Popular support for legal abortion is shrinking nationwide, and we may have Obama to thank for it, according to results released on Thursday of an August 2009 survey from the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life (PF).

PF says the "election of a pro-choice Democrat for president" could contribute to this downward trend in numbers of abortion supporters, since the decline first appeared in polls early in 2009. Until then, abortion supporters largely outnumbered opponents, but now they only represent a slim majority.

The survey revealed a seven-percent drop over the past year in the number of Americans who say abortion should be legal in all or most cases (47 percent). At the same time, the number of pro-life advocates (45 percent) is up four percent. PF found a six-point increase in respondents who want to make abortions more difficult to obtain (41 percent). Sixty-five percent of Americans think it would be good to reduce the number of abortions, also up six percent from last year. All of the survey results found that support for abortion is on the decline. And although 60 percent of Americans still believe it is possible to find a compromise on abortion issues, even that number is down six points from 2006 survey results. This recent survey confirms findings of a May 2009 Gallup poll that found a slim majority of Americans, 51 percent, call themselves "pro-life."

The shift in opposition to abortion is bi-partisan, though PF noted that abortion is no longer a hot topic among liberal Democrats. (Since 1973 and Roe v. Wade, they have not had to fight for abortion; they have focused their energies on loosening restrictions. Pro-life causes, on the other hand, have fought an uphill battle for nearly 40 years against legalized abortion, which might explain their more entrenched opposition.)

But this recent rise in pro-life sentiment didn't stop the Senate Finance Committee from rejecting two anti-abortion provisions in the healthcare reform bill earlier this week. Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) introduced both amendments. The first would ensure that no taxpayer dollars would support abortions, especially exempting insurance premium subsidies since the bill authorizes such funding. The other amendment would have prohibited the government from discriminating against healthcare providers who refuse to perform abortions. Committee members voted 13 – 10 against both provisions. In a press release, Hatch expressed his disappointment in both votes, "especially given the fact that Chairman Baucus has made it clear during this mark-up that he did not want federal taxpayer dollars to pay for abortions." Hatch declares he will continue to fight for both of the issues contained in these amendments as debate on the healthcare bill continues.
 

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (5)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Bonnie said:

Confused And just HOW has the Great Obama caused people to change their mind about abortion? I don't see how a healthcare bill is going to change anyone's mind about the morality of abortion. It may change a few minds about funding abortion, but not whether or not killing the unborn is a right choice in the first place. Don't get me wrong... I am happy more people are holding a pro-life position. I just fail to understand the relationship between Obama being in the White House and the increase of pro-lifers. I think there must be some other factor at work here. In other words, what has this to do with the price of tea in China?

report abuse vote down vote up

October 02, 2009
Votes: +1

Flu-Bird said:

	Abortion is murder YOU KNOW YOUR A LIBERAL WHEN YOU BELIVE CUTTING DOWN A TREE SHOULD BE A FEDERAL CRIME BUT ABORTION SHOULD BE A RIGHT
	report abuse vote down vote up

October 03, 2009
Votes: +0

robert said:

... The real question a lot of people ask is what exactly is this abortion debate about? And time and time again, it comes down to the question 'Do we really want to lock up women who have abortions and their doctors?'. Do we respect that they have to go through a heart wrenching question and many times are facing medical problems and problematic pregnancies? Or do we say 'No, I know better then you and now your going to go to jail.' That is the real difference. And the fact is that when women feel they have the choice they choose to keep it. That is why when we have a pro-choice president women more and more choose to keep the child. That is why under clinton and now obama the rates dropped. But when we say 'No we know better then you do.' women are more likely to have an abortion, because they are just not sure if they will be able to have an abortion if further along in the pregnancy the pregnancy becomes problematic if there is a president that will not choose to protect their rights. That is why under reagan the percentages went up every year and under the bushes the percentages have stayed stagnet. I hope that the anti-abortion pro-life movement will finally see that actually being pro-choice is the most pro-life you can be.

report abuse vote down vote up

October 04, 2009
Votes: -3

Florida Warren said:

	How's that again? Quote from Robert: "I hope that the anti-abortion pro-life movement will finally see that actually being pro-choice is the most pro-life you can be." This is the most convoluted, illogical statement I have heard since the Keynesian economists told us: "The size of the national debt doesn't matter because we owe it to ourselves"!
	report abuse vote down vote up

October 04, 2009
Votes: +4

still free said:

	Why don't babies count? Yes, exactly, Florida Warren. Sounds like Clinton trying to explain his definition of sex, doesn't it? Why is it that a baby's life means nothing to the pro-choice folks, and yet the life of a snail darter or a mink does? Talk about convoluted!!
	report abuse vote down vote up

October 05, 2009
Votes: +3