Lawmaker censured for asking if fatal child abuse saves taxpayers money

[Sugar Cookie]

Experts testified before Alaska lawmakers Monday about the widespread, long-term harm child abuse has on the state — to the economy, to the workforce and to taxpayers when traumatized children and the adults they grow up to be rely on government services.

Rep. David Eastman (R)

But, in questioning one of those experts, state Rep. David Eastman (R) zeroed in on a possible “benefit.”

“How would you respond to the argument that I have heard on occasion where, um, in the case where child abuse is fatal, obviously it’s not good for the child, but it’s actually a benefit to society because there aren’t needs for government services and whatnot over the whole course of that child’s life?” Eastman said.

In the days since the committee meeting, Eastman’s remarks have caused an uproar. His colleagues called them “despicable,” “atrocious” and “indefensible.” On Wednesday, the Alaska House of Representatives voted 35-1 to censure him. Rep. Andrew Gray (D), in introducing his censure motion, said Eastman had brought “great shame on this House.” The only lawmaker who voted against the motion was Eastman, who was also censured in 2017 for saying that some Alaskans try to get pregnant “so that they can get a free trip to the city” to get an abortion. He was the first Alaska House member in history to be censured, a formal admonishment that otherwise carries no repercussions.

Eastman said in a text message that he was playing devil’s advocate at Monday’s hearing, where Alaska Children’s Trust President and CEO Trevor Storrs told the Alaska House Judiciary Committee that when a child dies from abuse, it results in an estimated $1.5 million hit to Alaska, a figure that includes “productivity losses” because they don’t grow up to join the workforce.


“I asked them to respond to some of the arguments we hear regularly as pro-life legislators that there is an economic benefit to society when unwanted children are aborted since [Alaska Children’s Trust] was arguing the opposite in committee yesterday. What better organization to hear from on this issue than [the trust], as their mission is the prevention of child abuse?”

In the past, Eastman has described abortion as “the ultimate form of child abuse.”

At Wednesday’s censure hearing, Eastman defended himself and decried the push to formally reprimand him.

“The outrageous accusation that somehow I and members of my district support the extermination of people or support child abuse when I’ve staked my entire political career arguing for the opposite is not acceptable in this body,” he said.

Eastman started Monday’s exchange by asking Storrs about the $1.5 million figure and whether there were any cost savings because a dead child doesn’t need any services that would tap government coffers.

Storrs seemed taken aback by the question.

“Can you say that again?” he asked Eastman. “Did you say a benefit to society?”

“Talking dollars,” Eastman responded. “Now you’ve got a $1.5 million price tag here for victims of fatal child abuse. It gets argued periodically that it’s actually a cost savings because that child is not going to need any of those government services that they might otherwise be entitled to receive and need based on growing up in this type of environment.”

“I don’t even know how to answer that — that there’s a cost savings to the death of a child,” Storrs said. “The impact that that has on a family and us as a society when a child is lost, especially to child abuse and neglect, is unmeasurable, and it’s hugely tragic.”

About 1½ minutes later, another member of the judiciary committee, Rep. Cliff Groh (D), said he was “disturbed” by Eastman’s questions. “As someone who’s prosecuted child abuse cases, it was very sad and terrible,” Groh said at the hearing.

“Rep. Eastman’s comments … and his line of questioning were despicable, over the line, and I was stunned when I heard them,” he told The Washington Post on Wednesday.

MSN

 

[cubby]

WTF is wrong with this guy, maybe he can think like that in his mind, but to say it out loud and in front of a hundred witnesses. Just wow!

 

[McDanel]

Wrong, because the prosecution and incarceration of the parents is also of considerable public expense, asshole.

In reality, this guy is an obsessive abortion foe. He's trying to suggest that his colleagues who support abortion shouldn't care if a living child is murdered.

 

[Sejanus]

What a total nob of an assclown.

 

[thuumpr]

Wrong, because the prosecution and incarceration of the parents is also of considerable public expense, asshole.

In reality, this guy is an obsessive abortion foe. He's trying to suggest that his colleagues who support abortion shouldn't care if a living child is murdered.

I'm thinking the reference (since this is obviously a soundbite) is about abortion.

 

[roadsidehorror]

Just another greasy politician doing what greasy politicians do.

 

[DamagedGoods]

Even if you're anti-abortion, how could you possibly believe that it is the "ultimate" child abuse?? Does this asshole know what people do to kids? Kids who have self-awareness and and thoughts and feelings?

Maybe this isn't the time or place to be playing devil's advocate, my guy?

 

[thuumpr]

Even if you're anti-abortion, how could you possibly believe that it is the "ultimate" child abuse?? Does this asshole know what people do to kids? Kids who have self-awareness and and thoughts and feelings?

Maybe this isn't the time or place to be playing devil's advocate, my guy?

This is DD and you can't sense sarcasm?

 

[DamagedGoods]

This is DD and you can't sense sarcasm?

You really think this guy said that abortion is the ultimate abuse... sarcastically? You really don't think he meant that?

The guy who is extremely anti-abortion... is gonna be sarcastic about how bad he thinks abortions are?

 

[thuumpr]

You really think this guy said that abortion is the ultimate abuse... sarcastically? You really don't think he meant that?

The guy who is extremely anti-abortion... is gonna be sarcastic about how bad he thinks abortions are?

Backwards @DamagedGoods ... Asking if fatal child abuse (e.g.,abortion - tied to his earlier statement) saves taxpayers money. Phrased that way would be sarcastic however this is a soundbite. No one but apparently a liberal leaning news service would print this question - out of context.

 

[Babs]

WTF is wrong with this guy, maybe he can think like that in his mind, but to say it out loud and in front of a hundred witnesses. Just wow!

He suffers from Pretzel Syndrome...he's got his head stuck up his ass.

 

[Blunderbuss Firozabad]

Backwards @DamagedGoods ... Asking if fatal child abuse (e.g.,abortion - tied to his earlier statement) saves taxpayers money. Phrased that way would be sarcastic however this is a soundbite. No one but apparently a liberal leaning news service would print this question - out of context.

No, Eastman was using satire WITHOUT context.

He arrogantly assumes everyone knows his anti-abortion stance or he's attempting to have his false and unsubstantiated assertion that the pro-choice side frequently uses the governments cost- saving on abortions vs full term delivery as a "Pro" (vs Con) point in favor of legal abortions spoken on the record to be used out of context by himself.

Storrs was there to present information about the cost to society when adverse childhood experiences occur between birth and the age of 16.
He's not there to present results and opinions on anything having to do with the termination of a pregnancy.

@DamagedGoods is right, that was hardly the time to be playing Devils advocate.

The Washington Post printed the entire exchange from the Alaskan House of Representatives record.
So did the right-leaning Anchorage Press.

Verbatim.

Nothing was "out-of-context".

Alaska House censures GOP lawmaker over child abuse comments

JUNEAU, Alaska (AP) — An Alaska lawmaker with a history of incendiary remarks was censured by the state House Wednesday after he said it has been argued that cases of

www.anchoragepress.com

Rep. David Eastman is already well-reviled in Alaska.
Not only did he charge taxpayers for a visit to Arizona and a brief tour of the audit, he also went to Lindell "Symposium" on the taxpayers dollar.

And finally, and I made sure my info came from a "right" leaning media outlet)

" Alaska lawmakers are discussing whether to sanction a member of the state House who is also a member of the Oath Keepers far-right paramilitary organization..."

"Eastman has said he attended a Jan. 6 rally in Washington, D.C., for outgoing President Donald Trump held before people stormed the Capitol."

Prior to his attendance of the events of January 6th he said:

"There are times when push comes to shove and now seems to be one of those times. So all the more important that you recognize that simply rolling-over is not going to do anything good for Alaska or for our country,” Eastman told KTUU".

Rep. Eastman could be sanctioned over Oath Keeper ties

ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) — Alaska lawmakers are discussing whether to sanction a member of the state House who is also a member of the Oath Keepers far-right paramilitary organization, a

www.anchoragepress.com

Also..
"In 2020, he was removed from his position on the ethics committee after it was found that he violated the state ethics law in 2018 by disclosing confidential information."

Ethics panel finds Alaska Rep. David Eastman violated ethics law

A subcommittee of the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics said it found by "clear and convincing evidence" that Eastman had violated ethics law by disclosing the existence of a complaint that was considered confidential.

www.alaskasnewssource.com

The Washington Post reported accurately.
This is their first article about him.
I think they wrote fairly and with restraint to be honest. The WP did not bring up these other matters out of context to give us a fuller picture of him.

Maybe that's the problem.

 

[McDanel]

Backwards @DamagedGoods ... Asking if fatal child abuse (e.g.,abortion - tied to his earlier statement) saves taxpayers money. Phrased that way would be sarcastic however this is a soundbite. No one but apparently a liberal leaning news service would print this question - out of context.

I thought his sarcasm was obvious, hence my comment linking his remark to opposing abortion.

 

[DamagedGoods]

Backwards @DamagedGoods ... Asking if fatal child abuse (e.g.,abortion - tied to his earlier statement) saves taxpayers money. Phrased that way would be sarcastic however this is a soundbite. No one but apparently a liberal leaning news service would print this question - out of context.

So did you actually read what I commented, or did you just assume because you're pissed off that a liberal leaning news source was vaguely included?

I didn't say anything about his statement that fatal child abuse saves taxpayers money when clearly he was being facetious about that.

 

[Alxprkrkrls]

At Wednesday’s censure hearing, Eastman defended himself and decried the push to formally reprimand him.

“The outrageous accusation that somehow I and members of my district support the extermination of people or support child abuse when I’ve staked my entire political career arguing for the opposite is not acceptable in this body,”
Ugh I hate when they play the moral outrage card as a deflection
“HOW COULD YOU THINK THAT IM A SCUMBAG WHEN ALL I DO I TRY TO BE GOOD”
Classic move. However it’s been used too many times and now we all see through it.