Republicans Are Not Serious About the Deficit

News outlets are noting that budget negotiators are "inches away" from a deal to avert a government shutdown, but that the one item holding a full deal back is the Republican's policy rider for fully de-funding Planned Parenthood, under the auspices that no tax dollars should go to fund abortions.

Unfortunately, there's just one small hitch. It is already federal law that no federal dollars go to funding abortion services; it's called the Hyde Amendment. And in fact abortion services makeup only 2% 3% of the services Planned Parenthood provides. So what does Planned Parenthood do, you ask? They largely provide basic health services for low-income women. Things such as mammograms and standard GBYN health exams and drum roll please...birth control! Perish the thought!

Most economists have called the funding of Planned Parenthood a deficit reducer. Why?

What do you think costs more? The $10-15 subsidy a month so a low income young woman can buy birth control? OR... The cost of the Child Income Tax Credit for 18 years? Let's also assume that this young woman is a single mother who has to stay home from high school and will probably never end up paying a tax dollar in her life. Hmmmmm... I wonder.

Methinks the birth control pills are cheaper for the government to help pay for.

Now, you might say maybe teens shouldn't be having sex at all! But your problem is not with Planned Parenthood, but with the man upstairs. It is His PERFECT design (right?) to make teens hornballs with larger and more active amygdalas and less active frontal lobes during this crucial timeframe. Too bad he designed humans so poorly to have intercourse when they were most fertile and physically healthy.

So Republicans, take the deal. We can argue (again) about abortion in 2012. And if you're serious about reducing the deficit, buy the damn birth control. Isn't having fewer poor people walking around the U.S. your favorite thing ever, anyway?