saying the quiet part out loud. Clarence Thomas’s concurrence makes it crystal clear that he is inviting a challenge to the constitutional right to birth control. He says that the Court “should reconsider” its past cases aligned with Roe, including Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) which recognized married couples’ constitutional right to birth control. He says the Court should “overrul[e] these demonstrably erroneous decisions.”

The impact on women’s quality of life - including their ability to participate in all aspects of society and civic life - is why the right and access to contraception are essential to democracy. But then again, with democracy in a downward spiral and the resurgence of “the Mrs. Degree,” who’ll need contraception?