So Michael New argues:

In her [American Prospect] article, Goldstein also misjudges the politics of abortion. In order to receive the political support of women, Goldstein encourages Congress to pursue a plan that includes reproductive health services. However, President Obama and congressional Democrats need to tread carefully on this issue, for two reasons: First, taxpayer subsidies for abortion will receive a considerable amount of attention and most Americans oppose federal funding for abortion. Second, if abortion coverage is required as part of whatever health-care reform passes, President Obama’s rhetoric about reducing the number of abortions will appear very disingenuous — especially considering that a number of studies show that subsidizing abortion increases abortion rates.

Indeed, the potential inclusion of abortion coverage in health-care reform is already acting as a wedge dividing moderates from the liberal base of President Obama and the Democratic party. Pro-lifers and other opponents of health-care reform have rightly raised the salience of this issue. They would do well to continue their efforts in the coming weeks.

Sadly, Mr. Obama seems more concerned about passing his health care reform than about having a substantial debate on its merits. The fact that he has said the issue of abortion funding is a "distraction" means that he may fear it will hold up the passage of his health care proposal.

Which is all the more reason we should be talking about it.

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Name

Email

Comment

smaller | bigger

Subscribe via email (registered users only)

I have read and agree to the Terms of Usage.

Write the displayed characters

Add Comment Preview