Could Liberals Raise a Billion Dollars a Year to Fund Abortions?

John Middlebrook/CSM via ZUMA

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Bear with me for a few moments while I outline a probably dumb idea. But the possibility that Roe v. Wade might soon be on the chopping block has nudged it back into my mind again. My question is: how many women would likely be affected if Roe were overturned? Here’s a really rough guess:

  • About 900,000 abortions are performed each year.
  • A back-of-the-envelope estimate suggests that about 40 percent are performed on women who live in states like California or New York where abortion rights would remain strong. Maybe 500,000 women in other states would be affected.
  • Of those, figure that maybe a third have incomes high enough that they aren’t seriously affected. So that leaves about 350,000 women.
  • How much would it cost to provide all of these women with a free abortion? That is, pick them up at home, drive to an airport, have them fly to Los Angeles or New York or wherever, get an abortion, and then fly them back home. Maybe $2,000? $3,000?
  • So the total cost for a year would be somewhere in the ballpark of a billion dollars.

If Roe were overturned, could an organization raise this kind of money? Mark Zuckerberg could do it all by himself. Ten gazillionaires could do it without even feeling it in their wallets. Are there ten liberal gazillionaires who’d be willing to do this? How much money could be raised from small-dollar donors? Etc.

I dunno. Maybe it’s just a dumb idea. A billion dollars a year is a lot of money, putting aside fantasies of Zuck funding it all by himself. But it’s a very concrete dumb idea. I wonder. Could liberals defang any reversal of Roe by simply ponying up enough money?

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate