Up until now, the U.S. tax code has failed to acknowledge the unborn child — all while granting tax breaks for those seeking an abortion under the pretense of “healthcare.” According to page five of IRS publication 502, “you can include in medical expenses the amount you pay for a legal abortion.”
Thus, after House Republicans included language in their recent tax bill that allows for parents to start a tax-exempt 529 college savings account for an unborn child, it is no wonder that the abortion lobby — including the nation’s largest abortion provider Planned Parenthood and President Obama’s former Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services Acting Administrator Andy Slavitt — were quick to criticize. Even top pro-abortion Democrat Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Col.) mocked the proposal by asking: “What’s next, giving a Social Security number to a zygote?”
{mosads}Most would think that these organizations and individuals would be supportive of any proposal that allows parents to save for their child’s college schooling. However, the abortion industry serves a higher purpose than higher education: Abortion on demand. In many cases, abortion proponents even see carrying the baby to terms as a threat to women’s health.
Despite Marist polling that shows nearly 8-in-10 Americans believe laws can protect both the well-being of a woman and the life of her unborn child, our current health care system reflects this unfortunate “abortion on demand” paradigm.
This default position in favor of death has its origins with the 1973 Supreme Court decisions of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton that allowed for abortion at all stages of development. By 1980, when the Hyde Amendment first took effect, barring taxpayer funding for abortion, taxpayers were unknowingly funding the death of 300,000 children annually.
However, subsequent court rulings, such as Planned Parenthood Affiliates of Michigan v. Engler, yet again furthered the Supreme Court’s decision on Roe by ruling that comprehensive health services authorized by Congress must pay for “medically necessary abortions,” unless Congress expressly prohibits abortion funding — making abortion once again synonymous with health care in America.
In 2010 the passage of President Obama’s healthcare legislation greatly changed the way tax dollars support abortion. Knowing the Hyde Amendment only applies to health programs administered under the Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and related Agencies Appropriations Act, the authors of ObamaCare wrote the bill to bypass prohibitions on direct taxpayer funding of abortion.
Because the health care exchanges and other programs authorized and appropriated under Obamacare are separate from all other appropriations laws they are not covered by the Hyde protections. The Secretary of the Treasury makes monthly advance payments with U.S. taxpayer funds to insurance companies or to exchanges to pay for health insurance plans that subsidize abortion on demand; a tax policy that is out of step with the more than six in ten Americans who oppose the use of tax dollars to fund abortions in the United States.
A child in the womb is as human as you or I. House Ways and Means Chairman Kevin Brady (R-Texas) deserves praise for including language in this tax bill that recognizes the personhood of unborn children by allowing expectant parents to contribute to their child’s 529 education savings account in the year prior to birth. This language merely reflects the view of most Americans — that expectant parents are expecting the birth of a baby, not the birth of a zygote as Rep. DeGette would lead you to believe.
The American experience has always been one of hope for future generations — our laws should reflect that hope and not the cynicism of abortion.
Tom McClusky is the President of March for Life Action.