The first hard case and a possible response.
I love your proposal. You have my vote.
I would like to rant a little bit about the underlying argument that this is based off of from the proponents of abortion: that pro-lifers don't care about the baby beyond birth. That trash is so ridiculous given the amount of nonprofit organizations I know that are, and have been for decades, working towards taking care of the mother and child. Most are religious based (most charities are if I am not mistaken). So to say we aren't doing anything is disingenuous.
Even if we were though, the argument is still for murder. So yes, I am completely okay with Roe being struck down for being incorrect even without those provisions in place. Even in this extreme edge case. It's hard, but the alternative is worse.
The ticket should be purple. It gets away from the Blue/Red political divide. We need Purple solutions for many of our problems.
I see your footnote about why you chose 13, but I think a program like this should benefit anyone under 15, personally. That's still a really small number of cases, and anyone under 15 is still a child. Or, alternatively, once you hit 13 but you are under 16 you qualify for a similar but slightly less intense program - maybe you don't get free medical care and free college, but significantly reduced, plus ready access to resources for pregnant single mothers (as a mid-teenager might be old enough to consent to sex with a similarly-aged person, and might be old enough to decide to raise a child, while a 13-year-old is not and is ALWAYS the victim of a violent crime). I think we would also want to add free access to significant mental health resources to your list, since anyone in this situation will need that to cope with what's happened.
What would you say to those who argue that every pregnancy at this age is inherently life-threatening?