TODAY, WHILE STAYING WITH THE FATE OF CHILDREN, I propose to leave the national stage and make a crucial connection between two striking realities in Texas: its commitment to the unborn and the state of its dedication to those who have left the womb — that is, its commitment to the born.
First, regarding Texas’ abortion bill, “Gov. Rick Perry signs sweeping abortion restrictions,” CNN, July 18:
“In a celebratory mood, Gov. Perry signed Texas’ controversial Fetal Pain bill into a law Thursday. ‘In signing House Bill 2, we celebrate further the cementing of the culture of life which Texas is built upon … children do deserve the respect of simple recognition before their lives are cut tragically short,’ Perry said.
“The bill, containing some of the most restrictive abortion legislation in the nation, will ban abortions past 20 weeks of gestation, mandate abortion clinics upgrade facilities to become ambulatory surgical centers, tighten usage guidelines for the drug RU-486, and require doctors who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of the clinic at which they’re providing abortion services.”
From another report, “Texas governor signs strict abortion law that sparked protests,” Reuters, July 18:
“Perry, a Republican, signed the measure flanked by invited political supporters and anti-abortion activists, who gave him a standing ovation as he entered the room. ‘It is a very happy and celebratory day,’ said Perry, who thanked anti-abortion activists for helping to ‘support the health of Texas women.’” (Surely, what could be more healthful to a mother overburdened with children and underburdened with resources than adding another hungry, crying infant to the family?)
In a move calculated to make all abortion exceedingly difficult, “Texas is also requiring all abortion facilities to meet the same standards as outpatient surgery centers by September 2014, and forcing doctors performing abortions to have the right to admit a patient to a hospital within 30 miles of a clinic,” the Reuters report continued. “The law will prohibit anyone other than a doctor dispensing the so-called ‘abortion pill,’ or RU-486 drug, to end pregnancies, and require that a second dosage be administered at a clinic under a doctor’s supervision and not at home. Texas already has a law passed two years ago requiring a woman to undergo an ultrasound and be shown the results before an abortion can be performed.
“Planned Parenthood and other operators of clinics have warned that only a handful of the 42 facilities in Texas providing abortions now meet the standards set in the new law, and the cost of upgrading could force dozens to close.”
I thought to compare these jubilant voices of compassion for the fetus to another Texas reality: the levels of compassion for the infant and child following birth. Below are some of those realities.
A new report by the research advocacy group Children At Risk includes statistics showing that hundreds of thousands of North Texas children are living in poverty and facing food insecurity. “The Future of North Texas Children” examines 10 topics, including poverty, hunger and mental health. In 2010, it shows, 29.3 percent of children in Dallas County — more than 190,000 children total — lived in families below the federal income poverty level. Across the nine counties examined by Children At Risk, that number rose to more than 360,000.
The results in the other categories are similarly troubling. Childhood poverty is associated with behavioral, health and developmental problems. Chronic stress brought on by poverty and food instability does long-term damage to children’s concentration and memory. Children living in poverty are also more than four times more likely to drop out of school.
From “Poverty grows in Rick Perry’s Texas,” by Tami Luhby of CNNMoney, Oct. 13, 2011, we note the following:
“Texas ranks 6th in terms of people living in poverty. … 18.4 percent of Texans were impoverished in 2010, up from 17.3 percent a year earlier, according to Census Bureau data released this week. The national average is 15.1 percent.
“Being poor in Texas isn’t exactly a day — or year — in the park. Let’s rephrase that: Living poor in Texas can be a hellish prospect. The state has one of the lowest rates of spending on its citizens per capita and the highest share of those lacking health insurance (24.6 percent). It provides minimal support services to those in need: Relatively few collect food stamps and qualifying for cash assistance is particularly tough.
“‘There are two tiers in Texas,’ said Miguel Ferguson, associate professor of social work at University of Texas at Austin. ‘There are parts of Texas that are doing well. And there is a tremendous number of Texans, more than Perry has ever wanted to acknowledge, that are doing very, very poorly.’
“Some 9.5 percent of Texas’ hourly workforce are minimum-wage workers, the highest percentage in the nation — a dubious title it shares with Mississippi. There is little help for Texans in need. For residents living in poverty, ‘the state doesn’t offer many services or even make federally funded benefits easily accessible.’
“For instance, it has one of the tightest income limits — less than 12 percent of the poverty level — to qualify for federal cash assistance payments and one of the most meager benefits, a maximum of about $260 a month for a family of three, said Celia Cole, senior research analyst at the Center for Public Policy Priorities, which advocates for low-income residents. The program serves less than 6 percent of poor children in the state.
“Experts chalk up the minimal services and take-up rates to Texas’ anti-welfare attitude. In the Lone Star State, you are expected to pull yourself up by your bootstraps.”
As to its “compact with the born,” that, I believe, could be phrased quite simply: “We slaved, sweat and bled (putting it just a trifle over the top) to make certain you hit the outside world. What you do with it now is up to you! Good luck!” Or to rephrase for us effete non-Texans, “We stand proud and tall in Texas for self-sufficiency; gritting it out on your own two feet is what we’re all about, from cradle to grave.”
Thus, in Texas, “on your own two feet” essentially means once you’ve hit outside air and taken that first breath, the state sorta cuts out; that passion for the “culture of life” tends to fade incredibly quickly. From birth through infancy and childhood, the living must cope. Though some — in fact many — will not make it. As we well know, disease and illness tend to prey on the weak and undernourished. And the pregnant mother, perhaps with multiple often inadequately nourished children, just has to grit her teeth and make do.
As to those 1-, 2-, 5- and 6-year-old children of poverty in Texas, the word might as well be, “Hey kid, knock off the tears, we all have it tough, grab your bootstraps and pull like hell. If you’ve got the stuff, you can make it, look at the herds of new Texas multi-millionaires! If you had looked sharp, showed a little initiative, you would have picked one of them for your daddy!
“And if you find it’s a bit too much, remember, we all have to make choices, and this was yours. Sort of. Sayonara, adios and hasta la vista!”
All in all, a marvelous tribute to current “conservative” political and economic philosophy.
“We celebrate further the cementing of the culture of life which Texas is built upon … children do deserve the respect of simple recognition before their lives are cut tragically short,” was Perry’s jubilant summary. But only if that potential cut is to take place in the womb. Post-birth quality of life, culture of life or loss of life — that’s in the hands of fate, perhaps the gods … but quite apparently not the state of Texas!
Jerome Page is a Benicia resident.
Sharing is caring!
Mr. Page –
You are apparently against preventing abortion at 20 weeks of pregnancy. At what stage of fetal development would you agree that abortion should not occur? How many weeks would that equate to? Do you support partial birth abortion? Is it OK to terminate a pregnancy if only the head has seen the light of day? Is it okay to perform an abortion if the entire fetus is ex-utero, but the umbilical cord remains attached?
Maybe the low financial support in Texas is tied to the low cost of living?
It is clearly wrong to tell children that they need to fend for themselves. What is wrong with telling parents that they need to be responsible for their children?
If I recall correctly, you have relayed a story from your Midwest childhood, where you were able to provide for your family by hunting local game. Regardless of what was in season. And the local game wardens looked the other way. You found a way to make it work. Why can’t others? Government got out of the way so that you could eat. Why not less government now?
I say let Texas become an independent nation. All except Austin. Austin can be like our cold war Berlin. One highway in and one highway out and an occasional air drop .
Those damn Republicans can’t ‘Win for Losing’. I eagerly await Jerome’s next editorial foray into how the world will be destroyed by…oh you know who.
From the piece:All in all, a marvelous tribute to current “conservative” political and economic philosophy.
If Texas represents a tribute to conservative philosophy, which areas best represent a tribute to leftist philosophy: Detroit, Chicago, Oakland, Vallejo, Stockton?
San Francisco, which is nicer than wherever you live.
This statement applies to whoever is reading this.
Simon did you every live in San Francisco? Or maybe even any other great areas of this great nation? There are many in California and San Francisco is not the only one.
All the best cities are liberal. Ask anyone.
Would you include Detroit, Chicago, Baltimore, Cleveland, Cinn., Philly, St. Louis, Oakland and Los Angeles? Until recently San Diego was a very equally divided and great city to live in. Would you also include racist Boston? I lived and worked in San Francisco when its politics were more equal and it was a wonderful city and still is in many ways. The politics of that City have changed dramatically over the last 40 years. Simon give me a list of cities that you consider the best that are not racially divided, not going bankrupt, low unemployment, low crime rate. You will have a very difficult time finding one that is run by liberals because all the ones that are as I have asked are run by Republicans.
Benicia, FTW
You must have more. Maybe Richmond. The difference is Benicia is not totally run by Liberals. Closer to 50/50 . So I will take the conservative side and we both can be happy.
Not 50-50, not even close. But I’m sure it makes you feel better to think so.
Also, I reject your parameters of what makes a great city. Lots of cities with crime and unemployment problems are still great cities — Chicago, New Orleans, Washington, Philly, and yes Boston. I’m partial to college towns. Ann Arbor, Austin, Boulder, As heville, Bloomington, Alexandria, I could go on. These are fun, thriving, lively and liberal towns.
On the decision side 50/50 for sure. Check it out Simon.
Nope. Maybe when you’ve lived here a little longer you’ll figure it out.
Simon replying to your comment from below. I have been coming to Benicia for over 60 years. Over 30 on a regular bases. I have family in town and my grand children went all through school here. Also a family member who is a teacher in town. I am very familiar with the history and politics of this wonderfull city. Yes I have lived here for only four years but that does not mean I do not understand the politics of this fine city. I do not know how long you have lived here. It does not matter. What matters is in depth understanding of what is going on in this city. I do understand it and you may also. The council has been polarized and is 4/1 or 3/2 against the Liberal forces in this city. This is off topic but did deserve a responce.
It’s ok, I wouldn’t expect a tourist to know the politics everywhere they go. Maybe in a couple years you’ll figure it out.
This country was built on hard working indivuals and families. Mr. Page you apparently have no concern for education on birth control or any concern for the babies you want to abort. Only your left leaning politics. You slam the south and think nothing of the folks that are trying in those states to make things work. I find your article disgusting and very anti American. Mr. Page I know you are a very good Patriot and was very surprised to see this article. It is driven by your anti Republican political agenda driven ideals without any concern for life. There are ways to stop unwanted pregnancies. Why do you not talk about that and put your support in that direction. You would better serve these folks that you seem to think are under served and cannot think for themselves. Believe me they are not and have the ability to think for themselves.
Nonsense. This is an excellent article, very articulate, and at its core very patriotic, like all of Mr. Page’s writings.
Good article, Jerome. Perry is right up there with Doofus W. Bush and Darth Vader Cheney…May they all have to live with themselves and their collective legacies.–pb
“Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers.” – George Carlin
I only rarely enter these discussions. However, it would be difficult to find a message, to the degree that it is coherent or decipherable, describing my views that is more at variance with my views than the Lifesay commentary I quote. I note the following phrases:
“I find your article disgusting and very anti American.
“It is driven by your anti Republican political agenda driven ideals without any concern for life.”
“Mr. Page you apparently have no concern for education on birth control.” “ You slam the south and think nothing of the folks that are trying in those states to make things work.” “There are ways to stop unwanted pregnancies. Why do you not talk about that and put your support in that direction.” “You would better serve these folks that you seem to think are under served and cannot think for themselves. Believe me they are not and have the ability to think for themselves.”
I am exceedingly confused about what is being conveyed here. Indeed I am certain that I have a far, far greater respect for the ability of Texas women to “think for themselves” and to stop “unwanted pregnancies” than the current laws of Texas. Is this not at the core of the issue? It appears to have escaped this writers notice that the same drives to eliminate abortion are also vigorously engaged in blocking the use of birth control. By the way I am a contributing member of Planned Parenthood, which is dedicated to providing women control over their own bodies– and both education and decisions about birth control and family planning–and which is under unremitting attack from conservatives in Texas. Believe me I do think that women in Texas are capable of making their own decisions about birth control and reproduction without state interference and that was a central point in my article.
However the most crucial issue of my piece, which very obviously escaped Mr. Livesay’s notice, is that the over-riding concern for life being expressed by state governmental policy in Texas is limited to life in the womb. All the Texas blather about its deep and abiding respect for life and the health of women pretty much evaporates at the moment of birth. Following birth, the children of the poor, along with their mothers, are, to a very significant degree, on their own! This is wrong; painfully, morally and tragically wrong.
The writer stated: Following birth, the children of the poor, along with their mothers, are, to a very significant degree, on their own! This is wrong; painfully, morally and tragically wrong.
While one advocates for unlimited restrictions of a women’s right to terminate a pregnancy at any stage of development, that right would have to include partial birth abortions. Additionally it would include terminating a life outside of the womb in the event of an unsuccessful abortion. How does one square the immorality of that action while then claiming the moral high ground in advocating for child care for all through increased state contributions?
Just to be clear on my POV regarding abortion: I believe a woman should have a choice, up to a certain time frame (say 20 weeks). If she has not made a choice by then, well paraphrasing the President; ‘she will then be punished with a baby’.
Dennis, the “partial birth abortion” is an issue whipped up by Republican strategists dishonestly from overinflated emotion and scary imagery. Such events are very rare and would not be chosen by women or their doctors save in financial or health extremity. Many circumstances can prevent terminating pregnancy at the best times. You “conservatives” pretend to be so tough minded. How about giving a woman the same power over her body and issue the Roman husband had over his young children? Oh, that’s RIGHT,
WOMEN ARE NOT AS STRONG, SMART AND MORAL AS MEN. RIGHT? Wrong.
Shelby stated: the “partial birth abortion” … Such events are very rare …
Frequency of occurrence has nothing to do with the morality of the action. The question posed was fair and reasonable, as well as remaining unanswered:
How does one claim the moral high ground in seeking to care for children after birth, when advocating in favor of the heinous act of partial birth abortion, as well as post partum termination of a viable baby?.
So apparently you do not want the poor to bear children. Just who are you Mr. Page to pick and choose? Sorry Mr. Page your article is pure anti Conservative and for sure just an opinion. You are blaming your issue on the Conservatives without the folks at issue taking any responsibility. That is what I saw in your article. It was a pure political piece using the Texas law to very poorly state your anti Conservative core issues in this case abortion.
Grasping, grasping, grasping at those straws. You just got crushed. Accept it and bow out gracefully.
Boobie L., if you get any more wrong-headed and less able to read correctly, the men in white will clap you away in a padded room. Better practice wearing a strait-jacket.
Robert I am correct on all my comments on this article. Remember Shelby Mr. Page wrote it I read it as have others. There is no doubt to his feeling. At about this time he would love to do this article over. Robert you also read it and have a different take on the article to suit yourself. Thats fine but do not personally attack me because I do not agree with you. I have no problem how you politically or ideally feel.
The problem is mockery is lost on Bob. Bob you’ve been destroyed. You totally misinterpreted the article and got called on it. Your only response is to double down and it’s looking bad. Bow out for your own good.
Culture of LIFE???? In TEXAS??? Execution heaven??? WOW! I had never read the text of that egregious law, but that wording totally made my day, laugh-wise. Texas politicians are, in this case, pro-fetus, which is OK, as long as they admit the severe limits of their Culture of Life.” With the highest rate of executions in the US, and one of the highest in the world, with the strong possibility of some executed were actually innocent; and the neglect of its children who live in poverty in a state that receives huge financial handouts from MY taxes, in extremely LOW proportion to what they pay into the federal government, the idea of “Culture of Life” is so laughable that I really have to close and stop laughing. Hypocrites.
children who live in poverty in a state that receives huge financial handouts from MY taxes, in extremely LOW proportion to what they pay into the federal government
Here are the numbers:
Federal Taxes paid per capita:
California — $8,590
Texas — $9,429 (10% higher)
Federal Taxes received per capita:
California — $7,186
Texas — $7,124 (1% lower)
Correction: The taxes received numbers are reversed. Texas receives $7,186 and California receives $7,124. The 1% differential is essentially negligible.
Hahahahahahaha. Self-marginalization at its finest
Thanks for the comment Mike, oops, Simon.
Yeah I’ve seen this phenomenon before too. As if all the people who think you’re wrong about everything could only be one person. Sorry to disappoint but you have many, many detractors, by virtue of your skewed, undemocratic and antisocial views. Korinthenkraker is a great word though.
I think you are right Dennis. A very familiar tone.
Familiar tones abound but not from me. Bang your drum.
Correction: That’s only because Texas is a richer state than most “red” states. Red states collectively are financial sink-holes for the taxes of more productive, blue states.
Shelby stated: That’s only because Texas is a richer state than most “red” states
Texas was the subject, Bob, not Red States. J.Furlong, in his condescending comment, stated something that was at odds with reality, and I provided the correct numbers for the subject at hand.
Now you seek to support his erroneous comment by extending the discussion to other states. Nice try, but, and I will paraphrase your own words:
‘don’t go puling and drooling on us. We’re wise to your standard outcries. Act your age’.
By nearly every measurable economic growth statistic, Texas is one of the most successful states in the union.
Mr. Page seems to try to make two points in this article: Texas is a failure because its government doesn’t spend enough to assist the poor, and that by concentrating on unborn lives Texas necessarily ignores the poor.
The logic Mr. page uses is illogical!
First, the best way to help the poor is to create jobs, not offer government handouts. Texas leads the nation in job creation. Undeniable. It’s poverty rate … Largely attributed to the large influx of illegal aliens. CA has the same problem.
Second, by supporting pro-life agenda does not exclude child care issues. They are two separate issues completely disconnected. Mr. Page attempts to make the case that supporting life necessitates taking money from the poor. That case cannot be made.
Texas is pro-life and also supports the poor by creating an environment where jobs are created. It is the typical liberal position that compassion can only be measured by the amount tax payer money one spends. This is a false measurement. Heavily socialized states are failing throughout the country and the population affected the most are those in poverty.
If I remember correctly, however, all those hundreds and hundreds of jobs created in Texas are low-paying, “right to work” jobs, often barely minimum wage jobs which mean that those working have to rely on that damn socialist guvmint to make up inability to afford health care, basic food necessities and quality education. Yes, Texas creates lots of low-paying jobs while its oil/gas industry makes profits that even they admit are astounding. Texas is NOT pro-life, it is pro-FETAL life, which is a very, very different thing. I would like to know which heavily “socialized” states are failing miserably…could it be the ones which have the highest levels of education, lowest birth and teen pregnancy rates, lowest divorce rates, lowest bad health and obesity rates, best universities, fastest growing bio-medical and computer industries? Those socialist states, those darn blue ones?
Actually Texas leads the country in creating full time positions. The vast majority of jobs created in TX are full time, solid pay. You must be confused with the nation in general. Recent data from the Commerce Department show that over 50% of the jobs created since 2008 are part time. And with the initiation of Obama Care, more employers are moving towards part-time employees.
And the failing blue states … The most fiscally disturbed states in the union … CA, IL, NY … On and on. Big government policies and spending kills economic growth and hurts the poor. Always has, always will.
Enjoy Texas. We expect a full report on your new home. In the meantime …
http://m.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/04/the-10-states-and-10-jobs-with-the-most-low-wage-workers/256553/
Matter,
Here is a link to a piece that serves to confirm what you have stated:
Texas-Size Recovery; Here’s a look at the facts behind job growth in the Lone Star State
From the Fact Check.org piece:
Texas has done a fine job of adding to its employment numbers. Since June 2009, which marked the official end of the recession, until July 2011, the number of jobs increased in the state by 328,000. Nationally, the job growth in that time period was 697,000, according to figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. That means Texas jobs made up 47 percent of the national net job creation.
Livesay: So apparently you do not want the poor to bear children. Just who are you Mr. Page to pick and choose?
Riveting comment! It may somehow be possible to make a logical leap from what I have written to the above statement. I just can’t fathom how. I didn’t think I was making that choice for anyone; I thought I was wanting to insure that that choice was available to the poor. But my thought processes are pedestrian at best, I state myself poorly and I have obviously missed something profound.
Yes, J.P., you have missed the fact that B. Livesay is more strongly attached to his pockets than to reality.
Mr. Page and Robert Shelby are two like thinking individuals. The big difference is Mr. Page has over the years been a Patriot, is apparently religous and has his own thoughts on how society can move forward. All of those are fine. But this article has taken an even deeper thrust into your anti Republican views. You used abortion coupled with your anti Republican views to get a thought across. You are correct Mr. Page you stated your views poorly and if I were you I would rethink what you wrote. As far as Robert Shelby goes he is not in the same league as Mr. Page. Robert Shelby thinks you solve all problems with personal attacks. That Robert Shelby you should review.
Someone else here is not in Mr. Page’s league either.
Irony has finally met its match. Bob Livesay has a unique capacity to root through the pseudo-sophistication of superficial writers like (well, myself) and reveal the hidden truths therein. I am prepared to rethink my entire existence. I give!
Mr. Page it was very easy.
I would say neither do Mr. Page and any of the left leaning folks that comment. Way ahead of all of you. I can think and comment at the same time. Try it or better yet think before you sound off. What fun this is. Lets get back on topic about Mr. Pages article. It is well worth comments from both sides.
You do not have to go that far. Just admiting that you may have gone over the edge is good enough. Thanks for taking the time to except my insight and wisdom.
The winner and still undisputed heavyweight champion, Jerome Page.
All real votes go to Jerome…he has no contending competition…pb
According to the real comments it is a tie in this very far left leaning town. Not my opinion, just the opinion of some of the far left comments. Not bad of a performance by the Conservatives. Wow it was touch and go till the final bell rang. What a game. I loved every comment on this run.
Mr. Page wrote: “Post-birth quality of life, culture of life or loss of life — that’s in the hands of fate, perhaps the gods…but quite apparently not the state of Texas!”
Are we to infer, Mr. Page, that you subscribe to the Malthus’ population explosion theory?
Thomas Robert Malthus was an 18th Century British cleric who wrote several essays on the relationship between economics and population growth. His core theory was that human population always increases faster (geometrically) than the production of food (arithmetically). In his 1798 “Essay on the Principle of Population,” Malthus said there are two sets of factors that control population growth. The first (or “preventive”) set includes hunger, disease and war; the second (or “positive”) set includes abortion, birth control, prostitution, postponed marriage and celibacy. Like most progressives today, Malthus accentuated the “positive” set because these allegedly involve conscious and deliberate individual decisions (or “freedom to choose”).
There are two underlying assumptions in this argument: The first is that hunger, disease and war are “preventable;” the second is that choosing abortion, birth control, prostitution, postponed marriage and celibacy are all acts of an individual’s free will.
Conservative thinkers (everyone from Thomas Aquinas to Mark Levin) would say history shows that hunger, disease, and war are not preventable. Most progressive thinkers (everyone from John Dewey to Cass Sunstein) believe there is no such thing as “free will” because all thoughts and actions are governed by instincts and/or conditioned responses.
So what’s the solution to the suffering millions of children who are already with us? Should Obama issue SNAP cards to all of them so they can fill up on candy and soda-pop at their local Quick Stop?
Somehow I don’t think FLOTUS would approve.