End of the Line for Anti-Abortion Dems?

Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) is not running for reelection. | Congressional office photo.

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Remember Rep. Bart Stupak? The Michigan Democrat was a source of immense frustration for liberals during the health care debate. He spent months leading a small group of pro-life Dems who opposed the bill because they (incorrectly) thought it funded abortions. Stupak eventually settled for an executive order promising that no health care funding would be used for abortions, and it seems that he’ll soon be out of the spotlight for good, as he’s retiring in January. But will Stupak’s departure—and the fallout from the health care fight—mark the end for his breed of Democrat? I recently explored the possibility in an article for the print magazine. It’s now available online:

Pro-life Democrats come in two varieties: those who tout anti-abortion views on the stump, but largely end up voting with their pro-choice colleagues, and those—typically hailing from deep-red districts—who almost always vote pro-life. As abortion foes mobilize against “faux” pro-life Dems in November, you might think they were going to focus on the first group. But they’re really gunning for the second, traditionally the movement’s staunchest Democratic allies. We’re talking congressmen with ratings of 80 percent or higher from the National Right to Life Committee.

In May, abortion opponents claimed the scalp of the first member of this pro-life cadre—longtime Rep. Alan Mollohan (D-W.V.). The Susan B. Anthony List (a pro-life political action committee founded to counter the pro-choice powerhouse EMILY’s List) spent $78,000 to help defeat him in the primary, and has pledged to spend a total of $1 million to unseat other alleged traitors to the pro-life cause. With most of those members already in tough races, and other anti-abortion groups embracing similar strategies, at least a half-dozen pro-life Dems could be headed for defeat this fall.

Here’s the rest of “Mommy, What’s a Pro-Life Democrat?

The outlook for pro-life Dems has arguably worsened since the print magazine came out. Nate Silver, the New York Times’ polling guru, says Steve Driehaus (D-Ohio) and Kathy Dahlkemper (D-Penn.), two key members of the Stupak bloc, each have just an 8 percent chance of holding onto their seats. (My colleague Maddie Oatman has more on how the abortion fight has affected the Driehaus race.)

Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio), who drew a deeply flawed opponent in Nazi reenactor Rich Iott, will likely survive. But Rep. Brad Ellsworth will almost certainly lose his Senate race in Indiana, where Reps. Joe Donnelly and Baron Hill also face tough races. So do Chris Carney and Paul Kanjorski in Pennsylvania.

Other avowedly pro-life Dems, like Marion Berry (D-Ark.) and Charlie Melancon (D-La.) are not running for re-election. (Melancon is in a Senate race against David Vitter, and will probably lose.) Even longtime Rep. Nick Rahall could be in trouble in West Virginia. If Rahall loses, Kaptur would almost certainly be the only representative who attended Stupak’s eleventh-hour press conference still serving in Congress come February. The Stupak bloc will have paid a heavy price indeed for backing health care reform. 

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate