The Assembly is plowing through dozens of Democrat-sponsored bills today, literally “fiddling while Rome burns.” Amongst those bills that have passed today is AB 1048, by Alberto Torrico, legislation that increases from 72-hours to 30 days the amount of time parents have to “surrender” their child to the government. Many Republicans voted for this legislation today and in the past, under the impression that it is a “pro-life” policy that will save lives. Some legislation appears good public policy until it is truly examined. AB 1048 is one of those bills that initially makes lawmakers feel good about themselves, but sends the wrong message to the public.

First, the very concept of “surrendering” one’s child to the government is antithetical to the American principle of limited government. America was founded upon the belief that the church and family are the nucleus of our communities. If a woman finds herself unable to care for a newborn, she should be able to turn to her family, church, or local private charities for assistance. But as the government continues to take on the role of nanny—usurping the local, community-sponsored aid that citizens have historically looked to for help—the public comes to rely upon government instead. 

Second, AB 1048 is not a “pro-life” bill. It’s laudable that lawmakers want to end the horror of parents callously dumping their precious children in dumpsters or ditches. But what message does it send to prospective parents that the government is willing to allow a whole month to decide whether to keep or give away one’s child? What does it say about the government’s value of life when parents have three additional weeks to abandon their child? Between the current 72-hour abandonment allowance and the proposed 30-day allowance, there will certainly be increased incidents of child abuse. What initially may have been a child abandonment issue could turn into a child abuse issue as unwilling parents take out frustration on their innocent child.

During his presentation of the bill today, Assemblyman Torrico actually claimed that AB 1048 is a “pro-life bill” and expressed his bemusement at the governor’s repeated vetoes of other attempts to increase the “surrender” time for newborns. The governor’s veto message last year read, "I have vetoed similar measures twice before and there is no new data or information to support a change in my position. California’s Safe Surrender Law is carefully crafted to provide an emergency alternative to a woman in crisis while also reserving the fundamental rights of a child." Pro-abortion Democrats have hoodwinked pro-life Republicans into believing that allowing parents more time to determine whether they want to keep a child is a pro-life policy. In reality, this undermines the pro-life movement by telling the public that human life is easily discarded—even up to a month after a child is born. AB 1048 is antithetical to public policies that encourage strong family units and value for life.

Thank you to the five Republicans who voted against AB 1048; they understand the proper role of government and what it means to be truly pro-life: Joel Anderson, Curt Hagman, Steve Knight, Jeff Miller and Ted Gaines. It’s better to vote the right way and take a stand for a cause, than vote the wrong way to feel good momentarily. 

This entry was posted on Wednesday, June 3rd, 2009 at 12:00 am and is filed under Blog Posts.