40 Years of Roe v Wade

Wednesday marks the 40^th anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Roe v Wade regarding the legality of abortions.  The Economist’s Daily Chart notes this anniversary by highlighting the trends in abortions and abortion-related deaths in the United States since 1965.  The graph to the right illustrates an oft-overlooked statistic: although Roe v Wade is the national milestone for abortion rights, abortion laws had already been liberalized in fifteen states three years earlier.  In fact, abortion-related deaths saw an extreme decline between 1970 and the 1973 Supreme Court ruling, from roughly 140 deaths in 1970 to approximately 40 in 1973.  In a similar trend, abortions per 1,000 women aged 15-44 began to steeply increase in 1969 and continued at a similar increase throughout the 1970s.

Since 1980, abortions have been on a steady decline, from almost 240 per 1,000 women to less than 20 in 2008. The Economist also points out that many states have been attempting to curb abortion rates in their states, introducing 135 provisions and regulations in the past two years.  In addition, sixteen states retain laws which would ban abortions if Roe v Wade were ever overturned.

The Economist's article primarily used data from the US Census Bureau's Statistical Abstract, found here.

41% of Americans Identify as "Pro-Choice"

Gallup’s survey of Americans regarding their views on abortion has revealed an interesting trend.  Whereas in 1995, 56% of Americans identified as “pro-choice” and only 33% identified as “pro-life,” today, the percentages have almost completely flip-flopped.  Gallup reports that, currently, 50% of Americans regard themselves as “pro-life,” while only 41% are “pro-choice.”  That said, American’s views on the legality of abortion do not represent their self-identifications.  52% believe that abortion should be legal under certain circumstances.  On the other hand, the more polarizing views that abortion should be legal under any circumstances or illegal in all cases garnered only 25% and 20% of Americans’ opinions respectively. 

Teenage Pregnancy Rate on the Decline

Data recently released by the Economist shows that the teenage pregnancy rate is on the decline, from almost 12% at the high of the 90’s, to 7%. While the pregnancy rate has declined for White, African American, and Hispanic teenage girls 15-19 years old, black and Hispanic teenagers are still more likely to get pregnant. The abortion rate has also declined, though it still remains higher for black teenagers.

New Paper Finds Global Abortion Rate Stalling

The Economist's daily chart yesterday focused on a recent paper from The Lancet that "estimate[s] the number of safe and unsafe abortions in 2008." Because some countries under-report abortions, tracking them is not a simple task. Perhaps for this reason, the number of safe and unsafe abortions worldwide has only been successfully tracked twice before, in 1995 and 2003. When the 2008 data is compared with these other data points, changes corroborate findings from the World Health Organization and the Guttmacher Institute that indicate "that the global abortion rate has stalled."

The Economist writes of the abortion rate: "It fell precipitously in the 1990s, but recently the rate has not budged, barely dipping from 29 abortions per 1,000 women (aged 15 to 44) in 2003 to 28 abortions per 1,000 women in 2008." During this interval of time, the "geography of abortions has also shifted. In 2008, 86% of abortions were in the developing world, up from 78% in 1995. The share of unsafe abortions rose as well, from 44% in 1995 to 49% in 2008." Currently, "Eastern Europe has the highest abortion rate in the world, at 43 per 1,000."

Interestingly, the level of legal restriction on abortions does not appear to limit their frequency. The Economist notes, "Laws that restrict abortion did not seem to lower the number of procedures. On the contrary, restrictive laws were associated with higher rates."

Excess Female Deaths

A recent article in The Economist discusses what the article refers to as the "missing women" of the world, which it defines as "women who have died because the rate of female mortality is disproportionately high compared with men's." This includes sex-selective abortion, which accounts for the largest share of "missing women" or "excess female deaths," as a related Daily Chart blog refers to them as. According to the chart (below) from the blog, which is based on results from the 2011 World Development Report, sex-selective abortion resulted in 1 million excess female deaths in China and 257,000 in India in 2011. This has already resulted in distorted gender ratios in China, with roughly 105 boys for every 100 girls born. While sex-selective abortion accounts for the largest portion of excess female deaths, the largest growth in these deaths has been in Africa among women between the ages of 15 and 49. According to the chart, there were 751,000 excess female deaths in Sub-Saharan Africa in 2011.

BL cf

Country Remains Divided on Abortion Issue

Gallup polling shows that the issue of abortion continues to split Americans down the middle, though for the first time since 2008 a slight majority call themselves "pro-choice" (49%), just eking out those who identify as "pro-life" (45%). But despite this change, a majority of Americans (51%) still believe abortion to be "morally wrong," with only 39% asserting that it is "morally acceptable." Excluding 2006, when results showed Americans to be divided on the moral aspect of the issue, results regarding morality have been "fairly steady since 2002."
50% of Americans answer that abortion should be legal under certain circumstances, but this year's results suggest that more people are taking extreme views on the legality of abortion than they have historically. 27% answered that abortion should be legal in all cases while 22% wanted it to be illegal in all cases. The 49% combined believing in either of the extreme views was the highest since 1992.

Americans were fairly consistent in their opinions on abortion across gender. Age and partisan views appear to be a far more likely predictor of an individual's stance on the issue. 49% of adults 55 and older said they were "pro-life," as compared with majorities of those aged 35-54 (53%) and 18-34 (51%) who said they were "pro-choice." And while 68% of Democrats claimed to be "pro-choice," a full 67% of Republicans took the opposite stance, saying they were "pro-life."Writes Gallup about the results for 2011: "Americans' views on abortion held fairly steady over the past year, with the public still sharply divided over the 'pro-life' and 'pro-choice' labels."

NH cf

Republican Political Courage in Partial Obamacare Repeal

According to a Pete Kasperowicz The Hill article on Wednesday, the House voted 235-191 (roll call vote) to pass HR1214 (full text), a small Obamacare repeal of $100M in grant money for construction of School-Based Health Centers (SBHC).  While the dominant mood of the Republicans voting for HR 1214 was to turn around the out-of-control spending binge by the Democrats, liberal-leaning The Hill failed to present the controversial nature of SBHCs as ensurers of teenage access to contraceptives and abortion services providers (read more about SBHC's at Human Life International).  HR1214 is a simple, three-paragraph, easy to understand repeal of irresponsible SBHC spending backed by all but four Republicans and supported by three Democrats.

A Disappointing Vote:  Rep. West
Today, in a Russell Berman The Hill article, Mr. Berman pointed out the irony in the Allen West (R-FL22) vote.  Rep. West, a tea party favorite, had voted along with all the other Republicans in favor of a different partial Obamacare bill the day prior (HR1213) but cited the importance of focus on international issues including Libya as a reason for his "no" vote.  The Hill went further and pointed out that two SBHC applicants were within Rep. West's district, implying and perhaps rightly so, West's vote was influenced by the two applicants.  While I respect Rep. West's natural leadership and his voting record to date, this particular one I cannot accept.

True Political Courage:  Rep. Dold
While The Hill wasted no time in bagging a tea party member, they failed to present a true hero in the HR1214 vote:  Rep. Robert Dold (R-IL10).  Rep. Dold, a fiscal-conservative social-moderate freshman congressman who replaced Mark Kirk (Sen. Kirk won the Senate seat previously held by Obama), sits in "the most Democratic district of any Republican in the country" (National Journal) with redistricting controlled by Democrats.  Add to that, according to a Democrat-complied list of all applicants for the SBHC grant a whopping 13 applicants were within Dold's district--nearly double the number of applicants in any other congressional district!  To vote to deny the pork within one's own district takes a huge amount a political courage and Dold earned my admiration.  Too bad Mr. Berman at The Hill could only make a case against an aberrant Republican Congressman and not balance it with the Congressman who demonstrated true political courage.

Utah's Take
Utah's three Congressmen all voted party-line.  By his vote, liberal Matheson demonstrated his continued support for outrageous spending and Planned Parenthood referrals.  It was, however, nice to see on the SBHC grant list that Utah was devoid of applicants for the pork-barrel federal spending.

Aborting the Constitution Through Executive Order: More March Madness

Here we are on Christian Sabbath Day trying to defend the Constitution and to protect the babe in the womb.

As the Slaughter Solution appears to have been slaughtered, the latest tactic seems to be to get Rep. Bart Stupak & gang to sign on by having Obama sign an "executive order" defunding abortion after Congress would vote to fund it through passage of Obamacare. (The Hill, Life News). We decry this latest foul trickery.

Executive Orders have a tainted history of abuse in violating the Constitution separating the power of the Congress to legislate law and the executive branch to enforce the law. But this proposal goes further: Obama would pre-promise to reverse a law passed only perhaps minutes or hours stating the complete opposite. There is no historical example of this EVER being done before in the history of our Republic.

Secondly, an executive order is much weaker than a law passed by Congress. Any president can reverse any executive order at any time for any reason. All it would take is for Obama or another future Progressive President to wave their magic wand and all that Stupak, Hyde, and We the People have fought for in keeping federal funding of abortion prohibited would be washed away.

Stop this March Madness abortion of our Constitution!

+++ Update:
Although you can't contact Stupak outside of Michigan through his congressional email, you can use this email from his facebook: rep_stupak@new.rr.com