Posted on 03/02/2016 4:43:00 PM PST by Kaslin
Conservatives usually are not fans of arbitrary, heavy-handed, anti-competitive, counterproductive regulations. But as a case the Supreme Court will hear Wednesday shows, they make an exception for abortion.
That's because these regulations, ostensibly aimed at making abortion safer, are actually aimed at making abortion rare. While suppressing economic activity is an unwanted side effect of the regulations conservatives tend to criticize, it is the whole point of the Texas law they are defending.
That law, H.B. 2, requires every doctor who works at an abortion clinic to have admitting privileges at a hospital no more than 30 miles away and requires every abortion clinic to meet the standards of an ambulatory surgical center. Neither mandate makes sense as a health regulation, but together they should be pretty effective at discouraging abortions.
Before H.B. 2 was enacted in 2013, Texas had more than 40 abortion clinics. Almost half of them closed as the admitting-privileges requirement was implemented, and that number will be cut in half again if the ASC rules take effect.
The supposed health benefits of that shakeout are illusory, since abortion was already a very safe procedure and there is no reason to think the new mandates will make it safer. "Studies consistently report the rate of major complications during or after an abortion as less than one-half of one percent," the clinics challenging H.B. 2 note. The mortality rate in Texas before H.B. 2 was 0.27 per 100,000 abortions, making abortion 100 times safer than giving birth by that measure.
In the unlikely event of serious complications, the patient will be treated at the nearest hospital, regardless of whether the doctor who performed the abortion has admitting privileges there. Furthermore, as the appeals court that upheld H.B. 2 conceded, the ability to obtain admitting privileges may depend on various factors that have nothing to do with the doctor's competence.
Requiring abortion clinics to spend millions of dollars so they can qualify as surgical centers likewise is hard to justify as a safety measure, since abortions do not require incisions or suturing and are no more dangerous than various other procedures commonly performed in doctors' offices, such as vasectomies and colonoscopies. Texas is requiring even clinics that do nothing but administer abortifacient drugs to meet the prohibitively expensive ASC standards, which makes even less sense.
Far from protecting women, these overbearing rules are likely to undermine their safety. Making abortions harder to obtain is apt to encourage dangerous self-induced abortions, delay the procedure (which makes complications more likely), and result in more births (which are much riskier than abortions).
"The health and safety of abortion patients would be best served by a free market constricted only by evidence-based regulations," Freedom and Individual Rights in Medicine argues in a brief that I joined. "Unjustifiable government regulation creates obstacles to free market processes, resulting in increased costs and decreased supply without providing improvements in health care quality or availability."
Conservatives surely understand these points, which they frequently make in connection with other kinds of regulation. But regulatory excess is desirable when your goal is preventing people from exchanging money for a service you consider morally abhorrent.
Supporters of H.B. 2 are not supposed to admit that's their goal, since the Supreme Court's blessing hinges on pretending it isn't. According to the Court, regulations that "serve no purpose other than to make abortions more difficult" are unconstitutional.
But sometimes the truth slips out. After the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit upheld H.B. 2 in 2014, Rick Perry, then governor of Texas, welcomed the decision as a victory for "the culture of life."
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who cosponsored H.B. 2 as a state legislator, describes it as "the landmark legislation to protect the lives of unborn children." Another cosponsor, Texas Comptroller Glenn Hegar, says H.B. 2 is "widely recognized as the toughest pro-life legislation in United States history." But don't tell the Supreme Court.
What happens if a women develops complications during an abortion? Should the abortionist just throw her out into the parking lot?
You don’t read this in the MSM but women are injured and die from complications during abortions. Particularly in unsanitary abortion clinics.
Got to admit, this flushes out cases of heart hardness that rivals diamonds.
It’s a hide and seek game of known wickedness, a rotten Kabuki theater.
There used to be rumored the existence of a being who could help this kind of evil situation. But ever since the state support for proclaiming this being became scanty, we haven’t been hearing a lot about it.
Churches have fallen asleep at the wheel too.
Ridiculous.
Abortion is killing and only the mentally ill or morally bankrupt would support it and try to demonize those who oppose it.
You cannot change that by spinning the killing of your own child or the genocide of innocent babies as a free choice issue and characterizing those against it as hypocrites hungering for more government.
Churches for the most part pride themselves on promotion of illegal border crossing while paying scant attention to the multi-million dollar corporation murdering babies and butchering them for parts in the abortion mill right across the street.
The abortion crowd couldn’t probably care less about it.
You got that right.
It doesn't work, of course, because conservatives don't consider abortion clinics as contributors to the economy.
Very telling.
Some alleged conservatives love big government on abortion
Some alleged conservatives love big government on immigration
Some alleged conservatives love big government on foreign policy and nation building of foreign nations.
Some alleged conservatives love big government on drugs.
Some alleged conservatives love big government on _____ fill in the blank.
The only way we can win is with a coalition of others who arent as perfect as I am.
By that logic, any regulation that requires any medical procedure to be performed by a doctor -- period -- should be thrown out the window.
Even the most libertarian "republican" doesn't favor filthy unsanitary abortions, under the guise of "government control".
Just like no conservative would eat at an unsanitary restaurant.
Liberal abortion supporters are barking up the very WRONG tree here.
They even crucify themselves by their own words: "SAFE, legal,and rare".
These creeps are doing everything in their power to make sure there is nothing "SAFE" about abortion.
Ref: Kermit Gosnell.
Boy did that story get swept under the rug.
Abortion has been legalized and federalized since 1973.
So according to pro-abortionists, this guy should have never been allowed to practice.
Back alley butchers?
Why, you've got your "legalization".
How did that POS slip through?
In fact Gosnell is probably way more common than we think, BECAUSE the evil republicans want an abortionist to at least wear gloves once in a while.
Ha! There are so many conservatives who don't realize how destructive regulations are!
Jesus Christ: You can't impeach Him and He ain't gonna resign.
While suppressing economic activity is an unwanted side effect of the regulations conservatives tend to criticize, it is the whole point of the Texas law they are defending.
But there is nothing regulatory or intrusive about the Federal government inventing a right to kill people of a certain age and circumstance.
There is nothing regulatory or intrusive about legally deeming such killing—a medically therapeutic service. It is not killing. The state has spoke its Orwellian correction.
Libertarians are an ethical nightmare that does not end.
It is about states rights. If Washington DC can take a supreme court decision that individuals have a right to own a gun, and the city council can set about to make obtaining one through regulations so difficult that most cannot own one, what is the bitch?
We would not be having these suits and demonstrations or prolife marches if the black robed fascists did not make it legal nationwide, it should have been thrown back to the states same with homosexual marriage.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.