Can Catholics Vote For Pro-Choice Politicians?

Americans have become accustomed to a bitter and acrimonious abortion debate that pits two vocal and well-funded minorities against each other. On the one hand, a staunchly anti-abortion “pro-life” movement pursues the unlikely goal of a legal ban on all abortions. On the other, an equally staunch “pro-choice” movement seeks to preserve the status quo of legal abortion, and tries, in many cases, to expand taxpayer funding of abortion services. When forced to choose sides in this debate, many Catholics understandably align themselves with the former crowd. And they do this despite the fact that for the most part, Catholics hold values similar to the majority of Americans – who have some degree of moral concern with the practice of abortion, but who for one reason or another do not feel comfortable making abortion completely illegal.

In recent years, however, Catholics have looked increasingly to a third option: a snowballing effort to unite a majority of Americans behind “common ground” strategies to reduce and prevent abortions. This approach seeks to address the root causes of abortion: often lack of health care, child care, jobs, and other economic supports that give women and families the tools they need in order to choose life. Catholics may be justified in voting for “pro-choice” candidates who support honest efforts to address abortion through such practical means.

History provides strong support for the argument that abortion reduction will ultimately prove a more effective route than abortion criminalization. In the 35 years since the U. S. Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision, the largest reductions in the U. S. abortion rate occurred in the 1990’s, when a booming economy fueled a sharp decline in abortions. This decline has all but leveled off in recent years as the unemployment rate crept up and financial worries set in. A 2006 study by my organization, Catholics United, looked at data from Kansas and showed a clear correlation between availability of jobs, health care, and Head Start centers, and lower abortion rates. And a more comprehensive study using 20 years of national statistics, released this year by Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, proves a link between economic supports for families and reduced incidence of abortion. None of these results are very surprising given that polls have found some three out of four women who obtain an abortion say they do so for economic reasons.

Whereas addressing the root causes of abortion shows tremendous promise, the traditional strategy of advocating legal prohibitions on abortion – primarily by overturning Roe v. Wade – has proven considerably ineffective. It is highly unlikely that the Supreme Court will reverse its 1973 decision; indeed, even Bush-appointed Chief Justice John Roberts has suggested that Roe may be “settled law.” And data shows that even an overturn of Roe would have only a minimal effect on the overall abortion rate, since the decision’s reversal would only return the power to criminalize abortion to the states rather than making abortion instantly illegal. A 2008 Catholics United study found that after Roe only a handful of states would likely institute total abortion bans, and that women living in those states could easily obtain legal abortions in neighboring states or illegal abortions in their own localities.

The wider world provides some interesting insight into the most effective – and ineffective – ways of combating abortion. Abortion is strictly illegal in Brazil, yet rampant poverty there drives one of the highest abortion rates on the planet: around 40 abortions per 1000 women, about twice that of the U.S. One of the lowest national abortion rates can be found in the Netherlands, where abortion is generally legal yet women have greater access to health care, flexible work schedules, maternity leave, and other essential components of a family-friendly economy.

One major political party has begun to embrace the abortion reduction cause. In an historic shift this year, the Democrats adopted platform language affirming support for “a woman's decision to have a child by ensuring access to and availability of programs for pre- and post-natal health care, parenting skills, income support, and caring adoption programs.” At the same time, the Republican Party rejected platform language welcoming bipartisan efforts to reduce abortions.

Catholics may in good conscience vote for candidates who favor legal prohibitions on abortion – including an end to Roe v. Wade – as the primary means of addressing the abortion issue. But so too can they vote for those who pursue efforts to reduce abortions by uniting Americans behind non-coercive strategies.