CNBC Declares Red States “Worst Places to Live” Because They Protect Babies From Abortions

In a stunning display of journalistic duplicity that would make Pravda blush, CNBC has published its annual “America’s 10 Worst States to Live In for 2026” list. And, surprise, surprise, it’s a who’s who of states that dare to prioritize actual human life, lower taxes, and self-reliance over whatever cocktail of “inclusiveness” and “reproductive rights” (their polite term for abortion-on-demand) the coastal commentariat demands.

According to Scott Cohn, Tennessee takes the top spot as the absolute worst place to exist, followed by Texas, Indiana, Louisiana, Georgia, Utah, Missouri, Alabama, Oklahoma, and Arkansas. Did you notice the common denominator? All Republican strongholds.

Let me put on my shocked face!

REACH PRO-LIFE PEOPLE WORLDWIDE! Advertise with LifeNews to reach hundreds of thousands of pro-life readers every week. Contact us today.

According to CNBC, these states performed poorly in the quality-of-life category, which CNBC has conveniently given greater weight this year. Metrics include crime, air quality, healthcare, childcare… and, of course, “inclusiveness of state laws” and “reproductive rights.”

Translation: If your state doesn’t treat unborn children as disposable inconveniences and doesn’t bend the knee to every progressive social experiment, you’re basically living in a dystopian hellscape.

Bread and Butter Reality Check

Nobody’s pretending every Southern or Midwestern state is paradise. Some on this list do struggle with real issues: higher crime in certain urban pockets, opioid crises, education gaps that predate any recent culture wars, and yes, legitimate healthcare access problems in rural areas. Those deserve honest scrutiny. Economic growth, school choice, criminal justice reform, and targeted safety-net improvements aren’t partisan talking points; they’re common sense.

But CNBC’s sneering tone reveals the game. A pro-life state that protects the unborn gets dinged on “quality of life”? That’s not journalism based on solid data; that’s ideological sabotage dressed up in woke ideology.  Protecting innocent life isn’t a flaw —it’s a defining feature of a civilized society.

Families move to these states precisely because they offer affordable housing, lower taxes, stronger communities, and values that don’t mock traditional family structures.

Texas, second on the naughty list, boasts no state income tax, explosive job growth, and millions of people voting with their U-Haul trailers to get there from blue-state disasters like California and New York.

Tennessee? Booming economy, no income tax, Music City attracting talent left and right.

Utah? Family-friendly, low unemployment, economic powerhouse.

But sure, CNBC, tell us more about how “reproductive rights” (i.e., post-Roe-protections) make life unlivable while ignoring the actual human cost of the policies they celebrate.

The Partisan Nonsense Exposed

This isn’t subtle. CNBC’s methodology explicitly treats factors such as  “inclusiveness” (read: expansive equity mandates and policies that can conflict with religious liberty) and abortion access as quality-of-life positives.

Meanwhile, states with strong economies, abundant job opportunities, lower cost of living and strong communities are  penalized for wrong-think, especially when the don’t align with CNBC’s preferred social policy priorities.

It’s the same tired playbook: Red states are backward yokels, kind of like Hillary’s “Basket of deplorables.” Blue states are enlightened utopias, never mind the exodus data, skyrocketing costs, and visible decay in places like San Francisco, Chicago, or New York.

If “worst to live in” means you can’t easily get a late-term abortion but can afford a house, raise kids without bankrupting yourself on taxes and regulations, and live in communities that value work and family—then sign me up for the “worst” list. Americans aren’t fleeing Tennessee for Illinois. The migration patterns tell the real story.

CNBC can keep their F grades and pearl-clutching over “reproductive rights.”  The rest of us will stick to judging states on jobs, safety, schools, and freedom, bread-and-butter metrics that actually matter to normal families.

Pro-life policies aren’t dragging anyone down; they’re a moral baseline worth defending. The absurdity here isn’t the states. It’s CNBC pretending otherwise while lecturing flyover country.

Bless your so-called journalistic hearts; Pass the sweet tea and keep moving forward Red America. The data on actual livability, affordability, opportunity, and family formation disagrees with the CNBC narrative.

LifeNews Note: Lynda Bell is the president of Florida Right to Life.