Government Care from Cradle to Grave

Socialism is never the answer

Now that Roe v. Wade has been overturned and the issue of abortion has been returned to the states, the pro-life movement is at a crossroads. Various people and groups who were united toward the goal of overturning that decision now must hash out disagreements about what it means to be pro-life going forward. Unfortunately, this has opened the door to increased socialism under a pro-life and family friendly banner.

Last session, Rep. Megan Blanksma introduced House Bill 122 which would increase the number of families eligible for Medicaid as well as expand postpartum care to one year. An article by the Idaho Capital Sun cites the Maternal Mortality Review Committee report to say that Idaho women who died from problems related to pregnancy “doubled” from 2019 to 2020. If you read the fine print you’ll see that the number in 2020 was 11.

Obviously every death is a tragedy, but the article also points out that 8 of the 11 women were already on Medicaid. As the committee approached its end date this year, Rep. Dori Healey sponsored H81 to repeal the sunset clause and allow the committee to continue studying pregnancy-related deaths in Idaho.

Fred Birnbaum of the Idaho Freedom Foundation testified against the bill, pointing out that most of the recommendations from the committee were for more government. "You know the old saying 'All roads lead to Rome?' Well, all government-created committees lead to the call for more government spending."

H122 was the sort of bill that the committee wanted to see passed. The Idaho Capital Sun article argued that it was necessary to raise eligibility to families making 205% of the federal poverty level, compared to 133% in Idaho currently, and extend Medicaid coverage to pregnant mothers to one years past birth as opposed to the current 60 days. Neither H122 nor H201, a revised version of the same bill, made it to the House floor, nor did H81. The Maternal Mortality Review Committee ceased operation last summer as originally scheduled.

What Birnbaum said is absolutely true: government programs always breed more government. A sane society would want to see fewer people on government assistance, but the bureaucracies involved with Medicaid seem to want to increase their numbers instead. This was amplified when Idaho voters approved Medicaid Expansion a few years ago.

The article from the Idaho Capital Sun said that last year’s bill was “partly crafted” by a nonprofit called Idaho Voices for Children. According to its website, this organization “champions policies that helps kids and families thrive.” You don’t have to dig too far to figure out that they support any and all expansion of government subsidies and benefits.

A notable example is on their “Education and School Readiness” page where they lament that 68% of Idaho’s 3 and 4 years olds do not attend preschool. Advocating for getting children away from their parents and into government programs seems dystopian to me.

On their “Healthcare” page, they cheer Medicaid, sharing stories of children with medical needs that were paid for by taxpayers. They urge 100% coverage of all Idaho children, writing that, “To ensure a healthy start for every child, each newborn in Idaho should be enrolled in health coverage before leaving the hospital.”

Of course they assume that all children are born in hospitals! Organizations like this fondly imagine a world where every citizen is taken care of by a powerful and benevolent government from birth until death.

In case you were still wondering about where this group stands, they recently honored former State Supreme Court justice and attorney general Jim Jones as their “2023 Children’s Champion”. Jones, of course, has gone full speed to the left, advocating for every progressive program in Idaho while never missing an opportunity to trash conservative Republicans.

The corporate sponsors of Idaho Voices for Children are many of the usual suspects when it comes to lobbying for more taxpayer money. There is undoubtedly large overlap with IACI, which always supports the growth of government. Both big hospitals are on the list as well as St. Luke’s favorite law firm Holland & Hart. The City of Boise also sponsors the organization.

Another nonprofit organization called Idaho Children Are Primary also sponsors Idaho Voices for Children. Like other groups, this one rates bills and lawmakers, ostensibly by how they will affect families and children. Would it surprise you to learn that they opposed school choice bills, opposed H71 which banned child genital mutilation, opposed H314 which aimed to keep obscene materials away from kids, but supported any and all government subsidies?

These organizations, which claim to act on behalf of children and families, are all about taking your tax dollars and redistributing them to others through the bureaucracy. This is where the pro-life movement needs to take a strong stand on free market solutions to society’s problems. Proponents of socialist policies understand that pro-lifers are compassionate people, so they play on that compassion to push their government programs. People support organizations like Idaho Voices for Children and Idaho Children Are Primary because they assume that anyone working on behalf of kids must be worthwhile, without perhaps considering the long term consequences of bringing every citizen under the umbrella of government bureaucracy.

It is entirely likely that some version of H122 will return in the 2024 session that begins about a month from now. It will be introduced as a common sense investment in Idaho’s children. Testifiers from organizations such as the two mentioned above will be joined by representatives from hospitals and healthcare firms to explain why more government subsidies are necessary. We will be told that this is the pro-life thing to do, because we can’t stop caring about children once they’re born.

We need to stand strong. Expanding government to take care of people from cradle to grave is not compassionate, it’s dystopian. We need to work toward a culture that once again values life and rewards hard work, where families, churches, and communities take care of each other rather than relying on bureaucracy in the IDHW.

When this bill inevitably returns I hope we will all take the opportunity to tell the committee to stop growing government in the name of compassion.