Although "[t]aking substantial steps to reduce the abortion rate will not settle the larger ethical argument over the practice," the "election of a new congressional majority" for the 110th Congress should "open the way for a better approach to the abortion question," Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne writes in a Post opinion piece.
The "bitter political brawling" over abortion during the past 30 years has caused an "unproductive stalemate" that has left antiabortion groups "frustrated," abortion-rights supporters "in a constant state of worry" and U.S. residents "who hold middle-ground positions feeling that there is no one who speaks for them," Dionne writes.
However, "the politics of abortion began to change" in September with the introduction of a bill (HR 6067) sponsored by Rep. Tim Ryan (D-Ohio), who opposes abortion rights, and abortion-rights supporter Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) (Dionne, Washington Post, 11/21).
The measure would require states to cover contraceptives for women with annual incomes of up to 200% of the federal poverty level, establish grants for sex education programs and require programs with a focus on abstinence to include thorough instruction on contraceptives.
The legislation also would increase funding for health care for low-income women with children, provide no-cost visits from nurses to teens and women who have given birth for the first time, expand a tax credit for adoption and fund child care services for parents in college (Kaiser Daily Women's Health Policy Report, 9/20).
There are "moral and practical reasons" for Democrats, Republicans, abortion-rights supporters and abortion-rights opponents to support the bill, Dionne writes. "Why shouldn't both sides embrace broader steps that, without coercion, could cut the abortion rate by much larger numbers?"