The Party of (Biological-Only) Family Values?

Babies.

CBS4’s Dominic Garcia reports on an interesting line-item in the Republican tax reform bill currently up for debate in Congress–a proposed elimination of the federal tax credit given to families who adopt children:

A provision in the proposed Republican tax bill is worrying adoption advocates in Colorado.

The current federal tax credit for adoption is $13,570 per child, a provision in the proposed tax bill would eliminate it.

The goal is to help offset the costs that come with adding a new member to the family…

Lauren Arnold, the executive director of the Adoption Exchange, worries that without the tax credit many families won’t adopt because they simply can’t afford it.

“What’s at stake here is the child who’s not going to be adopted because there’s not as much of an incentive or it’s too much of a financial burden for a family to undertake that task,” said Arnold.

To the extent that the GOP’s tax bill includes what’s known in the parlance as “pay fors,” meaning offsetting revenue increases to cover the lost revenue from reducing taxes, they frequently consist of the elimination of tax deductions and credits that have been carved out over the years to encourage any number of policy goals. We talked last week about the proposed reduction of the mortgage interest deduction, which would have a negative effect especially on high-value housing markets like the Denver metro area.

Well folks, it would appear that in addition to home buyers who unlike Donald Trump have to ask what real estate costs before they know if they can afford it, the Trump administration doesn’t prioritize child adoption either. Given the unquestionable social benefits of connecting children with families who want to raise them, this doesn’t seem like a tax credit Republicans should want to get rid of.

Unless of course it’s the same logic that says people shouldn’t have access to birth control, because it just encourages sin! Trump doesn’t have to worry about the cost of adoption, after all, since he’s a billionaire who changes spouses to keep the heirs pumping out. But if ordinary babies given up for adoption can’t get adopted, maybe these irresponsible punk kids (insert urban or whatever dog-whistle adjective suits you as desired) will think twice about making babies to begin with. Right? Just like that’s always worked every time it’s been tried.

More likely it’s just about giving rich folks a tax cut and not caring what comes after.

9 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. Diogenesdemar says:

    Republican Party:  Those kids made bad choices.  They could have chosen to be born into families of millionaires or billionaires, or they could have chosen to remain in the uterus — either way, we Republicans would have given them every protection and every benefit.

    When they chose to leave the uterus and enter into the world via the underclass, they knew what they were getting into.  

    Why do you think that baby booties come with bootstraps, anyway?? 

  2. RepealAndReplace says:

    All I could think of is that bumper sticker which anti-choice people have on their vehicles:  "Adoption – The Non-Violent Choice" 

  3. ModeratusModeratus says:

    What are you liberals worried about? As long as there is abortion on demand right up to the delivery date like there is in Colorado, there should be no such thing as an unwanted child. Be consistent!

    • mamajama55mamajama55 says:

      Moderatus, you should really know the law before you write about the law. In Colorado, "late term abortion" is usually up to 26 weeks, and in extreme circumstances, (death of the fetus, threat to the life of the mother, and/or or severe medical problems), it is obtainable up to 34 weeks.

      A normal pregnancy, which you hopefully remember from your own kids, lasts 40 weeks.

    • spaceman65 says:

      How about you do your homework, Moddy, and learn what the laws on abortion actually are in Colorado?  Your comment reveals your ignorance, which appears to grow daily, only outpaced by your unjustified self-confidence and dishonesty.

  4. Genghis says:

    Gotta love the GOP's consistency here. Banning all abortions would ensure that a 14-year-old rape victim must carry her rapist's baby to term. Eliminating the tax credit will help ensure that the 14-year-old gets stuck raising the rapist's baby to adulthood.

    Cuz it has nothing to do with the health, safety and welfare of babies. It has everything to do with punishing slutty behavior (the 14-year-old was certainly "asking for it," after all).

  5. notaskinnycooknotaskinnycook says:

    Adoptive parents losing that tax credit won't hurt healthy, white infants nearly as much as it will older kids in foster care waiting for a forever family. "Waiting kids" often come with a bucketful of problems that can be very expensive to address. If that tax credit goes away, many of those kids will remain in fosterage, where the state picks up the tab for their medical and psychiatric care through Medicaid. Does that sound like a good idea to you, Moddy? 

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account


You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.