When the Congressional Budget Office released its cost estimate for the Senate’s immigration bill, pro-amnesty Republicans excitedly promoted the CBO’s conclusion that S.744 would reduce federal budget deficits by $197 billion through 2023.
These same Republicans were less enthusiastic when the CBO released a cost estimate of the House bill to ban abortions from being performed 20 weeks or more after fertilization. The CBO found that H.R. 1797 would add to federal budget deficits. Here is their reasoning:
CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 1797 would increase direct spending, primarily for Medicaid in order to cover the costs of additional births under the act. … Under H.R. 1797, some abortions would be averted: some women who would have sought an abortion 20 weeks or more after fertilization under current law would instead carry those pregnancies to term (while other women would have abortions earlier in their pregnancies). 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. In addition, some of those children would themselves qualify for Medicaid and possibly for other federal programs as well.
So basically what the CBO is saying is that aborting Americans is a boon to the country’s bottom line since the federal government doesn’t have to pick up the tab for childbirth and children’s health care. Doubling our immigration is also a boon to America’s bottom line since most immigrants come to the country not only already born, but also ready to work.
If reducing federal budget deficits were someone’s goal then, the ideal public policy would be to legalize and promote abortion-on-demand while also opening our borders. That way we could maximize cheap abortions, minimize costly births, while still keeping a steady flow of new taxpayers.
Thankfully no conservative is actually advocating this.