What happens now? Democratic supporters of abortion rights need to accept that their House majority depends on a large cadre of antiabortion colleagues. They can denounce that reality or they can learn to live with it.
There is also a challenge for abortion’s foes, above all the Catholic bishops who have a long history of supporting universal coverage but devoted most of their recent energy to the abortion battle. How much muscle will the bishops put behind the broader effort to pass health-care reform? Their credibility as advocates for social justice hangs in the balance.
And if the Senate forces a change in the Stupak language, one obvious approach would involve a ban on abortion in the public plan — if such an option survives — and the application of Ellsworth’s rules to the private policies sold in the insurance exchange. The alternative would be Stupak’s original compromise offer to Pelosi. There are not many other options.
I think Dionne is putting his politics ahead of his Catholic Faith when he argues that the Bishops’ credibilty on social justice issues rest upon their advocacy for the current health care proposals pending in Congress.
More thoughts on the action of the Catholic bishops [url=http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-9452-DC-Catholic-Living-Examiner~y2009m11d12-Bishops-drop-opposition-to-health-care-reform-legislation-and-anger-some-prolife-groups]here[/url]. They are trying to balance their strong voice on moral issues without becoming partisan shills. The stated aims of health care reform are admirable. The devil (literally) is in the details.