Good news from the CBO: Late-term abortions reduce the deficit
posted at 2:16 pm on July 9, 2013 by Guy Benson
The CBO has also concluded that aborting babies at 20 weeks or later in pregnancy saves money for the government-run federal-state Medicaid system. The CBO made these determinations when doing its official “Cost Estimate” of a federal bill that would prohibit abortions at 20 weeks or later into pregnancy (except in cases of reported rape, incest against a minor or to save the life of the mother). “Because the costs of about 40 percent of all births are paid for by the Medicaid program, CBO estimates that federal spending for Medicaid will rise to the extent that enacting H.R. 1797 results in additional births and deliveries relative to current law,” says CBO. “H.R. 1790 would result in increased spending for Medicaid,” says CBO. “Since a portion of Medicaid is paid for by state governments, CBO estimates that state spending on the program would increase by about $170 million over the 2014-2023 period.”
Over at Townhall, I ask a few questions about the ethics of producing such a score. For instance:
- If late-term abortions “reduce the deficit,” how much would we “save” by aborting more children? How many of abortions would it take to make the whole enterprise deficit neutral? And while we’re at it, why limit this experiment to very young human life? Surely the active killing of at least some indigent and infirm Americans would produce deficit savings, right?
- Also, since we’re indulging these amoral calculations, perhaps CBO could project the potential economic benefits and budgetary savings from the hypothetical re-institution of slavery. Second look at indentured servitude, CBO?
Click through for a quasi-summary of the phone call I received from a CBO spokesperson, who insisted that our discussion be off the record. In short: They’re bound by law to score legislation after it’s been reported out of committee, although sometimes members make informal requests for scores on particular bills. I asked if any such request was made on this legislation, and if so, by whom. CBO would not comment. As for the “we’re mandated to do this” explanation — which seems entirely plausible — why can’t I find the score for the Senate Judiciary Committee-passed Assault Weapons Ban of 2013 (S. 150)? Applying CBO’s logic, wouldn’t gun deaths reduce the deficit, too?
Recently in the Green Room:
- Sunday reflection: Matthew 4:1-11
- Rand Paul wins CPAC straw poll
- Real question: Does Obama’s budget fund overseas abortions to protect endangered animals?
- Photo of the day: Crimea now belongs to Russia, at least on Russian propaganda TV
- Vatican: Pope Francis wasn’t talking about same-sex relationships; Update: “Civil unions” explained