But if we want to reduce abortions, we should pay for them. And for health care. For everyone:
Increasing health-care coverage is one of the most powerful tools for reducing the number of abortions -- a fact proved by years of experience in other industrialized nations. All the other advanced, free-market democracies provide health-care coverage for everybody. And all of them have lower rates of abortion than does the United States.
...The latest United Nations comparative statistics, available at http:/
/, demonstrate the point clearly. The U.N. data measure the number of abortions for women ages 15 to 44. They show that Canada, for example, has 15.2 abortions per 1,000 women; Denmark, 14.3; Germany, 7.8; Japan, 12.3; Britain, 17.0; and the United States, 20.8. When it comes to abortion rates in the developed world, we're No. 1 [T. R. Reid, "Universal Health Care Tends to Cut the Abortion Rate," Washington Post, 2010.03.14]. data.un.org
The U.N. must just be lying. How could universal health care have any connection with reducing abortions? Let's get English Cardinal Basil Hume to straighten us out:
In Britain, only 8 percent of the population is Catholic (compared with 25 percent in the United States). Abortion there is legal. Abortion is free. And yet British women have fewer abortions than Americans do. I asked Cardinal Hume why that is.
The cardinal said that there were several reasons but that one important explanation was Britain's universal health-care system. "If that frightened, unemployed 19-year-old knows that she and her child will have access to medical care whenever it's needed," Hume explained, "she's more likely to carry the baby to term. Isn't it obvious?" [Reid, 2010]
Yes, it is obvious. Cut the bull and abortions: tell Johnson, Thune, and Herseth Sandlin to pass health reform now.