Elephant in the Room

Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI) presenting his agreement with Obama to get rid of funding for abortions in the health care bill.

Two different D.C. liberals announced yesterday that they will be retiring. The first was Democratic Representative Bart Stupak who made news a few weeks ago for his involvement in the health care debate.  It seems that everyone in Washington is against him these days. Stupak was in the forefront of the debates because he strongly opposed public funding for abortion. The left was disappointed in his opposition to the bill for allowing his pro-life beliefs determine his vote while the right felt that the deal he struck with President Obama changing the abortion language in the bill was just giving in to the Democrats and agreeing to weaker initiatives just to prevent abortion funding. The Tea Party is taking credit for pushing Stupak towards retirement and it is easy to assume that Stupak’s steadily decreasing approval ratings within his district had something to do with his decision to not seek re-election.

Stupak had a near flawless pro-life record during his tenure in the House of Representatives. The National Right to Life Committee statistics for abortion-related legislation shows that Stupak has voted pro-life 100% of the time, which explains his caving on health care. Stupak was instrumental in passing laws that banned partial birth abortion and criminalizing those who performed these heinous acts. He helped pass two related bills through the House during the Clinton administration, but Clinton vetoed both bills because abortion language is historically broad so the former President found loopholes to claim unconstitutionality. But eventually Stupak was able to stand behind George W. Bush as he signed the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003. I do not agree with Stupak’s otherwise reckless spending and other social policies, but Stupak’s health care fiasco may encourage his district to vote Republican in November.

Justice John Paul Stevens has served on the Supreme Court under 7 different U.S. President's administrations.

The other retirement announcement yesterday was that of Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens which was expected considering he is turning 90 years old in just over a week. Stevens was nominated by Gerald Ford in 1975 as a moderate justice in light of trying to pass an uncontroversial candidate in light of the Watergate scandal. But Justice Stevens has turned out to be one of the more liberal justices on the high court in recent years. He has upheld affirmative action, entrusted First Amendment rights over protecting children from online obscenities, upheld unwarranted search and seizures, and in Bush v. Gore said there was “an unstated lack of confidence in the impartiality and capacity of the state judges who would make the critical decisions if the vote count were to proceed.” Well Justice Stevens I too have a lack of confidence in your impartiality on the court.

Stevens also had a strong pro-choice record. Although not yet on the court when the case was argued and decided on, Stevens has never wavered in his support for the decision to allow abortions in Roe v. Wade. The 2007 case Gonzales v. Carhart looked at the constitutionality of the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act previously discussed. Stevens joined on Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s dissenting opinion. The liberal dissenters in the case argued that banning partial births took more rights away from women and claim that the bill needs to have a health exception that minimizes the judgment of doctors.

So Stevens and Stupak had vastly differing abortion stances and both are exiting D.C. shortly. The timing of their stepping down are both politically motivated as Stupak is seemingly stepping down to make way for a Democrat who may have a better chance of winning and Stevens (although age and longevity of service clearly are major motives in the decision) has specifically said on several occasions that he would step down before the end of Obama’s only term so he would have the chance to nominate another Supreme Court justice. All eyes will now be following whether the President nominates a liberal to help his policies or a moderate who will pass through Congress easily. Time will tell how the replacements for these retirees will affect the future of the abortion debate.