One of the biggest issues arising out of the socialist revolution, passage of the health care bill in the House was the Stupak Amendment, which barred federal funds from going to abortion. It was a shrewd move by the Democrats to appease the pro-life Blue Dogs. In the aftermath of the bill’s narrow success, conservatives were left wondering, did the Stupak Amendment win the abortion battle but lose the health care war? This gets into the nitty-gritty part of politics. In any defeat, there are always a slough of “what ifs” (like if Jack Ryan didn’t like sex clubs would Barack Obama have won his Senate seat in 2004?) This is a topic that bloggers and graduate students will debate for a long time.
I’ve seen a lot of ire aimed at National Right to Life, particularly for releasing an advisory announcing that they would score “nay” votes for the amendment as opposition to life. This is an extremely difficult situation, and I don’t think that there is an easy answer. The Stupak Amendment created a dilemma that conservatives don’t see quite as often as liberals: party politics vs. issue politics.
National Right to Life is not a partisan organization. While the vast majority of their membership and likely most of their staff probably vote Republican, they don’t owe any allegiance to either party. Their duty is to ensure that the mission of the organization is carried out and not to toe a party line. In fact on their mission statement page (what a horrible web site!) they explain:
(more…)
