Actually... you've got your information wrong.
Originally the AAP said that routine infant circumcision should not be done (that's when the doctors just circumcise without leaving it up to the parents) due to risks and benefits not outweighing one another. However some doctors didn't get the message and kept routine infant circumcision or pushing the parents to choose circumcision for their sons.
A handful of years ago the AAP said there was no benefit to circumcision that outweighed the risks, and recommended that parents be advised accordingly but that in the end it was up to them. This led to a lot of insurance companies (including some states with medicaid) to no longer fund circumcisions, which took the decision away from MANY parents.
The AAP, which has always said that a parent should have the right to choose based on the information they're given, but not pressured by doctors or anyone else, looked at available research and reversed their position, saying that there were more benefits than risks, but not by much. This was based on research also showing there were some benefits, and research on actual studies showed even less risks. It also was based on research showing that the costs of circumcising infants as opposed to costs associated with leaving a boy intact (infections, cancers, etc, no matter how rare they do cost in a population assessment. see first link)
When a parent can't afford a circumcision for their son then they usually opt out of it, which can increase medical costs through the life of the child. But there's also the parents who decide to circumcise at home or have someone else do it. These types of circumcisions are EXTREMELY risky. In a doctor's or hospital office the circumcision has less than 1/2 a percent of a risk, and most of those are easily and quickly fixed. When someone does it at home they're likely to hide it, and there's all sorts of dangers. As long as there are benefits then supporting a parent's choice it's just wiser to make sure that insurances and medicaid will cover it. Hopefully they will start reversing their choices not to cover soon.
Add: AAP's statement "New scientific evidence shows the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks of the procedure, but the benefits are not great enough to recommend routine circumcision for all newborn boys, according to an updated policy statement published by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP). The revised policy, like the previous one from the AAP, says the decision whether or not to circumcise should be left to the parents in consultation with their child’s doctor." So definitely far outweigh, but also definitely do outweigh.