Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SUNDAY, April 8, 1990 TAG: 9004090256
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: F-3 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: CAL THOMAS
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
Former New York Gov. Hugh Carey knows what Andrus faced. Carey, who tells me he wishes he had done more while he was governor to stop abortion in his state, says he sent Andrus a telegram urging him to sign the bill.
"I have had to live with being constantly reminded that I didn't exercise power [to reduce abortions] while I had it," he said he told Andrus. Carey said he regrets Andrus' remark that he didn't believe the Idaho bill was constitutional. "The place to test the constitutionality of the bill was not in Andrus' mind or among his legal advisers, but before the Supreme Court," Carey declared.
When Carey was governor of New York, between 1975 and 1982, he vetoed a measure that would have prevented the use of federal Medicaid funds for abortion. He says if he had known that more than 20 million abortions would be performed nationally in the years since 1973, and that so many would be for reasons of "birth control," he would have acted differently. "If I were governor now," he said, "I would sign it."
Carey believes that Andrus will live to regret his decision. "I have been tortured over mine," he said. "I was in the infantry in World War II and saw the bodies piled high as we liberated Nazi concentration camps. I saw what can happen when a government decides that certain categories of human life are commodities for the state."
Beyond what now happens to his re-election prospects (he recently announced he will run again), Andrus has blown an opportunity to enjoy a place in history few governors expect or even hope to attain. He could have been the governor, and Idaho could have been the state, that recognized the right to life of the unborn. This is the stuff of political immortality.
Faced with threats and pressure from vocal pro-abortion groups, he chose the easy way out. It is always easier to give in to pressure than to stand for principle.
What good is it to be pro-life, as Andrus has consistently said he is, if when one has the power to do something to stop or greatly reduce the killing, one does nothing?
It is clear from the pronouncements of the "pro-choicers" that as the Supreme Court continues its slow rightward turn, their greatest fear is that model pro-life legislation might be upheld. That's why they are busying themselves in Congress and in state legislatures in an attempt to block any reversal or modification of Roe vs. Wade.
Carey believes that the court erred in 1973 by making a constitutionally unsound decision. He thinks abortion is "the most critical issue of our time. This nation was founded on a creed, as G.K. Chesterton said. If life is just another issue, then the basis of our civil rights programs and other laws which touch on the concept of endowed, inalienable rights is moot."
Andrus says, almost wistfully, that he has had a long political career, and if it has to end on the abortion issue, "so be it."
It probably will end on this issue, but it could have ended gloriously with a Democratic governor taking the lead on an issue of moral principle. He and his state might have earned fame and glory. Now, like Diogenes, who searched for an honest man, Americans must continue their search for a man of principle who is not afraid to act on his beliefs.
There are no monuments or memorials to the timid, and there will be none for Gov. Andrus. He may think that he has preserved the economy for Idaho's potato farmers (though it is unclear whether pro-lifers will now favor Maine over Idaho potatoes). But his failure to preserve the lives of the unborn ensures that when the accomplishments of his administration are considered, his failure to use his power to preserve life will place him not in line with the heroes of the past but in the moral and political equivalent of the discard basket for bruised and unmarketable spuds. Los Angeles Times Syndicate
by CNB