BOSTON -- Mitt Romney picked an unlikely backdrop for launching
a 2008 presidential bid: his veto of an emergency contraception
bill passed by the state legislature. The legislation requires
hospitals to offer the "morning after" pill to patients -- a
provision exempting Catholic institutions was stripped -- and makes
it available without a prescription.
Initially, it appeared that Romney would reach for the moratorium
justification. The Boston Herald reported that, in a letter to state House and
Senate leaders, the governor said he had "promised the people of
Massachusetts that as Governor I would not change the laws of the
Commonwealth as they relate to abortion. The bill before me would
change those laws and for that reason I am vetoing it."
Romney's reasoning: the morning-after pill doesn't just prevent
conception; it can also act as an abortifacient. The bill didn't
require minors to even notify their parents, thus circumventing the
state's parental-consent laws.
Fair enough. Then Romney dropped a bombshell in a Tuesday
Boston Globe op-ed piece. The governor repeated his pledge to
maintain the abortion status quo in the Bay State -- no new
restrictions, no further liberalization -- and then wrote, "I am
prolife. I believe that abortion is the wrong choice except in
cases of incest, rape, and to save the life of the mother."
As personal views, this is nothing new. Romney has been
describing himself as "personally pro-life" for some time. In 1994,
he acknowledged that in his capacity as Mormon lay leader he
counseled women against abortion except, the Globe
reported, "in cases of rape, incest, or where the mother's life was
at risk." In his controversial 2001 letter to the Salt Lake
Tribune, he called abortion "the wrong choice" but allowed
that "under the law, it is a choice people have."
What makes this op-ed different is the sentence that follows: "I
wish the people of America agreed, and that the laws of our nation
could reflect that view."
This is the first time Romney has articulated a desire for the
law to reflect his anti-abortion sentiments. He has finally deleted
the "personally" from his "personally pro-life" formulation.
Romney acknowledged that his abortion views put him "in the
minority in our Commonwealth" and that the "nation remains so
divided over abortion." His solution is to allow each state to
democratically decide its own abortion policy rather than have them
"dictated by judicial mandate."
Logically, this position means he should favor overturning
Roe v. Wade. Romney came close to saying so when he wrote
of the "bitterness and fierce anger" that continues to surround
Roe and the futility of the Supreme Court's attempt to put
the abortion debate to rest in Casey.
MAKE NO MISTAKE, THIS is a change in position. In the past, when
Romney has contrasted his personal views with those of
Massachusetts' pro-choice majority he has framed it as a difference
over the morality of abortion, not its legality. When he said
during the 2002 gubernatorial campaign that he was opposed to
abortion "on a personal basis" but would "protect the right of a
woman to choose," his spokesman described him as taking "exactly
the same position as any other pro-choice politician."
Yet implied opposition to Roe, a belief that states
should decide their abortion laws and the conviction that abortion
should only be permitted in cases of rape and incest or to save the
mother's life -- President Bush's pro-life position -- are hardly
stances taken by a generic pro-choice pol.
But they might just be positions taken by a Republican
presidential candidate with an ambiguously pro-choice record trying
to reach out to his party's pro-life base. This rightward movement
on abortion makes it seem less likely that Romney intends to run
for re-election as governor in 2006. Massachusetts' only pro-life
statewide elected official is Democratic Auditor Joseph
DeNucci.
Moreover, the pro-life overtures Romney has made are of the kind
that repels moderates. While they might feel differently if they
understood the therapeutic cloning involved, most Bay Staters would
instinctively side with the Harvard Stem Cell Institute and its
promise of cures against Romney's embryonic stem-cell research
veto. And if partial-birth abortion makes pro-choicers appear
extreme, opposition to emergency contraception legislation appears
to pit Romney against birth control for rape victims -- in
Massachusetts. Many politicians with a longer history of calling
themselves pro-life would have stayed away from both of these
issues (paradoxically, their records would give them the cover to
do so).
In recent weeks, Romney's Republican Lt. Gov. Kerry Healey has
indicated her willingness to step into the breach by informing
interviewers that she supports the emergency contraception bill and
reiterating her pro-choice stand. Protesters gathered outside the
governor's State House office and chanted, "Mitt Romney, we want
the pill. Keep your word and sign the bill!"
Time will tell whether pro-lifers embrace Romney as a new
convert. Pro-choicers are already reading him out of their ranks.
''I think he's more concerned about the opinions of Iowa caucus
goers than the opinion of women in our state," NARAL Pro-Choice
Massachusetts executive director Melissa Kogut told the
Globe.
On this much, then, people on both sides of the abortion issue
can agree: Mitt Romney has sent his strongest signal yet that he's
looking beyond the Bay State.
topics:
Abortion, Law, Supreme Court, NATO
