Infant Mortality Is Higher When a Republican Is in the White House, Study Shows

320px-Newbornbaby-1hourafter.jpg
Pospiech
Infant Mortality: Probably Not a Partisan Issue
Let's get this out of the way at the front. The study -- the one I'm about to delineate -- does not mean that there is a causal relationship between Republican presidents and infant mortality.

It means that after the authors controlled for certain relevant variables -- e.g., education attainment, the unemployment rate, and economic inequality -- there was a correlation between a GOP administration and higher rates of infant mortality. (Cue angry comment from Internet troll who does not even know what a regression analysis is).

Now that we've (hopefully) subordinated any knee-jerk responses, some new research (gated) indicates that, for reasons we do not yet know, infant mortality is higher under Republican presidents since 1965 (through 2010) than Democratic presidents.

The researchers, responsibly, say that further research is needed to determine if there is statistical causation. But we do know that when a Republican is in the White House, infant mortality -- while dropping absolutely over the past seven-plus decades -- is 3 percent higher. And, as an important side note, throw away the canard that we have the best health care system in the world; the U.S. ranks 31st, neighbored by Slovakia and Chile, in infant mortality.

The study's finding do have some intuitive appeal. Republicans have long been skeptical of any national health insurance program, and their ongoing fight to attack, repeal or otherwise tarnish Obamacare (the Affordable Care Act) is well-known. Indeed, Republicans are skeptical of most social-welfare programs in general.

But I suspect the reason for the study's finding might go a bit deeper.

For example, in 1960, the U.S. ranked 12th lowest in infant mortality. This is why I suspect the explanation goes far beyond basic partisan labels (i.e., Democratic and Republican) and probably calls for an examination of the political plate-tectonic shifts that have taken place in American politics since the 1960s. Today is not the day for that history lesson (but see here and here for primers). But I submit the most alarming take-away from this research is not the 3 percent difference between Republicans and Democrats, but why we're comfortable living in a world where Slovakia is our equal.



Advertisement

My Voice Nation Help
4 comments
robertms15
robertms15

Does that include unborn children slaughtered by abortion?And does this study deal with the children of Democrats who have less of a moral concern for the survival of their progeny than say,the Republican Duggars?

mario_risk
mario_risk

Baloney!  The article is written by a troll who can't help himself, he needs to take some Thorazine or Haldol!

Maryos
Maryos

I understand that correlation is not causal, but the questions are, first, why there is a correlation, and second, why the correlation is against Republicans? This might be "only a correlation" but nevertheless is very telling of the different political ideologies when in power!

Puller58
Puller58

You can cite studies, statistics, polls, etc, but voters vote their guts.  (Yep, both parties.)

Now Trending

Houston Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...