Could stricter laws against abortions actually end up increasing the number of abortions?

"In the last two years we have....ended grisly partial birth abortion..." -- Sam Johnson, in a speech in Wylie, Feb. 6, 2004

How ironic that he'd be proven false less than two months later! Read on to see how THAT screw-up happened. It's even worse than you think!

Many folks, even progressives, realize that in some ways, Roe v. Wade may have gone too far. So-called Partial Birth abortions have drawn much fire, and even fairly liberal commentators such as Nina Totenberg have described it as a 'gruesome' procedure (since it is - you're killing a fully viable human infant). In the case of the legislation for which my opponent voted, however, several points must be remembered. The first is that even if we were to look at all third trimester abortions, we're only talking about 1% of all abortions - in the tens of thousands, not millions. Moreover, the bill for which my opponent voted makes exceptions when the mother's life is in danger, even though that's precisely the biggest reason third trimester abortions are done. As well, this bill is stating that ALL states are locked in this mold, NOT that they now have the OPTION (as they did in a pre-Roe world) of setting their own rules, exceptions, penalties, etc. This means that at least one category of abortions called partial birth abortions is now MORE stringently handled than it was PRE-ROE! This seems like a violation of the 9th and 10th Amendments in at least as much of a way as Roe itself. Moreover, when governance of such decisions are at least left at the state level to regulate, arguably better decisions are made. Local and state officials have a better sense of whether their own native Dr. X really did the best he could to save the life of the baby AND the mom, or whether in aborting the baby he is beginning to behave like Dr. Mengele, Dr. Kevorkian, etc. When we already have problems (arguably due to malpractice suits) keeping doctors, why would we want to have this sort of thing Federally regulated, when we know that puts even more pressure on doctors? Since there may end up being fewer doctors who will be willing to deliver babies AT ALL in an ABOVE-BOARD fashion due to a botched delivery being literally a FEDERAL CRIME, it is QUITE POSSIBLE that we'll not only have more mothers dying in childbirth having them outside a hospital, but more back-alley abortions (or newborns successfully discarded in garbage bins with the same result) and thus a HIGHER rate of abortions!

This sort of oppositely-intended result happens in other areas like regulation of electricians, where states that regulate electricians cause them to be more expensive, which leads people to attempt their own electrical work, which leads to higher rates of death through electrocution per capita than in states where electricians aren't regulated. Seems obvious once you think about it. The point is to think before you legislate.

Thinking before you legislate is ALSO important if you want your legislation to survive challenges. For example, the partial birth abortion laws we have currently have been struck down just about everywhere, even in Nebraska! This is because they don't make an exception for the HEALTH of the mother. Let me give you an example. There was a woman in New York who was pregnant and wanted to have her child. However, her doctor mentioned that during her second trimester, that apparently the fetus had a brain edema and would be born dead. Moreover, if she didn't get an abortion, she'd never be able to have any other children. As it turned out, due to the Federal Government now being involved, she had to go to Wichita, KS to get the abortion. Cases like this came before the Federal appelate court in Nebraska and resulted in Federal partial birth abortion laws being struck down. Now what's REALLY SICK about all of this is that it was avoidable. As you'll see from this anti-abortion writer it was the case that partial-birth abortion laws had been struck down in April 2000 due to the issue of the health of the mother. Yet, when Congress passed partial birth abortion laws in the two year time period Sam Johnson discussed, they 'forgot' about the health of the mother and it was thus struck down in 2004 in the SAME JURISDICTION!! Thus, until we can get rid of Roe and turn things back to the states, we will apparently need an exception concerning the health of the mother to make these laws survive Federal appeals. We'll also evidently need a Congressman who doesn't "forget" to put in exceptions that were the very reason Federal laws were enacted.