|
I personally do not think that Rove will risk losing elections to overturning Roe v. Wade - Rove is a smart man - diabolical, but smart. He knows, as many Republicans have said off the record, that the party just likes to have Roe "to kick around." Rove knows that he would lose the entire section of Republican women and suffer a massive backlash if Roe v. Wade were to be overturned.
The real scenario is something like this: Rehnquist resigns and is replaced by a far-right, radical judge that puts Scalia to shame. But when and if O'Conner and Stevens resign, we may well get a rabidly libertarian judge approved by the CATO institute - a stealth nominee who is libertarian on social issues and supports Roe v. Wade. Dems support him or her, only to find that s/he is a radical far-righter when it comes to federalism and the ability of the federal government to regulate.
In essence, the danger is that we wind up with an economically reactionary activist court that undoes the New Deal and all the protections that came with it. Think about it - what has the Bush administration been all about? They are determined to destroy the American economic system for their cronies.
Trust me - we're being a bit blind here. Certainly we have to see that a potential judge is in favor of Roe v. Wade but I fear we will fail to see the real danger. And frankly, if I had to choose one or the other, I would rather Roe v. Wade be overturned than see all the state's regulations on commerce and business and labor overturned. At least abortion can be dealt with in legislatures and would at least lead to a backlash that would sweep Democrats and moderate Republicans into power to protect the right to privacy. If the New Deal state is declared unconstitutional, there's very little anybody can do.
|