Pro-life Lie Exposed: Texas vs California

Texas is deadly for pregnant women. And it's not just because it's a heavy populated state, because the most populous state, California, had lowest maternal mortality rate of any reporting state.

The Daily is people-powered journalism. To join our community, please consider becoming a subscriber.

The folks who’ve sold their anti-women lie as “pro-life” for decades have been completely exposed by new research.

If lawmakers want to increase the chances of maternal mortality, they should enact Republicans’ anti-abortion laws.

It turns out that mothers in states where abortion is banned are more likely to die during pregnancy, childbirth, or soon after giving birth. In stark contrast, a state like California, which has enshrined the right to abortion and contraception in its constitution, has significantly lower rates of maternal mortality than any other state.

A perfect example of the so-called “pro-life” policy actually being pro-death is seen in the data from Texas. “More maternal deaths occur in Texas than in any other state, and a disproportionate share of U.S. maternal deaths take place in the state,” Gender Equity Policy Institute (GEPI) reported.

And for those ready to scream that Texas is the second most populated state in the country, yes. That’s true. But what is the most populous state in the country? California.

And which state has the highest maternal mortality rate and which has the lowest?

“California had the lowest maternal mortality rate of any state reporting data in 2023. At 9.5 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births, it was roughly half the rate of the United States overall (18.6).”

And what is the difference in reproductive laws between these two states? Abortion policies, namely. And access to contraception. You know, things that are basic human rights.

They note “elected officials in Texas have enacted some of the most stringent anti-abortion laws in the nation,” whereas in California, not only did voters enshrine the right to abortion and contraception in the state constitution, but the Golden State actually provides “public funding for contraception and abortion care and a year of post-partum health coverage for mothers and babies under state Medi-Cal.”

California put their money and laws behind being pro-women’s rights and pro-mothers health, and it is resulting in significantly lower maternal mortality rates. So, we could say that California, a blue state constantly mocked by conservatives and Republicans, is actually the pro-life and pro-family state.

The contrast is stark. Texas bans “public and private insurers from covering abortion and has not accepted Medicaid expansion under the ACA, which provides no-cost contraception.”

If the goal of Republicans is to force women to give birth, then why not support maternal health? Are women disposable?

Morals and Money

There is a very stark contrast between their stated goal and where they choose to spend resources and money and how they shape their policies.

On Tuesday, Trump said he thought a $5,000 "baby bonus" would be a good idea as a way to increase the number of babies being born in the United States. If that’s such a concern, why not enact policies that don’t kill women surrounding pregnancy?

The baby crisis won’t be solved with a one-time $5,000.00 bonus tossed at it. A person need only look at other countries facing the same issue to see that. CBS News noted:

Some experts point out that by tackling long-standing economic issues — such as providing affordable day care and paid parental leave after the birth of a child — the government could provide a more hospitable environment for families. The U.S. is one of a only a handful of nations that doesn't provide paid leave for parents, including countries such as Papua New Guinea and Suriname.

They then quoted White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt as responding via email about the baby bonus idea, “President Trump is proudly implementing policies to uplift American families, from securing order [at the] border to keep violent criminals out of our communities, to lowering taxes and the cost of living.”

Actually…

Trump’s immigration policies are not uplifting American families, but they do reveal priorities. For example, as Republicans try to cut Medicaid, upon which many parents rely for young children, ICE was awarded (and then canceled after a Pro-Publica investigation) a $3.8 billion contract with Deployed Resources to build an immigration tent detention camp on a Texas military base.

So there is money to shove human beings into tents in Texas, but there is not money to control the border humanely, legally, and with a consistent effort to uphold international human rights.

We have billions for “tents” but not for maternal health, contraception, or access to abortion.

The Trump administration still plans to throw billions of dollars to build tents at Fort Bliss for a detention camp. ProPublica wrote of the potential health and safety risks of the longer use of tents, “Current and former agency officials said holding ICE detainees in tent facilities — which in the past have generally held people for shorter periods of time — raises significant concerns about potential health and safety risks. An ICE official at a recent border security conference said Deployed Resources was adding more rigid structures within its tents, which could address such concerns.”

Republicans refused to give former President Joe Biden the money he requested for border control efforts. Not only did they do that so that they could use the border as an election issue, but as I wrote then and we can see now, their morals and values about immigration enforcement are vastly different.

While Republicans claim to be going after violent criminals, in point of fact both Biden and Obama prioritized the deportation of violent criminals. What is different is that Biden needed money to process people efficiently, legally and humanely. It can require legal and psychological experts to properly assess asylum requests, for example. It costs money to investigate someone’s past. It costs money to protect the most vulnerable. It costs money to keep children with their family. It costs money to “repatriate” people to their home country.

And yes, it’s apparently easy to upset people by pointing out how much money we spend to process people who flee to the U.S., but on the other hand, people come here because in the past this country has represented freedom. Freedom based on laws that are upheld and a respect for human rights.

The way we process immigrants is much like how we handle abortion rights. We have the choice of being a country that is admirable for upholding human rights, or we can become the kind of country from which many are fleeing.

Core Values

Abortion policies are no different from immigration policies, in the sense that they reflect the core morals of the people pushing them.

“California proactively protects the legal rights of abortion care providers and patients traveling from other states to access care. Recently, the Texas Attorney General arrested a midwife, charging her with performing illegal abortions, a felony which is punishable by up to 20 years in prison,” GEPI concluded.

And yes, data can always be subject to unknown or untested variables. But the bottom line is, “While many factors affect maternal mortality, the outcomes in Texas and California are dramatically different. Texas has persistently higher maternal mortality than California across all years.”

Both Republican policy stances on abortion and immigration are rooted in a lack of humanity and a failure to uphold international human rights. So while criticism of Trump’s deportation policies and “his” SCOTUS overturning Roe is reported on within the frame of “left versus right,” the more accurate frame is moral versus immoral.

An autocrat relies upon the dehumanization of others, and so their lack of morals should not be a surprise. But it is all the more important to object loudly precisely because the dehumanization of others will only grow until it encompasses everyone who is not an oligarch who also supports Trump.

What do you think about the pro-life lie? Share your thoughts in the comments below.