Editorial: Health and life taking backseat to politics in N.C. abortion policy

CBC Editorial: Friday, Aug. 19, 2022; editorial # 8781
The following is the opinion of Capitol Broadcasting Company

What did North Carolinians learn late on Wednesday when federal judge William Osteen Jr. allowed enforcement of the state’s ban on abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy?

They learned that health and life are not the most important matters to House Speaker Tim Moore and state Senate Leader Phil Berger. To Republicans Berger and Moore it is all about politics, the fall elections and their machinations to gain a veto-proof majority in the General Assembly.

In reacting to Osteen’s unsurprising ruling, Moore mainly attacked Attorney General Josh Stein, a Democrat, who appropriately recused himself from personal involvement in the matter after stating he opposed the previously unconstitutional state law. Berger, similarly took up a partisan cudgel. “Democrats’ position on abortion can only be characterized as extreme,” he said.

Democratic Gov. Cooper offered a more on-point and less belligerent reaction: "The significant problem with this ruling is that it will criminalize important health care that’s needed in certain extraordinary circumstances,” Cooper said. Abortion past 20 weeks in pregnancy is exceptionally rare and happens because of a devastating health emergency or diagnosis. Denying women necessary medical care in extreme and threatening situations, even if rare, is fundamentally wrong, and we cannot let politicians mislead people about the real-world implications of this harmful law."

In fact, few abortions in the state come after 20 weeks. In 2020 there were 48 abortions at 21 weeks or later -- 0.2% of all of the residents who had abortions.

The legislature’s GOP leadership has promised “more protection for the unborn.” They have yet to offer any specifics on what that means.

Yet, if Berger and Moore are looking for extreme positions on abortion, they need look no further than legislation their fellow Republicans have introduced, which is still pending in the General Assembly and that they’ve not renounced.

Republicans want the State Constitution (House Bill -158) to declare life starts “at the moment” of fertilization. Anyone who willfully tries or destroys a life is accountable for attempted murder. Is that what Moore and Berger want?

Do they back legislation (House Bill 31) banning abortions after a “detectable” fetal heartbeat?

Are these the “protection for the unborn” that Moore and Berger are promoting?

The General Assembly remains in session. Why don’t they have legislation they want introduced and fully considered in an open and accessible manner – through the committee process? Give citizens and their fellow legislators the opportunity to participate, in full public view, in the legislative process?

If they don’t intend to take that path – and doubt they would without their much-desired veto-proof majority – why don’t they tell North Carolinians specifically what they want to do? The reluctance may be based on just how out-of-step they are with the state’s electorate. A recent WRAL poll revealed 55% of voters don’t want further restrictions on abortion while just 34% favor more restrictions.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision overturning Roe v. Wade immediately made abortion a key election issue in every congressional and legislative race in the state and nation.

Well before they cast their ballots, North Carolinians have a right to know, and those seeking office have an obligation to explain in detail, what they want to do on this key issue.