Will Terri Schiavo Haunt Rick Santorum in New Hampshire?

The former Pennsylvania senator fought to save the late Florida woman’s life. Now the New Hampshire state Legislature is revisiting the Schiavo controversy—at the worst possible time for Santorum.

Andrew A. Nelles/ZUMAPRESS.com

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

The fight over the fate of Terri Schiavo, the 41-year-old Florida woman who died in 2005 after a judge ordered her life-preserving feeding tubes removed, captivated and divided the American public. Then-Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.), who’s now running for president, was one of the leading proponents of state intervention to save Schiavo’s life, cosponsoring a bill to intervene in the case and even visiting Schiavo in the hospital. That aggressive advocacy helped lead to Santorum’s ouster from Congress the next year. Now, the Schiavo debate is rearing its head in New Hampshire—and on the same day that Santorum needs a strong showing in the state’s first-in-the-nation primary after his near-win in Iowa’s caucuses.

On Tuesday, Schiavo’s brother, Bobby Schindler, is scheduled to testify before the New Hampshire Legislature in support of a bill making March 31 “a day to remember Terri Schiavo.” Republican state Rep. Jerry Bergevin introduced the bill, and a GOP colleague, Daniel Itse, has cosponsored it. Bergevin, who recently made headlines for introducing a separate bill to stop the teaching of evolution, has endorsed Santorum.

Tuesday, of course, is also the day of New Hampshire’s Republican presidential primary. Santorum, who’s running third or fourth in state polls, needs a strong showing in the primary to stay competitive (or relevant) in the battle for his party’s nomination. A reminder of his outspoken role in the Schiavo fight, however, won’t do his campaign any favors, especially in a state where GOP voters hold more moderate views on social issues while leaning further to the right on fiscal ones. Indeed, Santorum has slipped in state polls after sparring with voters over his conservative views on gay marriage and abortion.

In 2005, Santorum repeatedly demanded that Schiavo be kept alive against the wishes of her husband. “We need to do something to stop this unconscionable act on the part of the Florida Court,” he said. “Terri Schiavo is a daughter, a sister, and most importantly, a person. We cannot allow an innocent person to be put to death.” Santorum even used his position as a US senator to get Congress to subpoena the judge in the case. (The judge ignored Congress.) And most memorably, Santorum paid a visit Schiavo in the hospital when all the nation was watching—a visit, it turned out, made possible by Walmart’s private jet and coinciding with a fundraiser of Santorum’s.

Santorum’s role in the Schiavo controversy damaged him in the eyes of voters. Polls conducted in the run-up to Santorum’s 2006 reelection bid found that Pennsylvania voters opposed Congress injecting itself into the Schiavo controversy. More than a third of Pennsylvania voters in an April 2005 survey said Santorum’s actions in the case made them less likely to vote for him. Santorum ended up losing to Democrat Bob Casey by a staggering 18 percentage points, the largest margin of defeat for an incumbent Republican senator in US history. Many post-mortem reports on Santorum’s loss pointed to his Schiavo advocacy as a reason for his downfall.

To this day, Santorum defends his support for preserving Schiavo’s life. “What I cared about with Terri Schiavo was that a judge looked at the case fairly, and they did,” he recently told CNN. “And they made their decision.”

But now Terri Schiavo and Rick Santorum are meeting at one of the most inopportune moments for Santorum, the hardline social conservative in the GOP presidential field. The Santorum campaign did not respond to a request for comment on whether Santorum supported New Hampshire’s Terri Schiavo remembrance bill. A spokeswoman for the Terri Schiavo Life and Hope Network, a nonprofit that helps incapacitated people and has publicized New Hampshire’s Schiavo bill, says Santorum has not yet endorsed the New Hampshire bill. But it goes without saying that Santorum doesn’t want a repeat of his 2006 trouncing in Tuesday’s New Hampshire primary—which means he’ll probably want to steer clear of the state’s Terri Schiavo bill.

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