The timing of the House abortion debate

Jobs and spending. Spending and jobs.

That’s what voters heard from Republicans on the campaign trail this fall. And yet, a third platform is starting to gain attention.

In the House, where Republicans have the majority for the first time in years, several pieces of anti-abortion legislation have been filed in recent weeks.

House Speaker John Boehner on Jan. 20 announced consideration of the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act.

“A ban on taxpayer funding of abortions is the will of the people and it ought to be the will of the land,” Boehner said.

A different piece of legislation seeks to eliminate Title X federal funding for reproductive health organizations that offer abortion as one of their services. Among the groups that would lose money is Planned Parenthood of Illinois, which receives roughly 10 percent of its $26 million budget from Title X funds.

Another proposed law would allow hospitals to refuse to provide emergency abortion care, even if the mother’s life is at risk.

Even in light of the aforementioned legislation, Republicans say their priorities remain the same — fix the economy, rein in federal spending and stimulate job growth.

Yet Democrats argue that the proposed anti-abortion measures mean Republicans are reneging on their campaign promises.

“If these are the among the first bills to be introduced, it shows that they are top priorities,” said Rep. Jan Schakowsky, an Evanston resident and a member of the House Pro-Choice Caucus. “... While we’re spending time on this, we’re not talking about jobs, the economy, foreclosure.”

So, why this legislation and why now?

Analysts say it’s a strategic time for Republicans to bring up anti-abortion measures, since they can be tied to economic priorities outlined on the campaign trail.

“There’s no question that the major theme for the 2010 election was the economy,” said Kent Redfield, a University of Illinois Springfield political science professor. “And you can run a campaign that focuses on questions of the economy, basically how are the people in charge doing with making your life better or worse. That’s pretty powerful.”

With a new Republican majority in the House, Redfield said, “you’ve got social conservatives saying ‘we can walk and chew gum at the same time.’ ... It does create an opportunity for them to move policy, to play to their base.”

Still, Republicans note, anti-abortion legislation isn’t coming completely out of the blue.

Party leadership — including Boehner and Chief Deputy Whip Peter Roskam of Wheaton — have noted a commitment to “protecting the sanctity of human life” was contained within Republicans’ Pledge to America.

“There was a commitment (in the pledge) to renew,” Roskam told audience members during a Feb. 1 speech at the City Club of Chicago.

Roskam spokesman Gerrit Lansing said that while residents in Roskam’s district “still overwhelmingly disapprove of the taxpayer funding of abortion, that doesn’t change that Republicans still remain laser focused on removing the barriers to job creation.”

Lansing said the “focus, from the top down, is on job creation and cutting spending, which are closely tied together.”

That focus makes the legislation easier to introduce right now, Redfield said. Note each of the pieces of anti-abortion legislation are billed as laws that would save the government money. And the legislation comes on the heels of a House vote to repeal health care legislation.

Framing the debate around spending cuts and health care, Redfield said, “it allows you to kind of broaden the appeal that you’re making and take advantage of the opportunity you have to discuss these issues.”

Still, it’s a double-edged sword, particularly among swing voters.

Democrats may capitalize on the conversation and accuse Republicans of pursuing “extreme legislation,” whether it be by repealing health care legislation, refusing to raise the debt ceiling, or eliminating the option of abortion.

“From the Democratic side, then you’re trying to make this part of a theme,” Redfield said. “That you may have elected people to fix the economy, but these really aren’t mainstream people because they are doing far out things. That becomes a way to win moderates and independents back. You really ought to have buyer’s remorse.”

Proponents of abortion rights argue that moderates and independents — many of them women who voted for Obama in 2008 but swung back to vote for Republicans last fall because of economic issues, may be turned off by the party’s agenda.

“Abortion is a very, very small part of what we do,” said Pam Sutherland, Vice President of Public Policy for Planned Parenthood of Illinois,

“Our women are coming for gynecological services, for wellness checks, for pap smears and family planning services,” she said. “... It’s very obvious that they don’t trust women to make good health care decisions.”

Planned Parenthood, Sutherland said, is not going to sit by. She said that in Illinois, they are calling and e-mailing Congress members to argue that the proposals should not be considered.

Schakowsky on Friday sent a letter to Boehner urging him to “end extreme anti-woman legislation.”

She said the Pro-Choice Caucus has been meeting daily and planning its strategies.

“Essentially we’re chagrined that Republicans who ran on a promise of smaller government want to make it small enough to fit in our bedrooms, by concentrating on social issues like abortion,” she said.