An ‘investment’ that we can do without

Gov. Gavin Newsom has jumped the shark with the report of his California Future of Abortion Council.

Anticipating that abortion restrictions in other states could result in upwards of 1 million women coming to California to seek abortion, the council called on the state to “increase investment in abortion funds” in order to provide “direct logistical and practical support for patients such as gas, lodging, transportation, child care, doula support, food, lost wages, etc.”

Upon release of the report, Newsom vowed to make California a “sanctuary” for abortion.

“We want to let people know that we are going to be part of the solution, that we are a beacon,” California Senate president Toni Atkins, D-San Diego told The New York Times. Her office helped create the report.

We suppose our idea of aspiring to make California a national beacon differs a bit.

In any case, it’s one thing for the governor to want to maintain the status quo on abortion policy in California in the event that the Supreme Court overturns existing precedent on abortion and allows states to set their own abortion policies.

It’s another for the governor to not only promote abortion tourism but vow to subsidize abortions.

No, California taxpayers shouldn’t pay for the abortions of out-of-state residents.

No, California taxpayers shouldn’t cover the travel expenses, lodging and/or lost wages of those who would come to California from out of state to have an abortion.

Politically, Newsom should tread carefully, too.

A July survey by the Public Policy Institute of California notes that, while most Latinos in California oppose overturning Roe v. Wade, about half are more concerned that some states make it “too easy” to get an abortion than are concerned about states being too restrictive.

Newsom and the Democrats shouldn’t take Latinos, who largely identify as Catholic, for granted.

With that in mind, if the governor wishes to use his finite time to encourage private groups to help finance abortion access, he should feel free to do so.

There’s no need to involve taxpayers in what is fundamentally a headline-grabbing political stunt.