The decision by the US Supreme Court to overturn Roe vs. Wade and Planned Parenthood vs. Casey is one of the greatest victories for morality and justice since Brown vs. Board of Education. To the Court’s everlasting credit, it demolished the fiction that abortion was a Constitutional right and that functioning societies had ever endorsed the killing of babies.
Since that time, we’ve seen the pro-abort left ratchet up several lines of attack they’ve used in the past. They’ve falsely claimed that pro-life people don’t care about babies once they are born. They’ve stepped up their assault on crisis pregnancy centers. Now they are trying out one rarely used in the past. GOP No Longer Cares About The Deficit If It Means Women Having More Babies bleats a Huffington Post headline.
Many Republicans hailed the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision as a victory for one of their highest-profile priorities: ending abortion. But it comes with a string attached — more federal spending, which Republicans usually hate.
House Budget Chairman John Yarmuth (D-Ky.) said he’d like to see Congress’ fiscal umpire, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, put pen to paper on the impact of Dobbs.
“I would welcome a CBO score as another way to qualify the damage the Dobbs decision will do to women across the country,” the Kentucky Democrat told HuffPost.
But for a party that has been so quick to raise the alarm on federal spending over programs like expanding the child tax credit, Republicans are noticeably quiet about the financial cost that outlawing abortion will have.
Exactly how much more Medicaid spending Dobbs will entail is unclear. In the past, the CBO has estimated that bills restricting access to abortion would increase births and boost Medicaid spending.
Those increases, though, have been relatively small compared to the program’s overall outlays. A House Republican bill in 2015 to defund Planned Parenthood would have increased Medicaid spending by $650 million over 10 years. A 2017 GOP bill to restrict abortions after 20 weeks would have increased Medicaid spending by $175 million over 10 years, but the boost in spending could have been as much as $335 million if more people than projected carried their pregnancies to term instead of ending them before 20 weeks.
Dobbs’ impact may be several orders of magnitude higher. Taking the Kaiser estimate of $18,865 in birth costs, multiplying that by consulting firm Sg2′s high estimate of extra births and assuming the proportion of Medicaid deliveries stayed the same, the annual tab would be about $1.3 billion a year, or $13 billion over 10 years.
The argument is something of a twofer. It claims that Republicans don’t really care about the deficit. At the same time, it can roll in the “Republicans don’t care about children after birth” garbage by pointing to Republican opposition to Biden’s perpetual “child tax credit.”
Comparing human lives to the deficit is nothing short of obscene. If we take this argument to its logical conclusion, we can say that Republicans don’t care about the deficit because they don’t support mandatory euthanasia. Estimates show that over 25% of all Medicare costs occur in the last year of life. Medicare is a much larger share of healthcare costs ($829 billion annually for Medicare versus $671 billion for Medicaid). If we are going to kill babies based on the cost of delivery, we might as well go whole hog and start killing off the elderly when they are sick. That would save billions in Social Security payments, too.
This analysis, such as it is, misses the approximately $400,000 in taxes paid by the one million new taxpayers born each year over a lifetime. It ignores the potential wealth never generated by the labor of 60 million Americans slaughtered since Roe was wrongly decided. It misses the families that were never created because of a half-century of abortion and the never-born children from those families.
Submitting abortion to quantitative analysis doesn’t even begin to take into consideration the damage done to our society by the corruption of its morals by abortion. It ignores the psychic cost inflicted on women and men who’ve made the awful decision to kill a child for whatever the reason. You can’t run a cost-benefit analysis on human life because it is God-given. It doesn’t matter if the life is that of an unborn baby or someone in an ICU. Our obligation and our default position have to be the preservation of life.
At one time, many of us thought that pro-aborts might conceivably be well-intentioned people who were misguided. Since the end of Roe, we’ve learned that we were wrong. This kind of argumentation shows they are evil, if not outright demonic. It shows they never cared about “bodily autonomy” or the other bullsh** they slung about; they were really for killing babies.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member