Crimes against Babies or Crimes against Intelligence?

The G.O.P.’s Abandoned Babies

Well, I’ve been beating up on the right a bit but, not to tarnish my moderate stance, it’s now time to take on the left. My target this time is a New York Times opinion article titled “The G.O.P.’s Abandoned Babies” by CHARLES M. BLOW.

In his article, Mr. Blow assails the G.O.P. for some of the healthcare cuts in their recently passed House budget. He provides statistical and comparative information in relation to premature births and how the US compares to the rest of the industrialized nations. He then goes on to imply that their stance is immoral and counter to their pro life stance. Despite his obvious passion on the subject and the worthiness of his cause, this article is a textbook case of fuzzy logic at its best.

First and foremost, to equate the reduction of some funding for research into premature births and prenatal healthcare grants to abortion is comparing apples and grapes. It is a play on emotions and unjustified in this case. We cannot provide every worthy cause with unlimited funding and to make such comparisons discredit the author and any valid arguments he makes to restore the funding. These are cuts to funding which means that except in the case of Planned Parenthood some funding is still being provided. The programs in question will just have to do more with less.

The statistics he provides in relation to the US having the highest infant mortality rate of any of the 33 IMF industrialized nations is valid, and points out a valid issue, but even he admits that premature births are but one contributing factor. To include this in an assault on the G.O.P. is also invalidated by his own facts as he pointed out that the decline in our standing in relation to other countries has been going on for decades, since 1960, through both Republican and Democratic administrations. Perhaps we should look at issues like obesity, poverty, education and access to rural healthcare rather than turning it political.

I’m not sure who taught Mr. Blow to read charts, as what I see when I open his media chart is an increase in premature births and a steady drop in our infant mortality rate. This tells me that the increase in premature births is because we are saving more and more premature babies every year that otherwise would have died. I don’t think a few billion dollars either way is going to effect this trend and though we may not be doing the best, it likes like we are continuing to move in the right direction.

His financial analysis makes yet another blind leap. His claim that a 10% reduction in premature births would save 2.6 Billion is reasonably good math, and as he points out that is more than the amount of the budget reductions. However, he provides no evidence whatsoever that a restoration in funding would reduce the rate of premature births significantly, thus invalidating this entire leg of his argument. Thank you for wasting 5 minutes I could have spent playing Second Life.

I come out of this experience with the impression that I have just read a political rant with little basis in fact, a lot of childish name calling and an over dramatic ending. Baby Killers?! Don’t insult my intelligence Mr. Blow. This article may be appreciated by the most extreme left-wing reader but will do little to rally an independent thinker to his cause.

Caught in the Middle: The Environment

http://money.cnn.com/2010/11/22/news/economy/epa_global_warming_republicans/index.htm

As an Environmental Science student and having followed the issues from a personal interest perspective for much longer, it really concerns me that business interests and the Republican Party are trying to roll back environmental protections.  When many of our environmental laws were passed, our waterways were full of sewage and industrial wastes.  Some rivers actually caught on fire, literally.  Scores of people were dying from illnesses caused by air and water pollution.  Today we have cleaner waterways and air because politicians headed the call of scientists to take action.

Now we have politicians that either ignore science based on false religious pretenses or due to their belief that business should be able to do as they please regardless of the damage to our planet and shouldn’t have to pay for their pollution and destruction of our natural resources.

Global warming is for the most part universally accepted by most scientists and governments except for those that are funded by special interests or that allow their ideologies to interfere with their neutral interpretation of the data.  As a parent I am concerned for the future of not only my children but also for successive generations as well.  At the point when we need government to step up to the plate the most, it is gut wrenching to see such an important issue being used as a political pawn.