For some reason, a woman's right to choose to terminate a pregnancy is treated as amenable to compromise while the principles of people who oppose that right are inviolate. I think that's part of why it took so long for Bart Stupak's opposition to the current health-care bill to be unraveled for what it is: an attempt to force tougher restrictions on women's rights. As Ann Friedman and Tim Noah explained some time ago, Stupak has been trying to implement stricter prohibitions on abortion than currently exist under the guise of upholding the status quo.
Lately, it seems as though Stupak has been having trouble keeping his dozen anonymous "pro-life" votes together, as Rep. Dale Kildee and Rep. James Oberstar, both "pro-life" Democrats assumed to be part of the Stupak bloc, announced their intention to vote for the health-care bill.
Stupak, meanwhile, has collapsed into accusing his fellow Democrats of wanting to force fewer children to be born because of the cost, telling National Review that "one of the arguments I've been hearing" is "if you pass the Stupak amendment, more children will be born, and therefore it will cost us millions more." Really? It isn't because Big Undead was concerned about a surplus of baby flesh flooding the market and lowering the retail price? Their zombie lobbyists really need to work the Dems harder.
Now, Stupak is saying he wants the baby-killing bill to pass; he just won't vote for it:
“You know, maybe for me that’s the best: I stay true to my principles and beliefs,” he said, and “vote no on this bill and then it passes anyways. Maybe for me is the best thing to do.”Stupak thinks the bill will lead to more abortions, so he can't vote for it, but he wants it to pass. He claims the bill will lead to public funds paying for abortions (not true), but he's happy if it passes as long as he doesn't have to vote for it. That's narcissism, not principle. More likely is that Stupak can't vote for the bill now without admitting his claim was false, but he doesn't want to be blamed if it doesn't pass.Beyond the abortion issue itself, Stupak said he feels conflicted because he has always supported healthcare reform.
What made sense about Dennis Kucinich's switch yesterday was recognizing that when it comes to voting for the the health-care bill, despite all its flaws, a yes vote for the bill brings the government closer to doing what Kucinich wants -- extending health care coverage to all Americans -- than killing the bill would. Stupak is essentially saying the same thing as Kucinich while proclaiming a "no" vote based on an objective falsehood. There's no "principle" involved here worth admiring.
-- A. Serwer
