In The New York Times on Thursday, Lindy West has an op-ed on the recent announcement by Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee campaign chairman Ben Ray Luján that the group would not impose a litmus test for Democratic candidates requiring them to be pro-abortion. West is a fairly radical feminist with fringe social justice she co-founded an organization called “Shout Your Abortion”—so it’s somewhat surprising that the Times would embrace her let alone give her a weekly column.
Her column demanding a litmus test for Democrats demonstrates why West is way outside the mainstream. Here’s the crux of her argument:
Let’s set aside the fact “economic equality” and “identity politics” are nebulous concepts subject to interpretation, so asserting a direct link is somewhat pointless. America’s birth rate is tanking, so saying there is no economic equality without abortion is ridiculous. Much of America’s welfare state depends on growing the tax base to keep full the coffers of Social Security, Medicare, and other entitlements. Demographers readily agree there are many economic benefits to be had to not artificially limiting population growth.
And even if you think the “overthrow of white supremacy”—whatever that means—is necessary for economic equality, you should be against abortion. There is no doubt that black children are aborted at highly disproportionate rates. Some 74 percent of black children in New York City are aborted, and more black women in the city have abortions than give birth. Killing off new black voters before they have a chance to be born is a great way to limit how much political power you have.
But even if you accept the dubious premise abortion is somehow linked to income inequality, for most people abortion is a moral issue, not an economic one. The retort here is obvious—marginal differences in income inequality don’t warrant the taking of an innocent human life.
While it is true that in recent years polls have shown majorities are uneasy about the prospect of overturning Roe v. Wade, polls consistently show overwhelming support for further restrictions on abortion that West and most national Democrats oppose, such as late-term abortions and public funding of abortions.
Finally, for the purposes of West’s argument, the only poll that matters is the ballot box. Abortion has become a much more partisan issue in recent decades, with the GOP having far fewer pro-choice candidates, and Democrats having far fewer pro-life candidates.
How’s that worked out for Democrats? For reasons that go well beyond the abortion fight, the GOP is currently dominant at the local, state, and national levels, and controls all three branches of government. Recall that Obamacare’s abortion mandates forced number of pro-life Democratic congressmen to sacrifice their political careers. Blue Dog Democrats are all but extinct. Earlier this year, state Democrats in Nebraska excoriated national Democratic leaders for losing the Omaha mayoral race by weighing in on abortion and alienating pro-life voters.
The Democratic party’s decision to encourage more pro-life candidates is a smart political move, and the kind of abortion extremism expressed by West will only hurt the party’s political prospects.
