Pro-life Representative Brad Stupak (D-MI) is leading the charge, pushing an amendment to bolster the block on federal funding for abortions. These Democrats are a small fraction of their Party, but they are offering the victory spin today claiming they have a bloc large enough -- combined with unilateral Republican opposition -- to halt the bill.
While the economic crisis has demanded center stage, former linchpin cultural issues have remained relatively dormant. Gay marriage has moved from a national battleground to smaller regional fracases. And the abortion debate has largely been relegated to the fringe of domestic policy debates.
The high-profile return of this issue indicates its continued mark on American politics. Pro-life Democrats are not driven by the realities of the policy, but by shrewd political posturing in what has become a legislative process of one Party. The LA Times parses the baseless argument Stupak's camp makes, pointing to the presence of an ulterior motive:
The real goal of abortion opponents isn't to maintain the status quo. It's to extend federal prohibitions into private pocketbooks. By restricting coverage offered through the exchange, they hope to make abortion coverage so unattractive that insurers eventually stop offering it in the market for individual and small-group policies.So the pro-life bloc is content to block health care reform, despite the public support of religious individuals for reform that would cover abortions. This approach hardly seems to resonate with the post-partisan, non-ideological commitment candidate Obama made to address the structural causes for abortion; a stance that arguably brought a fair chunk of the Evangelical vote.
But such a legislative coup could easily frame its leaders as defenders of the anti-abortion crowd. This may be why the White House will not come down on Stupak et al. The conventional wisdom, however inaccurate, is that these pro-life Democrats are teetering in conservative districts. A strong-armed showing for these cultural issues -- regardless of how or if they address actual policy problems -- could fold value voters firmly into the Democratic tent.
It is hard to imagine how this is any less manipulative and disingenuous than the once-formidable Religious Right strategy?
Update: Looks like House liberals, who were once poised to bring a halt of their own on a bill without a robust public option, are not having Suptak's amendment.
