Scott Brown: Pro-Choice With a Twist

imagesbannerscp_150x601Reprinted by permission of the Christian Post

By Lawrence D. Jones|Christian Post Reporter

Scott Brown of Massachusetts may have taken away the Democrats’ filibuster-proof Senate majority, but the Republican Sen.-elect isn’t your typical conservative.

“I am a fiscal conservative. And when it comes to issues affecting people’s pockets, and pocketbooks, and wallets, I’ll be with the Republicans if they are in fact pushing those initiatives,” Brown said in an interview set to air Sunday on ABC’s “This Week.”

But there are issues on which he might break with his party – most notably, abortion.

“You are pro-choice, yes?” Barbara Walters asked Brown in the interview.

“Yes,” Brown replied, explaining later that he feels the issue “is best handled between a woman and her doctor and her family.”

But Brown isn’t your typical pro-choice politician either.

“Roe v. Wade is the law of the land, but I think we need to do more to reduce the amount of abortions,” he stated. “And the difference between me and maybe others is that I’m very – I’m against partial-birth abortions. I’m against federal funding of abortions. And I believe in a strong parental consent notification law.”

Last week, Brown became the first Republican to win a Senate race in Massachusetts since 1972, defeating the state’s attorney general, Martha Coakley, with 52 percent of votes. His win gives the GOP enough members to block legislation, including the current health care reform bill, in the Senate.

Brown has vowed to oppose the bill, and once he takes office, the Democrats will no longer control the 60 votes in the Senate needed to overcome filibusters.

In his interview with Walters, Brown said, “Everyone really is the 41st senator.”

“And what it means is that now there will be full and fair debate. And there will be no more closed – behind closed doors actions,” he added.

Brown had expected to be sworn in sometime this past week, but the timing of his swearing-in still remains in question.

The waiting period for the arrival of absentee ballots has not yet been waived despite the five-point margin with which Brown won.

Massachusetts Secretary of State William Galvin has sent a letter to the Senate clerk declaring Brown the unofficial winner of the seat.

Copyright 2009 The Christian Post. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Note: Reader comments are reviewed before publishing, and only salient comments that add to the topic will be published. Profanity is absolutely not allowed and will be summarily deleted. Spam, copied statements and other material not comprised of the reader’s own opinion will also be deleted.

  • Digg
  • Yahoo Buzz
  • Reddit
  • Yahoo Bookmarks
  • Delicious
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Windows Live Favorites
  • Technorati Favorites
  • NewsVine
  • Share/Bookmark
  • dcm
    "I think we need to do more to reduce the amount of abortions.” -- Well, if he really means that (and it's not just some PR talk), that alone will get him strong opposition from pro-abortion types. The last thing Planned Parenthood wants is any measure that would reduce the amount of abortions.
  • Haggs
    You actually see that idea frequently among pro-choicers. It's part of the "Safe, Legal, Rare" idea. It's where those on the pro-choce side still support Roe v. Wade, but want to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies.
  • We are seeing him name specific things he supports -- a PBA ban, parental consent, no tax funding, etc. So our job is to just expand the number of pro-woman, pro-child measures he backs. Informed consent. Women's Right to Redress. The Brownback-Kennedy Bill. Etc.
  • dcm
    True, you do often hear the "safe, legal & rare" phrase from pro-choicers, but there never seems to be much actually done about it -- especially the "rare" part. I suspect it's often just a bit of PR talk used to placate pro-lifers. If the "rare" part was actually meant by pro-choicers of any influence, it would be much, much easier for the two sides of the debate to come together. But with Planned Parenthood, especially, refusing to cooperate with the prevention of even one potential (profitable) abortion (and being lax about safety, and breaking even the abortion-friendly laws that exist), "safe, legal & rare" ends up being meaningless.
  • If he's for parental involvement, against PBA, we can work with him. Nudge him into doing what's really right for women and families.
blog comments powered by Disqus