But for Wales?

While he remained unnamed, it is without question that Congressman Dan Lungren had Congressman Bart Stupak in mind last Sunday when he quoted St. Thomas Moore’s lines in the classic play, “Man for All Seasons.” In the quoted scene, Moore confronts his betrayer who was made Attorney General of Wales in exchange for false testimony. “Why Richard, it profits a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world… but for Wales?”

For Stupak, he didn’t even get Wales.  Heck, he didn’t even get Cheboygan.  All he got was the accolades for a day from his liberal peers and a meaningless executive order that essentially nobody on either side of the debate thinks will have legal effect and, in any event, can be repealed at any time for any reason by any President, current or future.  It doesn’t even qualify as a fig leaf.  It covers nothing.

The betrayal could not have been more painful or more real to the pro-life movement.   Nor could the effects have been more devastating.  Stupak had always been a pro-life Democrat.  But in the past year, he had set himself up as an icon of a liberal Democrat who nonetheless was dedicated to defending the lives of the unborn. Susan B. Anthony’s List, an organization that supports pro-life politicians, had given him their highest award.  He had courageously forced a vote on a true end to abortion funding in the original House vote on health care back in November.  When it became clear that the House bill could not pass the Senate, and the House would have to pass the Senate bill, he stood his ground and demanded a fix to prevent abortion funding.  When the self-imposed deadline came this past Sunday, it was unclear to many people how they would pass the health care bill, complete with public funding of abortion, without Stupak and the few other Congressmen he represented. 

As it turned out, Stupak simply caved and voted for the bill, complete with public funding of health care plans and entities that will fund abortion.  This is not merely a mere defeat for the pro-life cause, but the biggest step backward since Roe v. Wade.  For the first time since the Hyde Amendment was passed in the early 70’s, the pro-life movement’s biggest victory, the government will fund abortions in America. 

Stupak’s status as a pro-life icon is now dead and the potential future of building a truly non-partisan pro-life movement with it.  While it is true that there are still a few genuinely pro-life Democrats, such as Gene Taylor of Mississippi, they are also genuinely conservative Democrats that would have opposed the health care bill on many other grounds as well.  This wasn’t true of Stupak and his band.  They clearly supported the liberal ideas concerning health care reform.  They just also, it seemed, valued unborn life as well. 

It was important to the pro-life movement to have people like Stupak and his crowd.  While many pro-lifers, such as myself, disagree strongly with the modern welfare state, statism and the agenda of the modern left, that agenda is here to stay.  The pro-life cause can only truly be victorious when people accept it across the political spectrum, as is true of all such social movements.

For example, consider civil rights.  Republicans and Democrats, liberals and conservatives agree that people of all races should be able to vote, they should be able to have jobs at any level without respect to race, they should be able go to any school they want, they should be able to live wherever they choose, etc.  Yes, there are racists in both parties and in both ideologies. But on the fundamental idea of equality and civil rights, there is uniform agreement among both parties and both ideologies.  Anybody not agreeing with these principles will not be given any power.  In order to truly achieve its goals, the pro-life movement must reach a similar agreement on abortion.  Without such an agreement, there might be small victories, but there will be no larger victory for a pro-life culture.

It is true that no such agreement was anywhere close to being reality before this vote. But it is also true that a number of Democrats ran on and won with a pro-life platform.  Their influence was increasing, as evidenced by the initial vote on the health care bill when they forced a vote on language truly stopping any government funding of abortion.  So while the pro-life movement was nowhere near its goal, progress was being made.  Stupak, in particular, represented the fact that in the long run, such agreement might be possible.  He was a Democrat in a swing district, not a district that is carried by Republicans routinely and he fully supported the liberal’s basic assumptions and policy prescriptions in regards to health care.  If someone like him could behave like a principled pro-lifer, there was hope.

Now, such hopes are dashed. There will not be anything resembling a pro-life consensus in the foreseeable future because even those who were supposedly the most principled pro-life liberals folded like a cheap suit.  It turns out government control of health care trumps protecting innocent life among all progressives with any power.

The immediate effects of Stupak’s betrayal are obvious.  The health care bill passed (and it would not have without him and his cohorts).  The government will have much greater control over health care.  The government will fund abortion.  Susan B. Anthony’s List has rescinded Stupak’s award.  Stupak’s likely opponent, Dr. Dan Benishek, increased his number of fans on facebook from about 130 to over 18,000 in less than 48 hours and his fundraising has exploded. 

But the long-term effects, while harder to gauge, are likely to be even more significant.  People who are serious about the pro-life cause can only support one party and one ideology.  And that is a tragedy for the pro-life movement.

Cliff Smith