(June 7, 2004) — Hardly a day goes by without another Democratic Party fundraising letter arriving in my mail, promoting the party’s support for “choice.” Never mind that we can’t bring ourselves to say what it is we are choosing. The big question is: Will we Democrats learn from the 2000 and 2002 losses — or continue our party’s unrestricted support for abortion rights?

Only seven states, plus the District of Columbia, saw growth in the number of people who identify themselves as Democrats in 1993-2002. By contrast, 41 states saw Republican gains (Gallup, 2003). Yet despite popular support for abortion restrictions, the Democratic Party continues to advocate for an increasingly smaller minority of Americans who favor abortion on demand, no matter the circumstance.

A 2003 poll sponsored by Emily’s List, a pro-choice PAC for Democratic women candidates, revealed that women are almost as likely to back President Bush as they are one of the Democratic presidential candidates. This is a far cry from 1996, when Bill Clinton defeated Bob Dole by 16 percentage points among women voters.

In addition to women, other major constituents of the Democratic Party back abortion restrictions. Sixty-two percent of African Americans surveyed and 65 percent of people making less than $20,000 a year support greater restrictions (Gallup, 2002). And 78 percent of Hispanics think abortions should be outlawed (Zogby 2004). Although it may not be surprising that, according to a Zogby poll released in January, 68 percent of Republicans believed that abortion is manslaughter, what is surprising is that 43 percent of Democrats agreed.

Despite enormous amounts of money poured into pro-choice Democratic PACS, e.g., Emily’s List with $33 million, we Democrats still didn’t win in 2002. The abortion albatross is a money drain, consuming millions of dollars that could be going toward showcasing Democratic candidates’ championing of the fight against hunger and poverty, of finding peaceful alternatives to war, or of safeguarding the environment.

Columnist Mark Shields put it this way: “What has to worry Democrats who for the first time in nearly 17 months see George W. Bush as politically vulnerable is that their potential nominee will — by compulsive constituency-coddling of the variety shown at NARAL (National Abortion Rights Action League) — forfeit any chance of winning in November 2004.” (Democrat and Chronicle, Jan. 25, 2003).

Many grass-roots Democrats hope to reverse election losses and to plug the hemorrhaging of good people from the party because of its extreme position on abortion. New York has become the eighth state with a chapter of Democrats for Life of America. And 20 more states are starting chapters. These include Wisconsin, Florida, Iowa, Colorado and West Virginia, many considered “swing states” in the next election.

Let’s be honest. The pragmatics of winning shouldn’t be everything to the Democratic Party. For instance, on principle, we in Democrats for Life of America want our party platform to oppose capital punishment even if we lose a few votes because of it. But is standing for unrestricted abortion a truly principled position? In the 1840s and 1850s, Democrats were on the pro-choice side of another great moral issue — slavery. The collective conscience of the people, however, voted for Republican Abraham Lincoln. This was a history lesson in pragmatics as well as principles. With rare exception, Democrats continued to lose control of the White House and Congress until the election of Roosevelt in 1932.

Since then, we have proudly been the party with a more expansive interpretation of human rights — workers’ rights, minorities’ rights, women’s rights and the rights of the poor. So it is a tragic irony that now the party of the oppressed supports unrestricted destruction of another vulnerable class of human beings.

Meanwhile, issues we Democrats deeply care about are losing out because our candidates are losing. The Democratic platform plank of the “right to choose” has really become our party’s “right to lose.” It’s time we stand up to the absolutist abortion-rights special-interest groups and say, “No, thank you” to their money. It certainly won’t buy our consciences. It won’t even buy many elections.

Crossed, of Rochester, is president, Democrats for Life of America.