Unemployment hovers around 9 percent nationally. Our nation’s debt lurks at just over $14 trillion. But fortunately for all of us, millions of Americans took it upon themselves to rise up, head to the polls and throw out the bums who caused all this mess. The way toward a prosperous and fiscally responsible United States is clear, but only through a steadfast focus on job creation, chipping away at the deficit and balancing budgets.

Tricked, bamboozled, hornswoggled even, the Republicans have performed a nice little switcheroo and now seek to limit the rights and endanger the health of millions of American women. And all this social reform under the guise of fiscal responsibility.

From the makers of “Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act” comes the “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act;” and with a name that rolls off the tongue so gracefully, this one, in the House at least, is going to be a slam dunk.

Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) recently introduced legislation that would not only prevent the use of federal funds for the performing of abortions, but would prevent Americans receiving health care from the government from acquiring coverage for the same procedure. Small businesses enabled by tax credits to help insure their employees would be unable to provide for abortion coverage. But hey, it’s good as long as Obama’s not forcing you to buy the inadequate coverage, right?

The proposal itself is an extension of the Hyde Amendment, passed in 1976 in response to the Roe v. Wade decision passed three years prior. Hyde, tacked on to legislation annually, states that except in cases of rape, incest or the pregnancy itself posing a danger to the life of the mother, federal funds are not to be used. So Smith’s bill seeks to outlaw federal funding for abortions, the funding for which is already outlawed. Forgive the crassness, but first of all it’s redundant, secondly, it’s redundant.

Smith’s proposal previously altered the portion concerning rape to “forcible rape,” the definition of which either varies from state to state or is wholly absent as it is on the federal level.

This wording revealed a dangerous misunderstanding on the part of not only Smith, but all supporters of the bill. Without consent, rape, whether “forcible” or otherwise, is still rape. The degree of interpretation that could have resulted from this single word could endanger the lives of thousands of women every year, especially those with low-incomes who would otherwise be unable to afford the procedure.

A second pillar of the bill could prove just as harmful should it gain any significant support in its progress through Congress. It would give protections to those who object to abortion on the basis of conscience. Does your faith prevent you from performing an abortion? Do your morals stand in the way? Are you just not feeling it today, not an abortion kind of day? Take a break, this legislation has you covered.

If that was too blunt or even disrespectful, fine by me; because I believe allowing a complete stranger to have that much control over the course of a woman’s life simply because of their beliefs is short-sighted, dangerous and fundamentally wrong.

But that’s not all, folks; Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.) is looking to defund groups supported by Title X who perform abortions. Title X, aimed at family planning and basic health services such as screenings, directs a significant amount of funds to Planned Parenthood. Though a provider of abortions, Planned Parenthood’s reach goes far beyond the procedure, and once again oversights such as this endanger more than the unborn.

So with this, sponsors of the bill are looking to cut $327 million from family planning services. Don’t forget the possible $758 million cut to WIC either.

So, add those up, subtract the detrimental effects it will have on our society and American families and the total comes in at…still roughly over a $14 trillion deficit. Happy budget season everyone.

Jake Begun ([email protected]) is a junior majoring in journalism.