Taking a straightforward approach to this issue, we can say that unless more women produce more babies, we shall all be in big trouble. As a nation, the average age is increasing rapidly as the boomers approach retirement age. This is going to place an ever greater strain on the people still working as more tax revenue will be required to pay for the healthcare of our retirees. So, from a strictly economic point of view, we can side with the policies maximizing fertility and promoting childbearing to all couples. Unfortunately, this gets mixed up in the pro-life, anti-abortion stance of many Republicans. As it stands, their view is not wholly rational. From a moral stance, the largely Christian right is hostile to any policy that terminates a pregnancy. There are also objections to the use of contraceptives. Yet there’s equal hostility to any suggestion that taxes should increase to cover the rising costs of caring for the retirees. The assumption seems to be that our seniors should all be prepared to pay their own way out of savings. The “little government” movement wants all public services cut back and all entitlement programs severely limited.
In the recent recall elections in Wisconsin, one of the issues was the cuts to the clinics and programs offering help and support to women. Governor Walker had cut several million from the family planning programs. This is somewhat ironic because Obamacare will require insurance companies to cover the cost of birth control. In practical terms, this puts Wisconsin on a collision course with the federal government because his policies aim to eliminate birth control services in his state. When you take an axe to a range of services that advise thousands on how to avoid unwanted pregnancies, deal with sexually transmitted diseases including HIV, and screen for cervical cancer, this sends a very clear message to women on the priority accorded their reproductive health.
Not surprisingly, Right to Life groups around America actively campaign for all states to adopt this approach. Although, naturally, the focus falls on abortion, when clinics close through a lack of funding, all their other services are lost to the community. Taking nothing away from the strength of their moral conviction, there’s no attempt to cost the drain on public funds when unplanned pregnancies come to term. Many of the mothers have no access to insurance so their medical care and the care of the children comes out of public funds. If these women do not work, there’s a further drain through benefits. We may not like entitlement programs, but we should not ignore them when calculating the costs of policy proposals.
Under Obamacare, there’s a new accent on preventative care. The earlier the diagnosis, the more cost-effective the treatment. If access to reproductive care is also classified as preventative, this will have profound implications for the health insurance debate. This will open up a new war of words between the liberal establishment that favors funding women’s healthcare, and the GOP which campaigns aggressively to withdraw funding from any healthcare service that directly or indirectly supports abortion or fails to emphasize abstinence rather than contraception. So, because these health insurance issues should be resolved during 2012, we can expect men to begin debating how much healthcare women should receive.
