Five years ago, Thomas Frank wrote a book called What's the Matter With Kansas. One of his theses is that working-class conservative Religious Right voters vote against their own economic interests. Because of their strong commitment to opposing abortion and gay marriage, they vote with Republicans and against their economic interests. If only they would put aside their emotional commitment to these issues and vote rationally, they would improve their lot in life and improve society.
So in the health care debate, we see a steady stream of stories like this from the Associated Press: La. senator's vote on abortion revives conflicts
NEW ORLEANS (AP) — Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu's vote this week against abortion funding restrictions in health care legislation brought new attention to an issue that has long complicated her political life. …
… Her vote Tuesday against an amendment by Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., to the health care bill now before the Senate brought immediate condemnation from the state Republican party and anti-abortion organizations that said she broke her own policy against government funding for abortion. …
… Landrieu said she voted against the amendment because she believed it also would take legal abortion coverage out of private insurance policies. …
Now Landrieu is a moderate in a difficult spot, but here is the real question: If dropping the abortion issue would get the bill passed, why are the liberals making such a big fuss about keeping abortion coverage in the bill? Mr. Franks assures us that such issues are peripheral to our voting for things that are in our economic and society's interests. Aren't the liberals just being irrational? Or maybe those folks in Kansas weren't being so irrational after all? 🙂
Leave a Reply