BEYOND PARTIAL-BIRTH

What’s next, now that the pro-life movement has momentum, plus better poll numbers? With the abortion debate working to their advantage, what should pro-lifers seek in Congress? This is suddenly a matter of considerable discussion. And the answer is legislation that’s more sweeping than the partial-birth ban and designed to prohibit thousands more abortions each year. The exact form of the legislation will probably be decided by the four most influential anti-abortion leaders in Washington: GOP senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, Republican representative Charles Canady of Florida, Douglas Johnson of National Right to Life (NRL), and Gary Bauer of the Family Research Council. Nothing will happen without their support, or at least their acquiescence.

Of the four, Bauer is the most confrontational. He’s eager to seek a ban on second and third-trimester abortions, which would directly challenge the Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion. Santorum and Canady are sympathetic, but they’re hardly committed to going ahead with such a bill. Johnson, the architect of the partial-birth ban, is wary of even talking about strategic decisions now. Santorum remains intrigued by a suggestion last year of Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle, who said he might back a ban on all “post-viability” abortions. In other words, if the baby could live outside the womb, for even a short period, then it would be illegal to kill it. “If Daschle is willing to look at a post-viability ban, let’s look at it,” Santorum says. He assumes such a ban would cover all abortions after 20 weeks’ gestation. However, other pro-life leaders — Canady and NRL officials, for example — suspect a Daschle bill would include gaping loopholes, scuttling any deal with Santorum and other pro-lifers.

Bauer, who’s allied with former Pennsylvania governor Robert Casey, a Democrat, is ready to provoke a major fight with Clinton and the courts. “You have to keep forcing votes and putting bills on the president’s desk,” Bauer says. “Make him veto.” Legislation should not be tailored to accommodate the courts either, he argues. Instead, there has to be a willingness “to confront the judicial branch. There’s a larger issue here: whether we’re a self-governing people or not.” He likes the approach of seeking a ban on all abortions in the ninth month of pregnancy, then the eighth, and so on. “You’d probably get down to the fourth month before you had a close vote [in Congress].” In the end, though, Bauer favors a campaign to ban second and third-trimester abortions. “There isn’t much opposition to this across the country,” notes Jeffrey Bell, a GOP strategist who advises Bauer.

Santorum, to whom other senators defer on the abortion issue, is more cautious, at least in his public statements. “You have to move the abortion debate on the basis of common ground,” he insists. That’s why he’ll confer with Daschle about a post-viability ban. “Most people would find that common ground. Let’s take people where they are [on abortion] and not push beyond where they are.”

Still, Santorum and Bauer have become close allies and are likely to act together. Canady, chairman of the House Judiciary Constitution Subcommittee, says he’s “not interested in signaling to the other side” what the anti-abortion forces will seek next. On partial-birth, he says, pro-lifers have benefited from catching the pro-abortion lobby by surprise. In any case, Canady favors a bill with a broad impact “consistent with the overall goal of moving the public debate forward.” Johnson, for his part, believes the whole matter is “not ripe yet,” since the partial-birth battle hasn’t been won.

It’s already had an enormous impact on the abortion debate, though. Once Ron Fitzsimmons, a lobbyist for the abortion industry, admitted last year he and others had lied about the number of partial-birth abortions taking place in the country, the media began covering the story.

This was critical, Santorum told me, because the pro-life activity in Congress is aimed partly at educating the public about the gruesome nature of aborting a child. “Somehow we’ve got to catch the media’s attention [again],” he says. More important, the partial-birth debate prompted a shift in public opinion. “For the first time in 25 years, the public has moved on abortion,” says Santorum. A New York Times/CBS News poll found last January that national support for abortion in most cases has dropped from 40 percent in 1989 to 32 percent. Nearly 80 percent now back parental consent and waiting periods. Two-thirds think abortions in the second trimester should be forbidden, and 79 percent favor a ban on third-trimester abortions.

Before turning to a broader ban, pro-lifers must address two issues. Even before the election, another effort is set to override Clinton’s veto of the partial-birth ban, though Santorum doesn’t expect the three votes needed in the Senate to materialize. And then there’s the Child Custody Protection Act, which recently was approved 17-10 by the House Judiciary Committee. This would make it a federal crime to transport a minor across state lines to get an abortion, skirting a requirement for consent from one or both parents or a judge. The White House says Clinton will sign the bill if it’s changed a bit. Naturally, the changes would weaken the measure. Still, Clinton’s willingness to pay lip service to pro-life goals is striking. He feels pressure from the partial-birth debate and the polls. Next year, he’s sure to feel even more.

Fred Barnes is executive editor of THE WEEKLY STANDARD.