The party that claims to be  pro-life  sure has a funny way of showing it. This week, the CDC released a dire report on the spread of the devastating Zika virus in the United States which found that the number of confirmed cases in pregnant women has ballooned to 157 in a matter of months. The disease which has only a mild effect on adults has been shown to lead to major birth defects in children, including a major risk of microcephaly.How did Republicans in Congress respond? By underfunding the fight   and then earmarking it for next year (and only if Democrats to agree to slash welfare funding of course).On Tuesday, the Senate cleared the way for expected approval by the chamber on Thursday of $1.1 billion to fight the mosquito-borne Zika virus, which has been linked to birth defects. Unlike the Senate legislation, the House bill requires that the $622.1 million be fully offset with spending cuts elsewhere. Many conservative Republicans in the House refuse to approve Zika funds that would add to federal budget deficits, while Democrats and some Senate Republicans favor treating the problem as an emergency that would not have to be financed with spending cuts.By next year, the number of cases will likely be in the thousands and the already lowball funding will be even less effective. If that sounds like a truly idiotic plan, experts agree and have condemned it. In response to which one Republican whined,  We will have hundreds of millions of dollars in that bill for next year s Zika response, so to suggest that somebody is being shortchanged the money is just being prudently laid out at the appropriate pace and paid for along the way.  (Note:  Hundreds of millions  is less than $1.9 billion.)Is right now really the time to get  serious  about stewardship of the federal deficit?  Absolutely!  say Republicans who may have just realized they only have a dwindling number of months to stick their thumbs in President Obama s eye and can t miss this opportunity.A month ago, a deal was almost hammered out to provide about half of the $1.9 billion Obama had asked for, but that fell through when Republicans tried to use the spending bill to derail the unrelated Iran nuclear deal. When it became clear that Democrats were not going to destroy the historic multinational deal just because Republicans had Zika-infected hostages, the Republicans dropped the bill entirely   and any pretense of actually caring about the victims of Zika. Their new option, put forward by the House GOP, offers just $662 million and is worse than the original in every way; partly because, as mentioned above, it won t even kick in until next year.While Republicans play these games, Dr. Tom Frieden, the director of the CDC, has been emphatically insisting that time is crucial and that defunding other programs to move the money around is monumentally idiotic. You can t rob Peter to pay Paul. That s no way to fight an epidemic,  Frieden said.  Let down your guard in one place, stop fighting one challenge and threat to Americans here to fight it better there   that s not a way to keep Americans safe. Which, of course, is of very little concern to Republicans in Congress. Keeping Americans safe has always taken a backseat to blocking any opportunity for Obama to  win.  If that means putting the lives of thousands of women and their unborn children in jeopardy, well, that s a small price to pay for not having to go back home and look a Tea Party voter in the eye while explaining why he or she worked with the president on anything.If the Zika virus could vote, it would surely support the Republican Party.Featured image via John Moore/Getty Images