Building a Big Tent Around Abortion

There he was again last week, dealing with the “abortion thing.” Every year around flu season, the President is called upon to convince a rally of right- to-lifers that he is the best friend of the unborn. So George Bush did it for 90 seconds last Monday, over a loudspeaker by telephone from the Oval Office. His tone was muted, but the message clear: “Let me assure you that this President stands with you on this issue of life.”

Bush’s abortion record is hardly a model of consistency. When he ran for the 1980 G.O.P. presidential nomination, Bush supported the Supreme Court’s landmark abortion-rights ruling, Roe v. Wade. A few months later, as Ronald Reagan’s No. 2, he adopted his boss’s anti-Roe stance. On his own now for a year, Bush has led the charge against Roe by vetoing four abortion-funding bills — heavy lifting to qualify for the Right-to-Life Hall of Fame.

But the real story last week was further evidence of a slow but sure retreat from the pro-life stance that has been official Republican policy for ten years. Look at the G.O.P. as a “big tent,” said party chairman Lee Atwater. “Forget politics. Do and support what you truly, truly believe. We are an umbrella party.” Anyone who thinks Atwater is free-lancing without higher approval has been smoking crack with Marion Barry.

What’s going on here? The political terrain is shifting, and the smartest Republicans are scampering to keep pace. “The electorate’s composition is % changing,” says a G.O.P. strategist. “The baby boomers are taking over, and their credo is ‘Live and let live.’ ” A move to the left could alienate Bush’s base of antiabortion conservatives, he acknowledges, “but those people will probably stay with us in the end, and we’ll need the young libertarians in ’92.”

Even some of those who oppose abortion are now claiming they are pro-choice. “I am pro-life and pro-choice,” says Ann Stone, the brains behind the right wing’s wildly successful direct-mail operations. “The question is, Who decides, us or the government?” Stone will soon announce creation of Republicans for Choice, a political-action committee that will support pro- choice G.O.P. candidates and work to change the Republican platform’s rigid antiabortion plank. Like Atwater, Stone is not flying solo. “Let’s just say we know what she is up to,” says a Bush aide.

Atwater’s “big tent” talk and Stone’s new PAC are just two manifestations of a long-term strategy. “It’s like perestroika,” says a Bush adviser. “It takes time and hard work to change positions previously carved in stone.” In other words, concedes the G.O.P. strategist, “the party is going to have to be hit over the head in the 1990 elections. Our big winners will likely be those who are pro-choice, our big losers those who are pro-life. It will take the shock of ’90 before a change can really be set in motion.”

Bush meanwhile will go blithely on his way, until the Big Test. “Everyone figures there will be a Supreme Court vacancy before ’92,” says a White House aide. “And that will be the ball game. At that point, no matter how many pro- abortion bills the President has vetoed or how craven he has been in his support of the right-to-lifers, it will all come down to how he handles that nomination.”

How would Bush play such an opportunity? A G.O.P. dream scenario runs like this: Bush (obviously) avoids choosing a trustee of Planned Parenthood, but he does select a new Justice whose position is ambiguous enough to generate a mini-outcry from the pro-lifers. Then the former wimp sticks by his man (or woman), stands up to the antiabortion lobby and creates a political triumph that dwarfs even Panama.

George Bush is the Mr. Lucky of American politics. He will probably get a court vacancy, play it beautifully and finally put the “abortion thing” behind him. If he manages that, the Democrats will be reduced to praying for a Depression.