My dad used to say, “Joey, don’t compare me to the Almighty. Compare me to the alternative.”And here’s the deal: Democrats want to codify Roe. Republicans want a national ban on abortion. The choice is clear.
I don't know that it's clear that "Republicans" want a national ban on abortion, although Lindsey Graham claims that he does -- claims, I say, since he proposed it knowing that he had nowhere near the votes to effectuate it. I have noticed that Republican politicians frequently propose doing things right up until they have the votes to do them, at which point they suddenly don't manage it -- repealing Obamacare, say, which they ran on for years and years until they had to have McCain defect at the last minute to avoid actually doing it.
But isn't that also true now of Democrats? If "Democrats want to codify Roe," what's stopping it from happening? Democratic politicians have 51 votes in the Senate, a majority in the House, and the Presidency. Republicans in the Senate, if anything, seem to be hedging in favor of at least a federalist approach to abortion rather than daring to support anything like a ban. Maybe one could get a few of them to overcome a filibuster; or otherwise, set the filibuster aside on abortion issues.
They aren't any of them serious about this stuff, I begin to think. It's just a way of keeping people divided and fired up, and keeping the donations rolling in.
7 comments:
I don't know that it's clear that "Republicans" want a national ban on abortion, although Lindsey Graham claims that he does....
Well, no, he doesn't--or at least has not proposed--a national ban on abortions. What he has proposed is a restriction on abortions after 15 weeks, with a couple exceptions:
--necessary to save the life of a pregnant woman
--pregnancy is the result of rape
A restriction on abortions that allows abortions isn't much of a ban.
Eric Hines
If "Democrats want to codify Roe," what's stopping it from happening? Democratic politicians have 51 votes in the Senate, a majority in the House, and the Presidency.
The Progressive-Democrats make clear that they only want the question for campaigning purposes every time they're asked what limits they would put on abortions, with some questioners explicitly asking whether they approve of abortion up to the moment of birth. To a man and a woman, every single one of them ignore the question or obfuscate with weasel words, declining even to approach an answer to what limits they would agree with, much less what limits they actually want.
Eric Hines
I was thinking more of the 'nationwide' aspect of it than what it would take to constitute a per-se 'ban,' but ok. The point is I don't think there are the votes for any sort of nationwide/Federal policy from the Republicans, nor obviously is it the party's policy to pursue one.
Since the Supreme Court has moved the question back to the states, I suspect that even if Graham got the bill passed and signed, the SCotUS would reject it (when challenged) for the exact same reason.
LittleRed1
I'm not sure the Supremes would. What they did was move the question from courts to the political branches of government. The Court expressed a preference for State-level decisions on this, but they didn't bar a Federal level decision.
An actually enacted Federal statute might well survive Supreme Court scrutiny.
Regardless, we'll likely get a number of State decisions (and have gotten some) before the Federal Congress acts, even were Congress to make a serious effort.
Eric Hines
keeping the donations rolling in.
That gets my vote. Pumping up divisions? That's only secondary.
Up-to-date example: note that the Republicans voted WITH the Democrats to stuff $40BN into Ukraine a few months back. But now they're voting (in the House) against another $12BN.
That's because they will lose that vote, the Senate already passed it, and it will go into that toilet called the Ukrainian Government, which is exactly what they wanted anyway. But they put on a good show for the ignorant, no?
BTW, I never believe a politician who claims "My dad used to say..." Or his mom, grandfather, or childhood clergyman. I've got five sons. They don't listen to much and remember it.
Post a Comment