Bush Raises Abortion Issue in N.H. Visit

MANCHESTER, N.H. — Opening a clear point of division in the Republican presidential race, Texas Gov. George W. Bush said Monday that if elected to the White House he would not impose an anti-abortion “litmus test” on his Supreme Court nominees.

“There will be no litmus test except for whether or not the judges will strictly interpret the Constitution,” Bush said during his inaugural campaign visit to New Hampshire, site of next year’s first presidential primary. “I am not a lawyer. My job is to pick judges who are qualified to serve on the bench and that will be my criterion.”

Bush’s comments set him apart from several of his more conservative rivals for the GOP nomination--such as former Vice President Dan Quayle and social activist Gary Bauer--who have pledged to appoint only justices who oppose legal abortion. And Bauer wasted no time in denouncing Bush.

“Gov. Bush’s statements on Supreme Court appointments . . . suggest he will be AWOL in the debate over the protection of unborn children,” Bauer declared in a statement.

Referring to the slogan Bush uses to describe his own political philosophy, Bauer added, “What is compassionate conservatism if it doesn’t include guaranteed protection for our children?”

Bush’s day of campaigning in New Hampshire was marked by the scale and fervor of a general election visit. Trailed by more than 100 reporters, he drew a turn-away crowd of more than 1,000 GOP activists at a luncheon sponsored by the New Hampshire Federation of Republican Women here.

Bush received an exuberant response as he repeated the broad-brush defense of “compassionate conservatism” that he first offered Saturday in Iowa. “Governor--Wow!,” declared Alida Weergang, the federation’s chairwoman, after he finished his speech.

Bush’s remarks on abortion marked his latest bid to find a position on the issue that can appeal to his party’s base while reaching out to swing voters who oppose efforts to ban the procedure. Although Bush supports a constitutional amendment to ban abortion (except in cases of rape, incest or a threat to the life of the mother), he said earlier this year he would not seek to pass such an amendment as president because of the lack of a public consensus for it.

Striking a similar chord, Bush on Monday said he would pick his Supreme Court nominees based on “judicial temperament” rather than any single-issue litmus test. He said the question he will ask is: “Do the judges share my overall philosophy and will the judges strictly interpret the constitution as opposed to using the bench as a way to legislate law?”

Bush also has advocated incremental steps to reduce the number of abortions--such as the Texas measure he recently signed into law requiring that minors receiving abortions notify their parents or another adult.

With these bookend views, Bush has sought to claim a middle ground. But demonstrating the difficulty of finding consensus on abortion rights, he’s also put himself in a cross-fire. The National Abortion Rights Action League already has run advertisements that accuse him of trying to hide his belief that the procedure should be made illegal.

But candidates to his right charge him with throwing in the towel on the anti-abortion cause. “Our bet is that in Iowa, New Hampshire and all of the states where it has been an issue, Republicans are not willing to say the fight against legalized abortion is essentially over,” says Jeff Bell, a Bauer advisor.

*

Hear Times political writer Mark Z. Barabak’s analysis of the Bush campaign’s swing through Iowa and New Hampshire on The Times’ Web site: http://ukobiw.net./bush