racial targeting and population control - - the pro
Post on 12-Sep-2021
0 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Abstract
In the summer of 2009, Life Dynamics released the
documentary film, Maafa 21. Its basic contention is
that terms like “population control” and “family
planning” are code words for a genocidal effort
aimed at minorities – primarily African-Americans.
Among the many revelations documented in this film
is that, as far back as the mid 1900s, some well-
known eugenicists were arguing that the most
effective way they could advance their agenda would
be to concentrate population control facilities within
the targeted communities. Perhaps the most noted
proponent of this concept was Gunnar Myrdal who
discussed it in his 1944 book, An American Dilemma:
The Negro Problem and Modern Democracy.
In Maafa 21, evidence is presented that Planned
Parenthood and others within the abortion and family
planning lobby took this approach when choosing
locations for their facilities and that this practice
continues to this day.
The film also cites a study conducted by three
American university researchers into the criteria used
to decide the placement of U.S. polulation control
facilities. Their finding was that the primary
consideration in making this determination is not
poverty but the percentage of blacks in the area.
The initial response to this documentary from people
defending these organizations was to claim that they
focus their facilities on minority neighborhoods
because that is where the need is. Almost
immediately, however, they saw that this argument
was creating a problem for them. Simply put, it is
incompatible with one of their other arguments.
For years, these people have consistently argued
that the most effective way to reduce the number of
abortions is to prevent unplanned pregnancies by
making birth control chemicals, devices and
information widely available. If that is true, in light of
their concession that they have focused these things
on the minority community, the obvious result should
be that black women have the lowest pregnancy and
abortion rates in the country.
But to the contrary, in contemporary America, the
rate of pregnancy among black women is almost
three times as high as it is for white women and,
though they make up less than 13% of the female
population, black women have about 37% of the
abortions. In other words, the family planning
lobby’s argument that they concentrate their facilities
in minority communities because that is where the
need is, cannot be reconciled with their long
espoused claim about the connection between
contraception, pregnancy and abortion.
Seeing that they had painted themselves into this
corner, their options were to either abandon the
assertion that contraception is the way to reduce
abortion rates, or reverse field and start denying that
their facilities are disproportionately placed into
minority neighborhoods.
They chose the latter.
Virtually overnight, they went from claiming that they
target minority communities with noble intentions to
claiming that they don’t target them at all. Then, to
support this revised strategy, they began quoting a
new report by the Alan Guttmacher Institute (AGI)
showing that only one in 10 Planned Parenthood
clinics is located in a minority community.
Racial Targeting and Population Control
By Mark Crutcher | President, Life Dynamics Incorporated
Carole Novielli | Researcher
Renee Hobbs | Production Assistant
Next, the media began publishing articles citing
these stats in which AGI was routinely characterized
as an independent entity. This was obviously done
to give the stats an aura of credibility. It was also
done despite the fact that the American media is fully
aware that AGI is not an independent agency but is,
instead, the research arm of Planned Parenthood
and receives funding from Planned Parenthood. In
fact, Alan Guttmacher was once the president of
Planned Parenthood and vice-president of the
American Eugenics Society.
In this process, the media consistently quoted AGI’s
stats at face value without questioning their accuracy
or the methods by which they were derived.
The reality is, the research in AGI’s report had been
manipulated to yield pre-determined results. For
example, only facilities that actually perform
abortions were included. However, every Planned
Parenthood facility in America either does abortions
or refers for them, and in the chain of events that lead
to an abortion each entity is equally responsible.
It should also be pointed out that, in Maafa 21, the
charge is that the genocide in question is being
carried out with both abortion and birth control.
Given that every Planned Parenthood facility
provides one or both, AGI had no legitimate rationale
for excluding any of them from its data.
In a transparent effort to narrow the field even more,
AGI also chose to only include facilities that perform
over 400 abortions per year. Again, this was an
arbitrary and inexplicable decision given that no
commonly accepted principle or industry standard
establishes that a facility doing 400 abortions is
statistically relevant while one that does 399 is not.
To appreciate the deception being perpetrated here,
imagine a hypothetical scenario in which 10 of the 12
Planned Parenthood facilities in a state are located in
predominately black ZIP codes. Two of those 10
facilities perform fewer than 400 abortions per year
each. The remaining eight do not do abortions but
refer their clients to abortion clinics located outside
these predominately black ZIP codes. The problem
is that, according to the formula used in the AGI
study, not one of these Planned Parenthood facilities
would show up in their report as being located in the
black community despite the reality that 83% of
them were located there.
Clearly, AGI was “cooking the books.” They knew
Planned Parenthood’s denial of racial targeting could
not be sustained as long as certain large segments of
their facilities were included in their statistics. So
AGI cobbled together this absurd formula to make
those facilities become statistically invisible.
Methodology
Historically, the population control movement’s
eugenic efforts have been primarily focused on the
African-American community and that was the
underlying theme of Maafa 21. In our research,
however, we have seen unmistakable evidence that
the family planning establishment is also ratcheting
up its efforts to deal with the Hispanic population.
For that reason, this report was expanded to include
them as well. Our mission was to document whether
the population control movement has targeted black
and/or Hispanic communities by placing facilities in
areas where those minority populations are
disproportionately represented.
We began by creating a database of the ZIP codes
for every Planned Parenthood facility in the United
States. This list was generated from Planned
Parenthood’s website. We then used United States
Census Bureau figures to establish the percentage of
black and Hispanic people residing within each of
these ZIP codes as well as within each state.
The resulting data allowed us to calculate how often
these ZIP codes contain a higher proportion of
blacks and/or Hispanics than the state in which they
are located. Of equal importantance is that this data
also gave us the size of those disparities. The results
of those calculations are given in a chart found later
in this report.
2
Within the American population control movement,
Planned Parenthood is not the only player. Their
efforts are augmented by hundreds of independent
abortion clinics. These facilities are found
nationwide and are generally affiliated with trade
associations like the National Abortion Federation or
the National Coalition of Abortion Providers.
For this report, a second database was created of
these facilities with their locations being subjected to
the same “racial targeting” evaluation as the Planned
Parenthood locations. Those results are in a second
chart. (Since some Planned Parenthood facilities are
also members of the National Abortion Federation or
the National Coalition of Abortion Providers, we took
measures to make certain that these two charts were
purged of duplicates.)
Accuracy
Any study of this nature includes several factors that
can lead to errors. ZIP codes change; facilities
close; new facilities open; facilities move to new
locations; facilities change their names; some
operate under multiple names and/or addresses,
etcetera. It is also true that, in the highly unstable
world of abortion clinics and population control
facilities, these problems are even more pronounced.
Considering the high number of potential mistake-
causing areas, we made certain that once our data
was gathered and calculated, it was checked,
rechecked and checked again.
One aspect of this study is that, due to the high
volume of entries and calculations necessary to
create these charts – approximately 3000 – it would
take a lot of errors to significantly alter the overall
results. Fortunately, the system we employed made
sure that errors simply don’t exist in those numbers.
Another factor supporting the study’s accuracy is the
fact that it was universal. It is common and accepted
practice for those conducting this kind of research to
examine a “representative sample” of the whole and
then issue an analysis based on data extrapolated
from that sample. We did not do that and, instead,
included every facility in the country. This eliminated
any claim that we used “selective inclusion or
selective exclusion” to control the results.
It should also be noted that all of our raw data came
from the United States Census Bureau and is, thus,
insulated against bias. The only limitation this source
presented is that there is a lag time between when
the government takes a census and when that
information is compiled, analyzed and released to
the public. For that reason, the latest information
available to us was from the 2000 census. Although
we would have preferred newer data, as a practical
matter, the racial makeup of ZIP codes where these
facilities are located would not change enough from
one census to the next to have any material impact
on our results.
The bottom line is, if there are errors, correcting them
would be as likely to reinforce our findings as refute
them. Additionally, in either case, they would be
neither numerous enough nor large enough to
substantially alter the overall findings.
The Charts
The first chart identifies the locations of Planned
Parenthood population control facilities. Even
though Planned Parenthood operates the largest
chain of abortion clinics in the United States, it is not
the case that every facility included here does
abortions. However, among those that do not, every
one refers for abortion, schedules abortions, or
otherwise arranges abortions. In addition, each
facility provides contraceptive drugs and/or devices.
As stated earlier, the second chart is for independent
abortion clinics that are not affiliated with Planned
Parenthood. In both charts, every state’s name is
followed by their overall percentage of black and
Hispanic populations. The “ZIP” column contains
the ZIP codes in which population control facilities
are located in that state. If a ZIP code is listed
multiple times, it means there were that many
facilities in that ZIP code.
3
The “BLACK” column gives the percentage of
African-Americans who live in this ZIP code and the
“COMP” column compares this percentage against
the state’s overall percentage of African-Americans.
When the “COMP” column is blank, it means that
this ZIP code did not exceed the state’s percentage
of black population. The last two columns provide
the same data for the Hispanic population.
As an example of how these charts work, the state of
Florida shows to have a black population of 14.6%.
In that state, Planned Parenthood has a facility in ZIP
code 33617 which has a black population of 23.5%.
This means that this facility is located in a ZIP code
with an African-American population that is 187.6%
that of the state.
In reviewing this data, there are several things to
keep in mind. The first is that the issue is not
whether a ZIP code is predominately black or
Hispanic but whether it is disproportionately black or
Hispanic. Second, any infrequent or small gaps
between the percentage of minorities in a ZIP code
and the percentage of minorities in the
corresponding state can be dismissed as
“statistically meaningless.”
But when those gaps are common enough or large
enough that they cannot be rationally attributed to
random chance, they constitute a pattern that could
have only been created by design and intention.
The question then becomes: at what point does a
gap stop being insignificant and start being
significant? Given the subjective nature of that
question, the deciding principle has to be common
sense. If a ZIP code’s percentage of black or
Hispanic population is 102% of the state’s
percentage, no reasonable person would consider
that an indicator of racial targeting.
However, when a state has multiple population
control facilities in ZIP codes with minority
populations that exceed 125% of the state’s overall
minority population, common sense says that racial
targeting is the plausible explanation.
As the charts in this report will show, such a pattern
is readily identifiable in the locations of America’s
family planning and population control facilities. It
should also be pointed out that these patterns are
routinely considered indicative of racial targeting
when it comes to other issues.
For example, African-Americans suffer far more of
the health problems associated with tobacco use
than does the white population. Civil rights leaders
have long contended that this is a direct result of the
fact that large tobacco companies target a
disproportionate percentage of their advertising and
promotional efforts on the black community. In just
one of many examples of this, research conducted
relative to a lawsuit in Baltimore, Maryland,
documented that 76% of the billboards in black
neighborhoods featured tobacco advertising while
that number was only 20% in white neighborhoods.
A parallel situation has also been identified with
alcohol. The catastrophic social and health
problems associated with alcoholism are found in
the black community to a much higher extent than
they are in the white community. And again, black
leaders have spent years pointing out that a primary
cause of this is the fact that liquor merchandisers
place a disproportionate percentage of their retail
outlets in black neighborhoods. The visual evidence
of this can be seen, first hand, by driving through
predominately minority neighborhoods in almost any
decent-sized city in America.
It is also claimed that the alcohol content of some
beverages marketed in these areas is measurably
higher than the alcohol content of similar products
sold elsewhere, and that certain cheap high-alcohol-
content products are sold only in liquor stores and
convenience stores in black neighborhoods.
There are many other examples of this sort of racial
targeting. Moreover, the disastrous effects it has had
on the targeted communities are easy to see.
The encouraging thing is that, in recent years, some
of the corporations responsible for this have been
4
dragged into the public spotlight by the news media.
A few have even found themselves in lawsuits and
Congressional hearings.
The glaring exception is America’s family planning
industry. Despite having more potential to destroy
the minority community than these corporations,
they have been left free to push their eugenics
agenda without scrutiny.
As the following charts show, when it comes to racial
targeting, these people are not amateurs.
5
CHART 1 – PLANNED PARENTHOOD LOCATIONS
ZIP BLACK COMP COMPHISPANIC
ALABAMABlack Population 26.0%
Hispanic Population 1.7%
ZIP BLACK COMP COMPHISPANIC
ALASKABlack Population 3.5%
Hispanic Population 4.1%
ZIP BLACK COMP COMPHISPANIC
ARIZONABlack Population 3.1%
Hispanic Population 25.3%
ZIP BLACK COMP COMPHISPANIC
ARIZONA [ continued ]
ZIP BLACK COMP COMPHISPANIC
ARKANSASBlack Population 15.7%
Hispanic Population 3.2%
ZIP BLACK COMP COMPHISPANIC
CALIfORNIABlack Population 6.7%
Hispanic Population 32.4%
NOTE: In this chart as well as the one that follows, some ZIP codes show a
percentage of minorities that exceeds 100%. This occured because a small
number of Hispanics identify themselves as both black and Hispanic and are,
therefore, counted twice by the Census Bureau. This phenomenon is rare
and was identified in fewer than 10 of the ZIP codes included in this study.
2.2%0.3%99669
222.8% 107.3%4.4%7.8%99701
3.4%0.8%99801
3.3%0.3%99835
257.1% 185.3%7.6%9.0%99508
19.1%1.7%85032
118.5%30.0%2.4%85204
112.9% 15.1%3.5%85224
13.5%1.6%85251
25.2%3.0%85281
12.1%2.8%85304
112.9% 19.8%3.5%85338
158.0% 248.2%62.8%4.9%85031
217.7%55.1%2.7%85364
153.8% 152.9%2.6%40.0%35205
109.2% 123.5%2.1%28.4%36609
5.3%0.3%86305
112.9% 128.0%32.4%3.5%85705
129.0% 19.3%4.0%85712
200.0% 254.4%62.1%6.2%85713
12.2%1.7%86001
440.1% 3.1%69.1%72204
128.1%4.1%4.1%72703
480.5% 204.9%66.4%32.2%90003
191.0% 179.6%58.2%12.8%90007
714.9% 136.4%44.2%47.9%90016
297.2%96.3%0.5%90022
188.2%61.0%2.8%90029
284.8%92.3%1.5%90033
284.8%92.3%1.5%90033
119.1%38.6%2.3%90041
171.6% 154.3%50.0%11.5%90260
ZIP BlacK coMP coMPHISPaNIc
calIforNIa [ continued ]
ZIP BlacK coMP coMPHISPaNIc
calIforNIa [ continued ]
ZIP BlacK coMP coMPHISPaNIc
coloradoBlack Population 3.8%
Hispanic Population 17.1%
13.8%1.2%91320
181.4%58.8%6.0%91405
23.9%1.7%91506
220.6%71.5%0.8%91732
208.9% 180.5%58.5%14.0%91767
131.3% 102.4%33.2%8.8%91786
102.1%33.1%1.7%91801
186.4%60.4%4.5%91911
17.9%0.9%92008
17.9%3.8%92021
149.6%48.5%2.1%92025
153.7% 22.2%10.3%92101
225.3% 149.3%48.4%15.1%92105
13.0%5.5%92108
10.6%1.4%92109
10.6%1.4%92109
22.1%5.4%92111
432.8% 30.0%29.0%92114
162.6% 24.4%10.9%92115
11.1%5.3%92126
300.0%97.2%0.4%92236
9.4%0.8%92270
214.9% 137.3%44.5%14.4%92408
19.1%5.6%92506
307.4% 139.8%45.3%20.6%92553
127.1%41.2%1.1%92627
21.6%1.0%92683
13.7%1.1%92691
104.3%33.8%1.5%92705
228.3%74.0%1.7%92805
101.8%33.0%1.8%92866
19.9%1.5%93003
148.4%48.1%1.9%93101
168.6% 31.8%11.3%93301
11.3%1.3%93401
126.2%40.9%2.2%93454
164.8%53.4%2.8%93637
24.4%6.3%93710
150.9%48.9%4.5%93728
101.4% 125.3%40.6%6.8%93901
260.8%84.5%1.1%93927
225.3% 108.0%35.0%15.1%93955
17.2%2.0%94040
20.5%2.6%94086
142.2%46.1%4.2%94110
144.7% 22.1%9.7%94509
122.8%39.8%4.5%94520
125.3% 7.9%8.4%94530
238.8% 20.3%16.0%94533
31.5%0.6%94559
255.2% 104.6%33.9%17.1%94565
7.2%1.9%94583
12.3%4.2%90401
211.1%68.4%1.3%90602
17.3%3.1%90713
305.9% 133.9%43.3%20.5%90806
214.9% 113.8%36.9%14.4%91104
183.3%59.4%4.0%91303
377.6% 22.1%25.3%94590
7.7%1.4%94596
665.6% 22.6%44.6%94804
346.2% 109.5%35.5%23.2%94806
17.9%1.6%95060
196.9%63.8%0.7%95076
30.5%5.0%95121
20.5%4.1%95123
114.5%37.1%4.7%95126
165.4%53.6%3.6%95127
129.8% 179.0%58.0%8.7%95205
150.7% 23.8%10.1%95207
23.9%2.3%95336
101.4% 109.8%35.6%6.8%95348
19.8%3.6%95350
27.0%6.6%95376
8.8%1.2%95405
11.0%5.1%95422
5.4%0.9%95503
180.5% 16.7%12.1%95660
7.9%1.3%95661
183.5% 16.4%12.3%95687
109.5%35.5%1.2%95695
202.9% 19.7%13.6%95814
14.1%4.9%95816
177.6% 110.4%35.8%11.9%95820
10.6%1.0%95973
26.0%2.6%95991
5.7%1.0%96002
4.3%0.2%96093
3.1%0.4%96145
3.7%1.1%94941
157.7%51.1%1.6%95020
152.7%49.5%1.1%95023
6
15.0%1.0%80003
500.0% 16.9%19.0%80012
8.4%1.2%80129
4.8%0.9%80134
1481.5% 15.4%56.3%80207
173.6% 11.4%6.6%80218
250.0% 10.5%9.5%80224
15.6%0.9%80232
4.7%1.1%80302
3.8%1.3%80446
132.7%22.7%0.5%80501
10.8%1.3%80521
15.8%0.7%80634
3.1%0.1%80477
11.3%2.3%80907
139.4% 8.8%5.3%80917
178.3%30.5%1.4%81008
213.4%36.5%1.1%81050
ZIP BlacK coMP coMPHISPaNIc
colorado [ continued ]
ZIP BlacK coMP coMPHISPaNIc
coNNectIcutBlack Population 9.1%
Hispanic Population 9.4%
7
Statistics for this ZIP code were not available.*
*
ZIP BlacK coMP coMPHISPaNIc
florIda [ continued ]
ZIP BlacK coMP coMPHISPaNIc
delawareBlack Population 19.2%
Hispanic Population 4.8%
ZIP BlacK coMP coMPHISPaNIc
florIdaBlack Population 14.6%
Hispanic Population 16.8%
ZIP BlacK coMP coMPHISPaNIc
georgIaBlack Population 28.7%
Hispanic Population 5.3%
ZIP BlacK coMP coMPHISPaNIc
HawaIIBlack Population 1.8%
Hispanic Population 7.2%
ZIP BlacK coMP coMPHISPaNIc
IdaHoBlack Population 0.4%
Hispanic Population 7.9%
ZIP BlacK coMP coMPHISPaNIc
IllINoISBlack Population 15.1%
Hispanic Population 12.3%
251.4%43.0%1.0%81101
8.6%0.1%81201
81303
11.3%0.2%81321
15.2%0.2%81601
6.5%8.4%06040
150.0%14.1%6.6%06052
3.7%5.6%06082
110.9% 142.5%13.4%10.1%06110
951.6% 9.3%86.6%06112
343.6%32.3%6.1%06226
2.6%1.6%06239
204.3% 209.5%19.7%18.6%06320
5.5%6.3%06360
235.1%22.1%6.0%06451
1.9%1.0%06475
3.5%1.1%06484
506.5% 119.1%11.2%46.1%06511
293.4% 344.6%32.4%26.7%06604
127.6%12.0%7.7%06708
242.8% 3.3%22.1%06790
224.4%21.1%7.0%06810
259.3% 267.0%25.1%23.6%06902
4.4%5.6%19711
431.7% 139.5%6.7%82.9%19801
148.4% 4.4%28.5%19901
2.2%5.9%19971
143.2% 4.7%20.9%32207
2.9%4.4%32250
250.0% 6.0%36.5%32304
160.9% 6.7%23.5%32601
539.7% 5.0%78.8%32805
120.8%20.3%5.0%32817
6.2%5.4%32960
183.3%30.8%9.8%33024
505.3%84.9%1.6%33145
385.6% 126.7%21.3%56.3%33161
122.6% 238.6%40.1%17.9%33176
151.3% 101.7%17.1%22.1%33409
5.1%1.2%33434
132.1%22.2%9.3%33463
187.6% 13.9%27.4%33617
5.0%2.8%33702
7.0%5.0%33803
% 4.2%26.9%33881
4.0%1.4%33919
7.8%0.7%34103
125.3% 401.1%67.4%18.3%34142
12.5%8.9%34203
15.1%10.5%34236
6.4%12.3%34994
101.8%5.4%10.3%30043
4.5%8.0%30062
265.8% 5.1%76.3%30303
302.4% 1.1%86.8%30901
172.1% 2.4%49.4%31405
113.8%8.2%0.2%96732
108.3%7.8%0.4%96740
3.7%1.3%96814
107.5%8.5%0.2%83301
125.0% 4.2%0.5%83703
4.0%0.6%60462
7.4%7.5%60504
7.4%2.1%60603
179.4% 3.9%27.1%60610
367.4%45.2%10.9%60622
627.8% 3.1%94.8%60628
647.6% 1.2%97.8%60636
184.2
ZIP BlacK coMPHISPaNIc
IllINoIS [ continued ]
ZIP BlacK coMP coMPHISPaNIc
Iowa [ continued ]
8
ZIP BlacK coMP coMPHISPaNIc
INdIaNaBlack Population 8.4%
Hispanic Population 3.5%
ZIP BlacK coMP coMPHISPaNIc
IowaBlack Population 2.1%
Hispanic Population 2.8%
ZIP BlacK coMP coMPHISPaNIc
KaNSaSBlack Population 5.7%
Hispanic Population 7.0%
ZIP BlacK coMP coMPHISPaNIc
KeNtucKyBlack Population 7.3%
Hispanic Population 1.5%
ZIP BlacK coMP coMPHISPaNIc
louISIaNaBlack Population 32.5%
Hispanic Population 2.4%
ZIP BlacK coMP coMPHISPaNIc
MaINeBlack Population 0.5%
Hispanic Population 0.7%
101.3% 1.3%15.3%62526
217.2% 1.2%32.8%62703
467.5% 217.8%26.8%70.6%60651
117.8% 169.1%20.8%17.8%60660
4.5%1.1%61350
1.2%2.0%61554
212.5% 4.9%32.1%61603
3.7%10.0%61701
106.6% 5.5%16.1%61820
1.5%14.5%62226
1.0%0.3%62401
1.4%0.4%46123
810.7% 1.0%68.1%46208
3.3%2.5%46227
235.7% 2.8%19.8%46229
3.4%7.5%46250
332.1% 114.2%4.0%27.9%46268
429.7% 1474.2%51.6%36.1%46312
110.7% 485.7%17.0%9.3%46324
229.7% 2.7%19.3%46360
3.1%1.2%46383
660.7% 211.4%7.4%55.5%46408
298.8% 268.5%9.4%25.1%46410
189.2% 402.8%14.1%15.9%46516
3.2%4.8%46545
208.5%7.3%1.1%46580
2.4%2.5%46804
1.3%6.5%47150
0.8%0.1%47170
1.6%2.0%47203
1.1%1.7%47250
102.8%3.6%0.8%47274
1.3%3.9%47304
1.7%7.2%47374
1.4%3.3%47403
1.1%0.5%47421
0.9%2.5%47711
190.4% 1.6%16.0%47807
182.8%6.4%2.2%47905
119.0% 2.1%2.5%50014
1.1%0.8%50023
0.8%0.9%50138
1.3%1.3%50208
442.8% 217.8%6.1%9.3%50311
142.8% 228.5%6.4%3.0%50315
142.8% 228.5%6.4%3.0%50315
1.8%1.7%50322
209.5% 103.5%2.9%4.4%50501
653.5%18.3%0.4%50588
1.0%1.5%50613
1.1%0.3%50801
175.0%4.9%0.9%51106
1.3%0.2%51301
200.0%5.6%1.3%51501
1.8%0.1%51566
1.9%1.4%52001
223.8% 103.5%2.9%4.7%52246
139.2%3.9%0.5%52353
138.0% 1.7%2.9%52402
214.2% 1.9%4.5%52601
190.4% 171.4%4.8%4.0%52627
161.9% 1.0%3.4%52632
109.5% 1.5%2.3%52641
2.4%1.5%52722
1.2%1.5%66211
971.9% 268.5%18.8%55.4%67214
2.6%0.8%67601
850.6% 1.5%62.1%40203
1.0%5.4%40475
434.2% 253.3%3.8%31.7%40508
156.9% 133.3%3.2%51.0%70115
138.7% 1.4%45.1%70806
120.0% 0.6%0.6%04005
157.1%1.1%0.5%04073
260.0% 171.4%1.2%1.3%04086
920.0% 400.0%2.8%4.6%04101
coMP
ZIP BlacK coMP coMPHISPaNIc
MIcHIgaN [ continued ]
9
ZIP BlacK coMP coMPHISPaNIc
MarylaNdBlack Population 27.9%
Hispanic Population 4.3%
ZIP BlacK coMP coMPHISPaNIc
MaSSacHuSettSBlack Population 5.4%
Hispanic Population 6.8%
ZIP BlacK coMP coMPHISPaNIc
MIcHIgaNBlack Population 14.2%
Hispanic Population 3.3%
Statistics for this ZIP code were not available.*
ZIP BlacK coMP coMPHISPaNIc
MINNeSotaBlack Population 3.5%
Hispanic Population 2.9%
ZIP BlacK coMP coMPHISPaNIc
MISSISSIPPIBlack Population 36.3%
Hispanic Population 1.4%
ZIP BlacK coMP coMPHISPaNIc
MISSourIBlack Population 11.2%
Hispanic Population 2.1%
126.8% 2.7%35.4%21801
110.3% 2.7%30.8%20602
304.6%13.1%17.2%20879
113.2% 131.9%13.5%31.6%20910
3.0%24.9%21117
221.1% 1.9%61.7%21201
1.5%17.0%21234
3.0%18.2%21401
2.5%17.9%21601
118.6%5.1%10.2%21702
150.0% 1116.1%75.9%8.1%01107
220.5%15.0%3.6%01420
116.6% 227.9%15.5%6.3%01609
6.1%2.2%01752
4.4%1.3%01757
3.7%4.8%02144
105.8%7.2%3.7%02215
1.0%1.5%48093
2.5%7.3%48103
109.0%3.6%5.2%48104
1.0%0.4%48114
1.9%0.7%48150
207.7% 2.5%29.5%48198
528.8% 1.9%75.1%48201
2.3%2.9%48509
129.5% 2.1%18.4%48532
236.3%7.8%7.2%48604
3.0%6.0%48823
124.2%4.1%13.7%48846
2.3%0.2%48867
324.2%10.7%13.3%48912
2.6%13.5%49006
124.2%4.1%7.4%49015
402.1% 2.6%57.1%49022
2.9%4.5%49036
260.6%8.6%0.9%49091
2.2%7.0%49093
3.1%6.3%49202
1.5%6.5%49307
161.2% 166.6%5.5%22.9%49442
156.3% 463.6%15.3%22.2%49503
49519
1.6%0.3%49686*
1.0%0.2%49770
0.7%2.4%49855
137.9%4.0%1.3%55060
1.2%1.2%55066
2.0%2.8%55113
131.4% 165.5%4.8%4.6%55116
2.0%2.0%55124
2.2%2.7%55125
151.4% 106.8%3.1%5.3%55344
797.1% 537.9%15.6%27.9%55404
460.0% 534.4%15.5%16.1%55408
254.2% 1.5%8.9%55445
0.6%0.2%55744
0.8%0.4%55792
1.1%1.5%55811
2.3%2.5%55901
2.0%1.6%56001
289.6%8.4%0.3%56007
2.7%0.4%56031
465.5%13.5%0.8%56201
102.8% 1.5%3.6%56304
0.6%0.2%56308
0.8%0.4%56401
144.8%4.2%0.7%56560
0.9%0.4%56601
1.3%0.2%56701
136.6% 1.3%49.6%39401
387.5% 1.2%43.4%63033
109.5%2.3%3.5%63088
400.0% 1.9%44.8%63108
400.0% 1.9%44.8%63108
470.5% 176.1%3.7%52.7%63118
1.5%2.4%63376
299.1% 204.7%4.3%33.5%64030
190.4%4.0%2.7%64050
104.7%2.2%5.1%64093
499.1% 161.9%3.4%55.9%64110
ZIP BlacK coMP coMPHISPaNIc
MoNtaNaBlack Population 0.3%
Hispanic Population 2.0%
ZIP BlacK coMP coMPHISPaNIc
MISSourI [ continued ]
10
ZIP BlacK coMP coMPHISPaNIc
NeBraSKaBlack Population 4.0%
Hispanic Population 5.5%
ZIP BlacK coMP coMPHISPaNIc
NevadaBlack Population 6.8%
Hispanic Population 19.7%
ZIP BlacK coMP coMPHISPaNIc
New HaMPSHIreBlack Population 0.7%
Hispanic Population 1.7%
ZIP BlacK coMP coMPHISPaNIc
New jerSeyBlack Population 13.6%
Hispanic Population 13.3%
ZIP BlacK coMP coMPHISPaNIc
New MexIcoBlack Population 1.9%
Hispanic Population 42.1%
ZIP BlacK coMP coMPHISPaNIc
New yorKBlack Population 15.9%
Hispanic Population 15.1%
180.9%3.8%1.9%64119
109.5%2.3%2.6%64801
1.2%0.1%65049
1.5%6.7%65109
2.0%10.3%65203
1.4%1.9%65401
109.5%2.3%3.1%65807
115.0%2.3%0.3%59102
133.3% 130.0%2.6%0.4%59105
1.1%0.1%59254
1.1%0.1%59254
1.0%0.1%59255
233.3% 150.0%3.0%0.7%59323
1.3%0.1%59327
333.3% 135.0%2.7%1.0%59401
1.2%0.1%59422
0.6%0.2%59442
1.6%0.2%59601
%0.3%59802 1.8
185.0% 2.5%7.4%68134
2.7%1.2%68137
1.8%1.2%68506
3.4%2.8%68510
392.6% 17.6%26.7%89032
110.2% 192.8%38.0%7.5%89102
18.9%6.4%89121
170.5%33.6%2.5%89502
9.9%1.8%89503
128.5% 111.7%1.9%0.9%03038
271.4% 164.7%2.8%1.9%03104
0.8%0.4%03431
0.5%0.3%03743
157.1% 152.9%2.6%1.1%03784
0.9%0.5%03833
668.3% 4.1%90.9%07018
319.8% 5.7%43.5%07042
254.4% 224.8%29.9%34.6%07060
481.6% 171.4%22.8%65.5%07102
264.6%35.2%5.6%07105
245.5% 334.5%44.5%33.4%07201
5.7%1.6%07442
300.7% 352.6%46.9%40.9%07505
286.7% 163.9%21.8%39.0%07631
1.9%0.5%07702
9.9%6.9%07728
5.8%1.1%07730
2.5%1.6%07860
103.0%13.7%10.4%07960
3.9%1.7%08031
325.0% 187.2%24.9%44.2%08401
171.3% 6.1%23.3%08010
513.2% 198.4%26.4%69.8%08103
383.0% 247.3%32.9%52.1%08608
130.1% 4.8%17.7%08628
2.3%1.3%08690
3.7%1.3%08822
5.4%0.5%08835
509.0%67.7%9.7%08861
3.7%2.2%08865
4.4%1.5%08884
169.1% 293.2%39.0%23.0%08901
180.8% 194.7%25.9%24.6%07601
231.5% 108.0%45.5%4.4%87108
231.5% 108.0%45.5%4.4%87108
147.3% 27.5%2.8%87112
136.8% 28.2%2.6%87124
18.8%0.8%87401
124.7%52.5%0.7%87505
7.5%2.9%10012
150.3% 121.1%18.3%23.9%10301
289.9% 364.2%55.0%46.1%10451
7.9%2.1%10509
435.8% 11.6%69.3%10550
204.4% 12.6%32.5%10607
179.8% 227.1%34.3%28.6%10701
174.2% 184.1%27.8%27.7%10801
7.1%6.1%10924
130.4%19.7%11.9%10940
210.0% 11.4%33.4%10977
130.1% 14.4%20.7%11201
ZiP BLaCk CoMP CoMPhiSPaniC
new York [ continued ]
11
ZiP BLaCk CoMP CoMPhiSPaniC
north CaroLinaBlack Population 21.6%
Hispanic Population 4.7%
ZiP BLaCk CoMP CoMPhiSPaniC
ohioBlack Population 11.5%
Hispanic Population 1.9%
north dakotaBlack Population 0.6%
Hispanic Population
[ There are no Planned Parenthood facilities in this state. ]
1.2%
1.7%1.5%12065
3.1%4.7%12095
3.6%9.7%12180
301.8% 6.7%48.0%12206
271.6% 13.2%43.2%12307
5.1%9.3%12401
4.9%12.1%12534
135.8% 160.2%24.2%21.6%12550
167.2% 8.6%26.6%12601
127.0% 111.9%16.9%20.2%12701
1.4%1.3%12801
0.5%0.4%12832
1.7%2.6%12866
0.4%0.5%12883
1.7%1.9%12901
107.5% 10.3%17.1%12953
0.9%0.6%12983
138.9% 4.4%22.1%13210
1.2%1.0%13350
0.7%0.5%13367
0.8%0.7%13421
3.9%6.1%13440
3.8%8.1%13502
3.6%5.2%13601
1.3%2.5%13617
4.4%6.9%13669
1.0%1.0%13815
3.2%4.0%13820
1.5%0.8%13838
1.1%0.4%13856
2.1%4.9%13901
1.9%4.1%14020
1.0%0.4%14120
235.8% 2.8%37.5%14214
0.8%0.5%14224
122.0% 2.7%19.4%14301
1.0%2.4%14304
1.1%1.0%14424
371.6% 209.9%31.7%59.1%14605
2.5%3.1%14626
0.7%2.4%14830
1.1%1.7%14843
3.9%4.6%14850
0.7%0.7%14891
105.0% 3.9%16.7%14901
3.4%0.3%11795
128.3% 9.0%20.4%11901
5.0%1.5%11930
11.0%1.6%12010
2.2%1.7%12043
128.4%19.4%6.2%11542
320.1% 205.2%31.0%50.9%11550
4.8%6.4%11743
4.5%4.5%11758
14.0%5.1%11772
3.4%0.7%11787
174.4%8.2%17.5%27103
1.4%6.7%27408
3.3%9.2%27514
178.7%8.4%21.5%27603
240.7% 104.2%4.9%52.0%27704
184.2% 268.0%12.6%39.8%28205
172.2% 148.9%7.0%37.2%28303
238.8% 2.7%51.6%28401
207.4% 2.5%44.8%28801
1.0%3.4%43015
0.7%1.8%43113
181.7% 147.3%2.8%20.9%43201
212.1% 173.6%3.3%24.4%43213
113.9% 115.7%2.2%13.1%43222
142.1%2.7%7.1%43528
345.2% 563.1%10.7%39.7%43604
166.0% 884.2%16.8%19.1%44052
687.8% 226.3%4.3%79.1%44103
1036.8%19.7%7.0%44109
1.2%0.4%44116
0.7%6.1%44139
337.3% 1.3%38.8%44146
0.9%6.0%44240
0.9%1.6%44256
0.7%3.2%44266
363.4% 1.9%41.8%44302
0.6%0.9%44410
540.0% 331.5%6.3%62.1%44507
0.8%2.5%44691
0.9%5.4%44709
0.8%0.2%44833
1.2%5.7%44906
142.1%2.7%8.9%45011
100.8% 1.1%11.6%45044
367.8% 1.5%42.3%45219
0.7%5.1%45238
0.9%0.8%45245
205.2% 231.5%4.4%23.6%45246
1.7%6.7%45324
333.9% 1.9%38.4%45402
0.9%3.5%45504
1.3%3.2%45701
12
ZiP BLaCk CoMP CoMPhiSPaniC
okLahoMaBlack Population 7.6%
Hispanic Population 5.2%
ZiP BLaCk CoMP CoMPhiSPaniC
oregonBlack Population 1.6%
Hispanic Population 8.0%
ZiP BLaCk CoMP CoMPhiSPaniC
PennSYLvaniaBlack Population 10.0%
Hispanic Population 3.2%
ZiP BLaCk CoMP CoMPhiSPaniC
PennSYLvania [ continued ]
ZiP BLaCk CoMP CoMPhiSPaniC
rhode iSLandBlack Population 4.5%
Hispanic Population 8.7%
ZiP BLaCk CoMP CoMPhiSPaniC
South CaroLinaBlack Population 29.5%
Hispanic Population 2.4%
ZiP BLaCk CoMP CoMPhiSPaniC
South dakotaBlack Population 0.6%
Hispanic Population 1.4%
ZiP BLaCk CoMP CoMPhiSPaniC
tenneSSeeBlack Population 16.4%
Hispanic Population 2.2%
4.0%4.1%74012
5.0%7.6%74105
125.0% 4.3%9.5%74107
106.5% 209.6%10.9%8.1%74120
2.4%6.2%73013
4.9%3.2%73069
263.1% 5.2%20.0%73103
259.2% 4.4%19.7%73110
211.5%11.0%5.5%73139
125.0% 268.7%21.5%2.0%97005
4.0%1.2%97015
118.7% 127.5%10.2%1.9%97030
118.7% 127.5%10.2%1.9%97030
167.5%13.4%0.6%97128
106.2% 6.5%1.7%97206
881.2% 4.2%14.1%97212
255.0%20.4%1.0%97305
3.9%1.5%97401
7.2%1.2%97402
3.9%0.1%97424
2.2%0.2%97439
7.6%0.8%97477
156.2%12.5%0.5%97501
3.4%0.6%97520
4.7%0.3%97526
3.7%0.3%97701
0.8%4.2%15017
0.9%4.6%15108
248.0% 1.1%24.8%15222
0.5%1.1%15501
0.6%1.9%15601
218.0% 2.0%21.8%15901
2.3%2.9%16801
1.4%3.4%17013
462.0% 187.5%6.0%46.2%17102
200.0%6.4%7.6%17202
128.1%4.1%2.8%17325
1.4%0.5%17331
1.0%0.5%17356
215.0% 443.7%14.2%21.5%17401
115.0% 759.3%24.3%11.5%17602
2.3%2.3%18045
199.0% 1428.1%45.7%19.9%18101
146.8%4.7%4.2%18360
3.0%8.7%18503
2.3%5.3%18701
1.5%1.7%18901
439.0% 1.2%43.9%19050
1.1%6.0%19063
1.6%2.8%19087
118.0% 118.7%3.8%11.8%19107
118.0% 118.7%3.8%11.8%19107
150.0%4.8%4.1%19152
3.2%5.6%19154
768.7%24.6%5.3%19311
228.0% 140.6%4.5%22.8%19320
2.5%6.4%19382
299.0% 278.1%8.9%29.9%19401
2.4%9.9%19426
109.0% 3.0%10.9%19464
110.0% 1343.7%43.0%11.0%19602
1.6%0.9%18951
4.1%2.9%18974
1.3%5.7%19002
147.0% 278.1%8.9%14.7%19007
140.6%4.5%5.9%19020
275.5% 174.7%15.2%12.4%02903
206.4% 1.6%60.9%29204
233.2% 1.5%68.8%29403
150.0% 1.3%0.9%57106
1.4%0.4%57702
325.6% 145.4%3.2%53.4%37203
251.2% 0.9%41.2%37914
343.9% 136.3%3.0%56.4%38112
ZiP BLaCk CoMP CoMPhiSPaniC
155.6%
13
texaSBlack Population 11.5%
Hispanic Population 32.0%
ZiP BLaCk CoMP CoMPhiSPaniC
texaS [ continued ]
ZiP BLaCk CoMP CoMPhiSPaniC
utahBlack Population 0.8%
Hispanic Population 9.0%
ZiP BLaCk CoMP CoMPhiSPaniC
verMontBlack Population 0.5%
Hispanic Population 0.9%
ZiP BLaCk CoMP CoMPhiSPaniC
virginiaBlack Population 19.6%
Hispanic Population 4.7%
168.6% 19.0%19.4%75110
16.1%10.4%75150
16.1%10.4%75150
208.6% 14.5%24.0%75160
115.6% 18.8%13.3%75165
236.5% 126.5%40.5%27.2%75231
236.5% 126.5%40.5%27.2%75231
770.4% 7.3%88.6%75237
126.2%40.4%9.8%75254
202.6% 4.1%23.3%75460
183.4% 10.5%21.1%75701
163.4% 11.9%18.8%75904
139.1% 124.0%39.7%16.0%76010
11.7%10.1%76015
6.7%3.5%76021
5.5%0.7%76028
497.3% 26.2%57.2%76104
27.9%3.3%76114
18.6%10.4%76116
482.6% 23.2%55.5%76119
11.5%7.9%76205
12.4%4.3%76240
14.2%17.9%76642
360.8% 16.4%41.5%76661
240.8% 22.8%27.7%76701
113.9% 28.1%13.1%76706
26.5%3.2%76901
268.7%86.0%1.8%77023
200.0%64.0%3.0%77037
113.0% 13.6%13.0%77068
222.8%71.3%9.0%77081
162.6% 13.3%18.7%77340
165.9%53.1%7.4%77471
144.3% 27.2%16.6%77477
22.5%10.7%77539
11.0%6.1%77802
256.2%82.0%1.9%78201
190.6%61.0%2.5%78212
31.1%9.3%78217
210.3%67.3%4.3%78223
199.0%63.7%7.9%78227
295.3%94.5%2.8%78237
187.1%59.9%4.7%78238
248.4%79.5%0.7%78332
206.8%66.2%3.9%78363
262.5%84.0%0.5%78501
291.8%93.4%0.3%78521
291.8%93.4%0.3%78521
280.3%89.7%1.4%78539
121.8%39.0%10.7%75041
26.9%9.6%75062
16.5%7.9%75067
28.5%9.5%75069
27.4%8.1%75074
27.4%8.1%75074
111.3% 15.4%12.8%75090
280.3%89.7%1.4%78539
232.1%74.3%0.9%78550
268.4%85.9%3.0%78580
304.3%97.4%0.2%78582
298.1%95.4%0.3%78589
275.9%88.3%0.2%78596
206.0% 211.5%67.7%23.7%78702
106.2%34.0%4.9%78704
100.3%32.1%11.5%78758
134.0%42.9%10.5%79412
110.9%35.5%9.9%79603
105.2% 156.8%50.2%12.1%79701
146.5%46.9%8.7%79761
276.2%88.4%0.3%78572
308.1%98.6%0.0%78579
117.7%10.6%0.4%84057
221.1%19.9%0.4%84060
3.3%0.3%84095
225.0% 132.2%11.9%1.8%84102
225.0% 132.2%11.9%1.8%84102
200.0% 236.6%21.3%1.6%84119
7.8%0.5%84321
175.0% 162.2%14.6%1.4%84403
8.4%0.3%84770
120.0% 111.1%1.0%0.6%05201
160.0% 155.5%1.4%0.8%05301
360.0% 155.5%1.4%1.8%05401
0.7%0.3%05478
111.1%1.0%0.5%05495
177.7%1.6%0.3%05641
0.8%0.4%05655
0.8%0.4%05701
180.0% 211.1%1.9%0.9%05753
120.0% 122.2%1.1%0.6%05855
229.7%10.8%3.3%22046
3.1%11.6%22901
1.6%13.1%23221
161.2% 4.5%31.6%23462
223.9% 3.0%43.9%23666
338.7% 1.2%66.4%24017
2.1%3.9%24060
ZiP BLaCk CoMP CoMPhiSPaniC
waShingtonBlack Population 3.2%
Hispanic Population 7.5%
14
ZiP BLaCk CoMP CoMPhiSPaniC
weSt virginiaBlack Population 3.2%
Hispanic Population 0.7%
ZiP BLaCk CoMP CoMPhiSPaniC
wiSConSinBlack Population 5.7%
Hispanic Population 3.6%
ZiP BLaCk CoMP CoMPhiSPaniC
wYoMingBlack Population 0.8%
Hispanic Population 6.4%
ZiP BLaCk CoMP CoMPhiSPaniC
waShington, dCBlack Population 60.0%
Hispanic Population 7.9%
275.0% 114.6%8.6%8.8%98003
130.6%9.8%2.9%98007
3.4%0.8%98027
3.6%1.3%98028
231.2% 6.1%7.4%98031
6.4%2.6%98036
3.7%2.0%98105
781.2% 6.9%25.0%98122
228.1% 6.1%7.3%98126
5.2%4.2%98133
6.6%3.5%98201
4.4%0.9%98225
2.8%0.3%98250
4.2%0.5%98271
310.6%23.3%0.6%98273
131.2% 5.7%4.2%98277
4.5%5.2%98310
170.6%12.8%1.4%98331
2.0%0.4%98362
3.9%2.4%98373
2.3%0.2%98382
4.1%2.9%98383
678.1% 6.0%21.7%98405
3.8%1.1%98501
120.0%9.0%0.3%98531
6.0%1.5%98584
4.2%1.9%98662
4.6%1.0%98686
384.0%28.8%1.6%98902
5.4%0.8%98926
888.0%66.6%0.4%98944
3.7%2.3%99163
2.7%0.9%99206
3.4%2.5%99207
3.4%2.5%99207
638.6%47.9%2.7%99301
248.0%18.6%1.2%99336
213.3%16.0%2.1%99362
0.6%1.0%26105
2.9%0.2%53038
177.7%6.4%0.9%53081
1.6%0.2%53090
400.0%14.4%0.9%53115
136.1%4.9%2.4%53142
266.6%9.6%1.0%53186
154.3% 3.4%8.8%53202
143.8% 1800.0%64.8%8.2%53204
1105.2% 286.1%10.3%63.0%53212
1328.0% 2.2%75.7%53216
3.2%2.1%53227
603.5% 144.4%5.2%34.4%53233
501.7% 427.7%15.4%28.6%53403
122.8% 130.5%4.7%7.0%53704
303.5% 419.4%15.1%17.3%53713
2.6%2.8%53901
108.3%3.9%0.3%53916
1.3%0.2%54166
2.2%0.5%54220
144.4%5.2%3.9%54301
0.9%0.3%54494
0.9%0.6%54703
0.6%0.2%54729
1.6%0.6%54902
2.2%1.1%54911
0.8%0.4%54913
2.6%1.6%54935
3.3%0.4%82604
162.8% 0.9%97.7%20019
7.4%5.2%20036
15
Chart 2 – indePendent aBortion CLiniC LoCationS
ZiP BLaCk CoMP CoMPhiSPaniC
aLaBaMaBlack Population 26.0%
Hispanic Population 1.7%
ZiP BLaCk CoMP CoMPhiSPaniC
aLaSkaBlack Population 3.5%
Hispanic Population 4.1%
ZiP BLaCk CoMP CoMPhiSPaniC
ariZonaBlack Population 3.1%
Hispanic Population 25.3%
129.0%
101.1%
ZiP BLaCk CoMP CoMPhiSPaniC
arkanSaSBlack Population 15.7%
Hispanic Population 3.2%
ZiP BLaCk CoMP CoMPhiSPaniC
CaLiforniaBlack Population 6.7%
Hispanic Population 32.4%
ZiP BLaCk CoMP CoMPhiSPaniC
CaLifornia [ continued ]
153.8% 152.9%2.6%40.0%35205
137.3% 1.7%35.7%35404
1.2%9.7%35801
1.1%7.4%36109
257.1% 185.3%7.6%9.0%99508
2.9%0.6%99611
129.0% 289.7%73.3%4.0%85006
29.2%3.8%85016
16.0%2.6%85018
25.6%3.8%85021
19.3%4.0%85712
2.6%14.2%72211
179.9%58.3%5.1%90005
191.0% 179.6%58.2%12.8%90007
1171.6% 14.3%78.5%90008
126.8% 19.6%8.5%90010
15.9%3.1%90025
284.8%92.3%1.5%90033
225.3% 29.2%15.1%90034
225.3% 29.2%15.1%90034
216.6%70.2%5.5%90057
216.6%70.2%5.5%90057
216.6%70.2%5.5%90057
216.6%70.2%5.5%90057
4.5%1.9%90211
4.5%1.9%90211
178.0%57.7%2.8%90241
295.0%95.6%0.7%90255
6.0%4.3%90292
17.3%3.5%90504
8.7%1.6%90505
104.9%34.0%4.5%91304
254.9%82.6%5.3%91331
129.3%41.9%4.2%91335
165.7%53.7%4.2%91345
13.1%3.8%91356
9.0%3.6%91403
181.4%58.8%6.0%91405
250.9%81.3%2.1%91744
186.1%60.3%6.2%91763
129.9%42.1%0.6%91770
186.4%60.4%4.5%91911
186.4%60.4%4.5%91911
186.4%60.4%4.5%91911
14.9%0.5%92024
149.6%48.5%2.1%92025
13.5%2.0%92078
12.7%2.5%92103
225.3% 149.3%48.4%15.1%92105
162.6% 24.4%10.9%92115
16.0%1.9%92117
9.3%2.9%92126
137.3% 14.4%9.2%92123
152.1%49.3%2.7%92234
214.9% 137.3%44.5%14.4%92408
139.8%45.3%6.0%92505
273.1%88.5%1.4%92701
273.1%88.5%1.4%92701
273.1%88.5%1.4%92701
139.1%45.1%2.7%92868
17.9%1.2%93065
168.6% 31.8%11.3%93301
102.9% 199.3%64.6%6.9%93701
142.2%46.1%4.2%94110
142.2%46.1%4.2%94110
265.6% 5.5%17.8%94115
265.6% 5.5%17.8%94115
122.8%39.8%4.5%94520
19.3%3.6%94538
192.5% 109.2%35.4%12.9%94541
7.8%1.1%94566
758.2% 12.6%50.8%94607
356.7% 6.9%23.9%94610
15.8%1.3%94954
199.0%64.5%2.9%95116
26.6%4.1%95204
104.9%34.0%4.5%91304
305.9% 133.9%43.4%20.5%90806
21.4%1.8%91203
28.5%1.4%91205
16
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
ColoradoBlack Population 3.8%
Hispanic Population 17.1%
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
CoNNeCtiCutBlack Population 9.1%
Hispanic Population 9.4%
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
delawareBlack Population 19.2%
Hispanic Population 4.8%
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
floridaBlack Population 14.6%
Hispanic Population 16.8%
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
CaliforNia [ continued ]
392.7% 3.2%75.4%19802
148.4% 4.4%28.5%19901
317.1% 3.4%46.3%32114
167.1% 3.9%24.4%32117
134.2% 5.5%19.6%32216
134.2% 5.5%19.6%32216
137.3% 16.4%9.2%95825
137.3% 16.4%9.2%95825
13.5%1.7%95928
5.7%1.0%96002
15.9%3.0%95355
7.0%1.1%95409
15.8%0.6%95437
8.7%1.8%95819
215.7% 6.8%8.2%80014
5.4%1.6%80111
1.0%3.8%80113
1.0%3.8%80113
176.3% 7.9%6.7%80206
6.7%1.6%80210
173.6% 11.4%6.6%80218
410.5% 16.7%15.6%80220
410.5% 16.7%15.6%80220
194.7% 125.1%21.4%7.4%80246
8.7%1.6%80301
9.7%0.8%80304
13.7%0.9%81501
5.7%0.6%81611
133.3%22.8%0.3%81621
7.9%0.4%81657
185.7% 614.8%57.8%16.9%06106
651.6% 403.1%37.9%59.3%06120
313.1% 231.9%21.8%28.5%06606
224.4%21.1%7.0%06810
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
florida [ continued ]
105.9%17.8%7.0%33021
308.9% 143.4%24.1%45.1%33023
112.5%18.9%13.3%33065
112.3% 267.2%44.9%16.4%33133
411.3%69.1%0.9%33134
552.9%92.9%2.3%33135
552.9%92.9%2.3%33135
423.9% 167.8%28.2%61.9%33136
255.3%42.9%12.0%33143
486.9% 110.7%18.6%71.1%33150
451.1%75.8%1.1%33155
332.8% 152.3%25.6%48.6%33162
332.8% 152.3%25.6%48.6%33162
332.8% 152.3%25.6%48.6%33162
369.6%62.1%5.4%33166
384.5%64.6%2.2%33173
439.8%73.9%2.8%33183
6.4%0.9%33308
556.8% 3.5%81.3%33311
465.0% 7.9%67.9%33313
465.0% 7.9%67.9%33313
132.1%22.2%5.4%33314
137.6% 104.1%17.5%20.1%33317
14.4%7.4%33321
14.4%7.4%33321
14.2%6.7%33324
127.9%21.5%12.3%33334
415.0% 9.3%60.6%33407
7.8%11.4%33606
127.3%21.4%7.0%33609
198.6% 106.5%17.9%29.0%33612
130.8% 101.7%17.1%19.1%33613
4.4%1.6%33710
6.1%9.4%33713
8.2%6.5%33756
3.8%0.8%33761
5.1%4.3%33813
151.3% 10.4%22.1%33901
4.8%1.5%33903
5.5%5.2%33952
5.2%0.9%34239
365.0% 4.5%53.3%34475
384.9% %18.1%56.2%34950
160.9% 6.7%23.5%32601
273.2% 4.1%39.9%32609
107.5% 14.2%15.7%32701
8.4%5.1%32803
9.7%5.3%32806
125.5%21.1%6.5%32812
535.7%90.0%1.6%33012
535.7%90.0%1.6%33012
537.5%90.3%1.5%33013
537.5%90.3%1.5%33013
123.9% 369.0%62.0%18.1%33015
107.7
134.2% 5.5%19.6%32216
322.6% 3.5%47.1%32301
2.7%12.1%32504
2.7%12.1%32504
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
iowaBlack Population 2.1%
Hispanic Population 2.8%
17
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
idaHoBlack Population 0.4%
Hispanic Population 7.9%
HawaiiBlack Population 1.8%
Hispanic Population
[ There are no independent facilities in this state. ]
7.2%
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
illiNoiSBlack Population 15.1%
Hispanic Population 12.3%
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
iNdiaNaBlack Population 8.4%
Hispanic Population 3.5%
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
KaNSaSBlack Population 5.7%
Hispanic Population 7.0%
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
KeNtuCKyBlack Population 7.3%
Hispanic Population 1.5%
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
louiSiaNaBlack Population 32.5%
Hispanic Population 2.4%
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
MaiNeBlack Population 0.5%
Hispanic Population 0.7%
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
MarylaNdBlack Population 27.9%
Hispanic Population 4.3%
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
georgiaBlack Population 28.7%
Hispanic Population 5.3%
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
iNdiaNa [ continued ]
304.5% 2.4%87.4%30349
2.5%10.5%30907
229.2% 1.4%65.8%31401
0.5%20.3%31904
311.4% 1.7%89.4%30035
196.2%10.4%26.0%30067
296.2%15.7%9.1%30076
364.1%19.3%9.9%30324
364.1%19.3%9.9%30324
460.3%24.4%16.2%30329
598.1%31.7%9.9%30341
598.1%31.7%9.9%30341
332.2%17.6%7.3%30342
150.0% 3.6%0.6%83702
10.5%2.7%60016
10.5%2.7%60016
195.9%24.1%1.0%60018
4.5%2.1%60137
108.9%13.4%0.5%60191
4.3%2.5%60516
3.2%3.1%60521
434.4% 113.8%14.0%65.6%60612
255.6% 9.1%38.6%60616
649.6% 0.7%98.1%60619
133.3%16.4%0.5%60630
544.3% 1.3%82.2%60637
6.6%0.4%60646
550.4%67.7%6.8%60647
550.4%67.7%6.8%60647
142.3% 5.9%21.5%60661
130.8%16.1%14.0%61104
1.4%5.6%61614
106.6% 5.5%16.1%61820
2.4%2.6%62040
135.7% 2.4%11.4%46219
457.1% 211.4%7.4%38.4%46222
2.8%4.0%46241
660.7% 211.4%7.4%55.5%46408
2.2%4.5%46635
2.3%4.9%46815
109.5 % 2.1%2.3%52245
712.2% 434.2%30.4%40.6%66101
1.2%1.5%66211
915.0% 140.0%2.1%66.8%40202
%2.5%2.7%40503 166.6
450.0%10.8%6.0%70002
156.9% 133.3%3.2%51.0%70115
156.9% 133.3%3.2%51.0%70115
225.2% 133.3%3.2%73.2%70122
138.7% 1.4%45.1%70806
108.3%2.6%27.1%71104
%3.2%23.9%71111 133.3
120.0% 157.1%1.1%0.6%04106
114.2%0.8%0.4%04330
160.0% %0.9%0.8%04401 128.5
254.1% 300.0%12.9%70.9%20710
130.2%5.6%15.5%20740
BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
MarylaNd [ continued ]
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
MiCHigaN [ continued ]
18
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
MaSSaCHuSettSBlack Population 5.4%
Hispanic Population 6.8%
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
MiCHigaNBlack Population 14.2%
Hispanic Population 3.3%
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
MiNNeSotaBlack Population 3.5%
Hispanic Population 2.9%
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
MiSSiSSiPPiBlack Population 36.3%
Hispanic Population 1.4%
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
MoNtaNaBlack Population 0.3%
Hispanic Population 2.0%
MiSSouriBlack Population 11.2%
Hispanic Population
[ There are no independent facilities in this state. ]
2.1%
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
NeBraSKaBlack Population 4.0%
Hispanic Population 5.5%
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
NevadaBlack Population 6.8%
Hispanic Population 19.7%
Statistics for this ZIP code were not available.*
ZiP
1.7%6.0%21236
2.1%16.3%21237
1.5%11.0%21740
130.2%5.6%15.5%20740
312.1% 2.4%87.1%20746
322.2% 1.3%89.9%20747
140.8% 944.1%40.6%39.3%20783
301.0% 3.1%84.0%20785
141.8%6.1%3.4%20814
195.3%8.4%10.1%20850
209.3%9.0%17.0%20874
637.2%27.4%17.7%20877
637.2%27.4%17.7%20877
3.0%24.9%21117
1.9%17.6%21228
1.1%0.7%01778
135.2%9.2%2.8%01830
4.8%3.2%01904
3.4%1.0%01960
3.72.4%02446
3.72.4%02446
3.72.4%02446
4.3%1.6%02703
1.2%3.8%48025
497.8% 1.0%70.7%48075
296.4% 1.1%42.1%48076
1.0%1.5%48093
118.3% 121.2%4.0%16.8%48108
3.1%1.4%48126
1.8%1.4%48152
2.5%6.2%48185
594.3% 0.8%84.4%48205
598.5% 1.0%85.0%48219
557.7% 1.1%79.2%48224
678.1% 0.6%96.3%48235
1.3%6.0%48302
1.2%1.2%48310
1.2%1.2%48310
1.2%1.7%48312
1.4%6.5%48322
2.9%1.1%48346
469.7% 2.0%66.7%48504
127.2%4.2%5.4%48603
384.8%12.7%13.1%48906
148.4%4.9%8.9%48917
2.4%6.3%49120
161.2% 166.6%5.5%22.9%49442
156.3% 463.6%15.3%22.2%49503
145.4%4.8%13.1%49508
137.1% 2.0%4.8%55422
0.9%1.9%55802
417.1% 337.9%9.8%14.6%55101
1040.0% 2.8%36.4%55402
797.1% 537.9%15.6%27.9%55404
797.1% 537.9%15.6%27.9%55404
0.5%35.3%39216
1.9%0.3%59047
1.8%0.3%59802
1.4%0.2%59901
157.5% 5.1%6.3%68005
277.9% 319.2%62.9%18.9%89030
89074 *
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
New jerSeyBlack Population 13.6%
Hispanic Population 13.3%
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
New MexiCoBlack Population 1.9%
Hispanic Population 42.1%
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
New yorKBlack Population 15.9%
Hispanic Population 15.1%
Statistics for this ZIP code were not available.*
*
19
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
New HaMPSHireBlack Population 0.7%
Hispanic Population 1.7%
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
Nevada [ continued ]
176.6%34.8%6.7%89104
122.0% 160.9%31.7%8.3%89119
89169
170.5%33.6%2.5%89502*
357.1% 405.8%6.9%2.5%03103
171.4% 1.5%1.2%03301
0.7%0.3%03840
668.3% 4.1%90.9%07018
7.9%1.7%07024
319.8% 5.7%43.5%07042
127.9% 10.0%17.4%07052
254.4% 224.8%29.9%34.6%07060
113.9% 9.3%15.5%07083
566.1%75.3%3.6%07087
9.8%8.1%07095
139.7% 321.0%42.7%19.0%07208
116.9% 218.0%29.0%15.9%07306
180.8% 194.7%25.9%24.6%07601
286.7% 163.9%21.8%39.0%07631
286.7% 163.9%21.8%39.0%07631
286.7% 163.9%21.8%39.0%07631
4.9%1.1%07652
103.7%13.8%0.8%07657
5.7%3.7%07731
3.5%5.5%08002
2.7%3.8%08034
2.5%8.0%08043
6.3%11.3%08201
4.3%4.8%08540
4.3%2.7%08755
4.2%2.8%08816
3.7%2.2%08865
208.3% 8.8%28.3%08873
221.0% 163.4%68.8%4.2%87102
221.0% 163.4%68.8%4.2%87102
124.7%52.5%0.7%87505
174.8%73.6%1.0%88008
289.9% 364.2%55.0%46.1%10451
173.5% 494.7%74.7%27.6%10455
173.5% 494.7%74.7%27.6%10455
227.6% 409.9%61.9%36.2%10457
145.9% 389.4%58.8%23.2%10458
172.1%26.0%4.9%10461
172.1%26.0%4.9%10461
11.9%7.7%10605
11.2%10.9%10710
5.5%1.7%10950
3.4%1.2%11030
158.4% 236.4%35.7%25.2%11101
130.1% 14.4%20.7%11201
130.1% 14.4%20.7%11201
130.1% 14.4%20.7%11201
423.8%64.0%6.0%11232
244.0% 7.0%38.8%11234
527.1%79.6%10.1%11237
125.1%18.9%4.4%11354
7.7%2.0%11364
373.5%56.4%2.9%11372
373.5%56.4%2.9%11372
373.5%56.4%2.9%11372
373.5%56.4%2.9%11372
373.5%56.4%2.9%11372
285.4%43.1%2.0%11373
13.1%2.6%11374
10.2%2.5%11375
10.2%2.5%11375
186.0%28.1%4.1%11417
12.7%6.8%11746
3.4%0.7%11787
4.7%1.3%11788
1.0%1.2%13057
1.0%1.2%13057
13851
235.8% 2.8%37.5%14214
1.8%5.7%14228
1.7%2.3%14618
5.1%14.1%14620
5.1%14.1%14620
133.1%20.1%9.8%10001
7.6%4.4%10003
4.7%4.8%10013
7.9%5.2%10016
5.4%3.4%10017
5.4%3.4%10017
5.4%3.4%10017
4.8%1.2%10022
8.3%5.5%10023
11.1%5.9%10024
8.7%4.9%10128
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
PeNNSylvaNiaBlack Population 10.0%
Hispanic Population 3.2%
20
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
NortH daKotaBlack Population 0.6%
Hispanic Population 1.2%
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
oHioBlack Population 11.5%
Hispanic Population 1.9%
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
oKlaHoMaBlack Population 7.6%
Hispanic Population 5.2%
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
oregoNBlack Population 1.6%
Hispanic Population 8.0%
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
rHode iSlaNdBlack Population 4.5%
Hispanic Population 8.7%
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
SoutH CaroliNaBlack Population 29.5%
Hispanic Population 2.4%
SoutH daKotaBlack Population 0.6%
Hispanic Population
[ There are no independent facilities in this state. ]
1.4%
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
teNNeSSeeBlack Population 16.4%
Hispanic Population 2.2%
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
texaSBlack Population 11.5%
Hispanic Population 32.0%
ZiP BlaCK CoMP CoMPHiSPaNiC
NortH CaroliNaBlack Population 21.6%
Hispanic Population 4.7%
Statistics for this ZIP code were not available.*
195.7%9.2%14.9%27609
3.3%12.1%28211
3.3%12.1%28211
131.9% 127.6%6.0%28.5%28273
113.8% 4.5%24.6%28306
113.4% 161.7%7.6%24.5%28546
207.4% 2.5%44.8%28801
142.5%6.7%21.1%27262
245.8% 2.4%53.1%27406
116.6% 146.8%6.9%25.2%27407
3.3%9.2%27514
138.2%6.5%13.3%27606
4.6%11.0%27607
133.3% 108.3%1.3%0.8%58102
709.5% 1.5%81.6%43205
1.2%2.9%43214
163.4% 152.6%2.9%18.8%43231
345.2% 563.1%10.7%39.7%43604
231.5%4.4%5.6%43612
1036.8%19.7%7.0%44109
663.4% 1.1%76.3%44120
264.3% 121.0%2.3%30.4%44304
1.1%3.6%45241
1.7%6.7%45324
1.0%1.0%45429
4.9%3.2%73069
181.5% 109.6%5.7%13.8%73132
109.6%5.7%6.6%74135
192.5%15.4%0.4%97116
331.2% 5.1%5.3%97205
3.0%1.6%97210
3.9%1.5%97401
512.0% 1.5%51.2%15206
512.0% 1.5%51.2%15206
248.0% 1.1%24.8%15222
355.0% 118.7%3.8%35.5%17110
2.7%1.6%18104
18109
758.0% 162.5%5.2%75.8%19013
2.9%6.3%19106
833.0% 2.5%83.3%19141
*
411.1% %26.5%18.5%02905 304.5
104.0% 1.6%30.7%29407
155.9% 2.3%46.0%29605
114.0% 454.5%10.0%18.7%37211
0.6%2.3%37620
0.9%1.1%37643
1.4%7.4%37916
1.9%4.3%37919
167.6% 154.5%3.4%27.5%38104
167.6% 154.5%3.4%27.5%38104
6.2%1.6%75205
236.5% 126.5%40.5%27.2%75231
219.6%70.3%9.9%75235
294.7% 14.4%33.9%75243
12.6%4.3%76108
196.2%62.8%4.8%76110
224.3% 14.8%25.8%76542
ZiP BLacK coMP coMPhisPanic
texas [ continued ]
ZiP BLacK coMP coMPhisPanic
virginia [ continued ]
21
ZiP BLacK coMP coMPhisPanic
utahBlack Population 0.8%
Hispanic Population 9.0%
ZiP BLacK coMP coMPhisPanic
virginiaBlack Population 19.6%
Hispanic Population 4.7%
verMontBlack Population 0.5%
Hispanic Population
[ There are no independent facilities in this state. ]
0.9%
ZiP BLacK coMP coMPhisPanic
washingtonBlack Population 3.2%
Hispanic Population 7.5%
ZiP BLacK coMP coMPhisPanic
west virginiaBlack Population 3.2%
Hispanic Population 0.7%
ZiP BLacK coMP coMPhisPanic
wisconsinBlack Population 5.7%
Hispanic Population 3.6%
ZiP BLacK coMP coMPhisPanic
wyoMingBlack Population 0.8%
Hispanic Population 6.4%
ZiP BLacK coMP coMPhisPanic
washington, dcBlack Population 60.0%
Hispanic Population 7.9%
Statistics for this ZIP code were not available.*
160.8% 0.9%96.5%20020
161.6% 0.8%97.0%20032
5.6%7.1%20037
353.0% 22.0%40.6%77002
629.5% 11.8%72.4%77004
135.0%43.2%4.2%77008
587.8% 31.1%67.6%77026
22.6%4.7%77057
177.3% 135.0%43.2%20.4%77074
177.3% 135.0%43.2%20.4%77074
225.9%72.3%8.0%77076
152.1% 18.4%17.5%77090
17.8%2.2%77098
7.9%1.0%77401
207.8% 7.2%23.9%77707
190.6%61.0%2.5%78212
190.6%61.0%2.5%78212
194.7% 137.5%44.0%22.4%78222
187.1%59.9%4.7%78238
132.8%42.5%5.3%78240
132.8%42.5%5.3%78240
201.8%64.6%1.9%78404
262.5%84.0%0.5%78501
232.1%74.3%0.9%78550
106.2%34.0%4.9%78704
9.8%2.8%78750
162.6% 120.3%38.5%18.7%78753
237.8%76.1%1.5%79902
237.8%76.1%1.5%79902
137.5% 8.9%1.1%84107
425.0% 256.6%23.1%3.4%84111
3.6%0.5%84124
302.1%14.2%12.4%20110
206.3%9.7%7.5%22030
293.6%13.8%5.5%22031
229.7%10.8%3.3%22046
124.4% 319.1%15.0%24.4%22304
114.2% 108.5%5.1%22.4%22314
3.1%11.6%22901
227.5% 1.9%44.6%23220
1.9%5.0%23229
128.0% 2.9%25.1%23601
231.6% 2.4%45.4%24016
4.3%17.9%23452
245.9% 3.2%48.2%23502
121.4% 4.1%23.8%23518
98057
328.1% 5.1%10.5%98101
625.0% 7.2%20.0%98104
3.0%1.9%98115
781.2% 6.9%25.0%98122
781.2% 6.9%25.0%98122
678.1% 6.0%21.7%98405
350.0% 6.9%11.2%98418
*
415.6% 0.5%13.3%25302
203.1% 142.8%1.0%6.5%25304
154.3% 3.4%8.8%53202
144.4%5.2%3.9%54301
3.6%1.7%54303
%8.1%0.2%83001 126.5
22
analysis & conclusion
It is important to remember that every time there is a
figure in the “coMP” column, that figure represents
a population control facility in a ZIP code that is
disproportionately black, disproportionately Hispanic
or, in many cases, both.
The fact is that even a cursory scan of those columns
takes the allegations of racial targeting made in
Maafa 21 and transforms them into an observable
and undeniable reality.
The numbers are staggering. As just one example,
consider Texas which has 94 Zip codes with at least
one population control facility. Of those, only 22 are
not disproportionately black and/or Hispanic.
As the charts demonstrate, similar patterns are found
across the country and they do not vary appreciably
by the size of the state. In Connecticut – a state
thoroughly dissimilar from Texas in size, culture and
geography – there are 21 Zip codes in which
population control facilities are located and only six
are not disproportionately black and/or Hispanic.
It is also important to note the number of times there
are multiple facilities in disproportionately minority
ZIP codes. For example, in New Jersey, ZIP code
07631 has a black population 286.7% of the state’s
overall percentage and a Hispanic population
163.9% of the state. That ZIP code alone has four
population control facilities. Similarly, Minnesota ZIP
code 55404 has a black population that is 797.1% of
the overall state percentage and a Hispanic
population 537.9% of the state. In that ZIP code
there are three population control centers.
Again, this pattern is repeated in state after state.
We identified 116 ZIP codes with more than one
population control facility. Of those, 84 were
disproportionately black and/or Hispanic. What this
means is that, when the American family planning
industry places multiple facilities in a ZIP code, that
ZIP code is more than two-and-a-half times as likely
to be disproportionately minority as not.
What we now know – and have documented – is that
there is not one state in the union without population
control centers located in ZIP codes with higher
percentages of blacks and/or Hispanics than the
state’s overall percentage. In fact, Hawaii is the only
state that does not have facilities located in ZIP
codes exceeding 125% of their overall percentage.
Not only is this racial targeting widespread, it’s scale
is often enormous. We found 42 states with family
planning facilities in ZIP codes where the black
and/or Hispanic populations exceeds 200% of the
state’s overall percentage. More telling is that these
percentages routinely go far beyond even this level.
Numerous states have facilities in ZIP codes that
range from 250% to well over 1,000% and it is not
uncommon for them to have facilities located in
many such ZIP codes.
In the end, this data speaks for itself and does not
require a lot of analysis. The numbers make it clear
that the African-American and Hispanic communities
have been targeted and logic makes it clear that this
did not happen coincidentally or unintentionally.
It should also be noted that this eugenics effort is
being funded with taxpayer money. Currently,
Planned Parenthood alone receives approximately
one million dollars a day from the federal government
plus an unknown amount in state and local funds.
Moreover, this has been going on for decades.
For years, there have been those within the American
political system who have taken action to address
the disproportionate treatment of minorities. Earlier,
this issue was raised in the context of alcohol and
tobacco marketing but, make no mistake, it exists in
many other parts of our culture as well.
Now, this report validates the revelations contained
in Maafa 21 to create a new challenge. The question
becomes whether the political leaders who have so
righteously spoken out against these other injustices,
will remain silent in the face of this one. Should that
be their decision, they will surrender their credibility
and lose the right to ever again be outraged.
Maafa 21 information
This 2-hour and 17-minute documentary
is available on DVD for $20 including shipping.
To place an order, call toll-free or go online.
1 | 800 | 800-5433
Maafa21.com
This website also features a short trailer
of the film plus comments from
previous viewers.
For additional information, call
940 | 380-8800
Copyright 2011
Life dynamics incorporated
Post Office Box 2226
Denton, Texas
76202
940 | 380-8800
This report was funded by the supporters
of Life Dynamics Incorporated.
Life Dynamics Incorporated is a
501(c)(3) corporation and
donations may be
tax deductible.
top related