In September, Mifepristone, better known as RU486, was finally approved
by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for use in early pregnancy
abortions. Despite having been safely administered in France, where it
is now used in one third of abortions, political stumbling blocks had prevented
its approval for sale in the US. RU486 remains unavailable in Australia.
On October 27, US House of Representatives and Senate leaders voted
to remove the “global gag rule” from the US$14.9 billion foreign aid bill.
This had banned overseas non-government organisations that receive US aid
funds for family planning from using funds — from any source, including
their own money — to present abortion as an option, provide abortions or
work for greater access to abortion. This applies even in countries in
which abortion is legal.
Whoever wins the US presidential election will have the ability to
reinstate the restrictions by executive order.
The Republican Party is clearly anti-choice. In 1992, it even removed
from its platform support for abortion provision in the cases of rape,
incest or in situations that endanger the life of the mother. Republican
presidential candidate George W. Bush criticised the FDA's decision as
being wrong. His spokesperson said if victorious, Bush would review the
decision.
Bush's personal views are less strident on choice than those of his
God Squad advisers.“There's good people on both sides of this issue”, he
said in a television interview in January.
Democrat presidential candidate Al Gore, while firm on the Democrats'
pro-choice policy during the election campaign, has not always been adamant
about a women's right to choose.
Many big names from the women's rights movement have pledged their support
to Gore, such as Gloria Steinem and Naomi Wolf. One of the main reasons
for feminist support for Gore is the Democrats' pro-choice position, and
their social policies which remain a little more people-friendly than the
Republicans'. Some have criticised Greens candidate Ralph Nader's presidential
campaign as having the potential to deliver the more conservative Bush
to the White House by taking votes from Gore.
How much have women benefited from eight years of a Democrat White House?
One of the main legacies of President Bill Clinton's rule has been the
decimation of the welfare system and a hardline stance that expects people
to drag themselves up by their bootstraps. This disproportionately affects
women, who have increased their over-representation among the US poor.
Laws on access to abortion are determined mostly by individual US states
and the Clinton administration has shown no inclination to attempt to override
anti-abortion legislation.
The Democrats have also failed to deliver any improvement on the disastrous
US health system, in which money buys good care and the poor are left to
die. More women than men access medical care.
The key issue is which US party leadership will benefit the majority
of the people, the vast numbers who are not part of the small wealthy elite
which includes the likes of Gore and Bush. Having Hillary Clinton represent
New Yorkers in the US Senate is unlikely to benefit the bulk of women and
men in that state.
While Nader had little chance of winning the presidency, the fact is
that neither of the major party candidates plan to rule in the interests
of the people, especially the poor, the bulk of whom are women.
If Bush does succeed in winning the position that he sees as his birthright,
then the flood of blame that may descend on Nader voters from some feminists
is undeserved. Nader may not have all the answers, but challenging the
two party duopoly from the left was a good start.
BY MARGARET ALLUM
