Taxpayer-Funded Abortion

It comes as no surprise but it does break the heart: The Statesman reports that Travis County residents will continue to be forced to fund abortions.

Half a million dollars of taxpayers' property taxes will be available to abortion providers after Thursday's vote by the board of Central Health, formerly called the Travis County Healthcare District. 

According to the Statesman, most of the communication to the Board was in opposition to using property taxes to pay for abortion, and most of those in attendance at the meeting were in opposition as well.  No matter.  The Board required that the same number speak for it as against it, and then the Board--unelected by taxpayers--voted unanimously to keep using taxpayers' property taxes for abortions.

"This is a hard issue for the community ... and for me personally," one board member told the Statesman. "In my view and in most instances, abortion is wrong." But, he said, abortions are legal and "we're not a church."

I am genuinely grateful that the member's personal view is that abortion is wrong. In terms of setting public policy, however, he says he based his decision on the fact that abortions are legal and there's a difference between church and state.

Let's break that down.

"Abortions are legal"

Does the bare legality of abortion serve as a stable foundation for government-funding of abortion? Not in any other government entity in Texas, and not nationally thanks to the Hyde Amendment prohibiting federal funding of abortion (a provision that may go away during current debates about health care in the U.S. Senate).  In fact, refusing to provide government funding in no way denies accessibility to abortion.  On the other hand, taking money from residents through tax law and using it to fund abortions makes residents complicit in a procedure the majority of them find objectionable.

In short, the Board's vote on Thursday was not on whether abortion would be legal in Travis County. The vote was whether taxpayers would be forced to pay for it.

This was obscured by Austin Democrats Sen. Kirk Watson and Rep. Elliott Naishtat.  "We know from history that when you remove a safe and legal option," they wrote to the Board, "you can create an environment of desperation that leads to choices that can put a woman's health and safety in danger."

Their letter incorrectly assumes that this was a debate over whether to "remove a safe and legal option."  We can have a conversation about that another day. Thursday's Board vote was whether to make Travis County residents pay for this "safe and legal option." The Board decided residents should be made to do so.

"We're not a church"

The board member quoted in the Statesman said another reason the Board proceeded in favor of the contracts with abortion providers is because "we're not a church." 

Indeed. And yet no one was asking his Board to perform the church's job. The church's job is evangelism and discipleship; the state's job is order and justice.  When we speak to state officials on the topic of abortion, we're not asking them to do the church's job. We're asking them to do their job. 

Let's look for the day when that job is dutifully performed.