Abortion vote

Back when the subject of abortion was debated on moral and religious grounds, opponents could disagree while understanding how each arrived at a position. Now that abortion is a vehicle for fund-raising there is no room for understanding because understanding doesn’t bring in the bucks or whip up the membership.

With the Senate’s vote next week on late-term abortion, the Christian Coalition, according to The Washington Post, has directed at five senators radio advertisements, 300,000 postcards and countless automated telephone calls. Two of the five senators are Maine’s Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins. The purpose of this extensive campaign is to harass these senators into dropping their support for a compromise measure that allowed late-term abortions to protect against “grievous injury” to the physical health of the mother.

But the vote is more about power than pregnancy — Maine had only two third-term abortions between 1984 and 1996, consistent with other states. If abortions were the primary concern, the coalition could with one magazine ad extolling the effectiveness of condoms do more to reduce unwanted pregnancies than this entire Senate campaign. As a bonus, the condom ad might also help reduce sexually transmitted diseases.

The coalition’s main goal is to remain relevant now that its best-known leader, Ralph Reed, has moved on. The group has two themes: abortion and gay rights, and even Mr. Reed says gay rights is a sure loser. That leaves the coalition trying to override a presidential veto of a ban on so-called partial-birth abortions, but its lack of sincerity is evident in its refusal to accept an exemption for the physical health of the mother.

Assuming for a moment that telling doctors what procedures they may use to perform an abortion is constitutionally legal — and the court’s 1976 Danforth decision says it isn’t — this compromise should be seen as a fair way for opponents to agree. The grievous injury provision is not the large loophole that the coalition claims. It is narrowly defined to cover either a “severely debilitating disease or impairment specifically caused by the pregnancy” or an “inability to provide necessary treatment for a life-threatening condition.” It does not include any condition that is not medically diagnosable or any condition that can be treated without ending a pregnancy.

The grievous injury exemption would allow treatment for such illnesses as leukemia or non-Hodgkins lymphoma, primary pulmonary hypertension, which can cause sudden death or congestive heart failure, and pregnancy-aggravated hypertension, which can cause kidney or liver failure.

Instead of recognizing the humanity in allowing for abortions under the threat of these illnesses, the coalition continues to demand an end to the partial-birth procedure, with an exemption only for the near-certain death of the mother. Banning a procedure, of course, doesn’t reduce the number of abortions; it forces physicians to use riskier procedures.

Sens. Snowe and Collins have supported a fair and compassionate compromise in the extremely difficult issue of abortion. They deserve support form constituents who recognize the coalition’s agenda as having little to do with unwanted pregnancies and everything to do with power.