New York, New York — It’s a new day in the Empire State with the inauguration of a new governor today. As David Paterson takes the oath of office in Albany, one week after Eliot Spitzer’s rising star was shot down by his own disregard for the law and his marital vows, pro-life activists hold their breath, having the audacity to hope that the new state executive will consider toning down the previous governor’s planned gift to the abortion industry. It’s called the Reproductive Health and Privacy Protection Act: legislation that would codify abortion as a “fundamental right” in New York State. New York pro-life political observers worry that the Albany-vet Paterson may rush to work the RHAPP into law with speed and ease, as a supposed “gift” to women in the wake of the wronged-wife-and-exploited-prostitute stories of last week.

It does take great audacity, however, for opponents of the legislation to be hopeful. Hanging on to hopes that Paterson will want to embrace his roots — his father has been honored by the Catholic Archdiocese of New York — and set himself apart by not delivering to the abortion lobby with the enthusiasm of the Spitzer administration. But at a rally last week, then-lieutenant governor Paterson assured advocates of the legislation that he, too, believes that abortion is a woman’s right: “Don’t let anyone slander your ranks by trying to suggest that the fight for reproductive rights for women is some sort of ‘special service,’” Paterson told advocates. “All it is, is the embodiment and the embrace of what our state and federal Constitution intended for all citizens but has been subjugated and in many ways changed so as not suit half of the population.” Still, what a difference a week makes, right? Pro-lifers are hoping that the new governor will reconsider. “Given the very extreme nature of Spitzer’s abortion bill, we are hopeful that Mr. Paterson will act quickly to strike it down,” Suzanne Topping, director of the Women’s Health Collaborative, tells National Review Online. Topping seeks to reason with her pro-choice friends in the state capital, pointing out that New York already gets high marks for “pro-choice friendliness,” dubbed the “abortion capital of the country” by New York magazine. “None of our existing pro-choice laws would be changed in the unlikely event that Roe vs. Wade is ever overturned, and yet Gov. Spitzer decided to try to push through [this] legislation.” Unless you want an unregulated abortion capital with few restrictions even on basic standards and children, there’s no need and point for this legislation right now, Topping argues. She adds, as if to plead: “We are extremely hopeful that Mr. Paterson, who has a reputation for a more moderate and conciliatory approach, will truly step out in support of the women of our state, and publicly oppose this extreme and dangerous legislation.” In a March 10 letter from eight New York State Catholic bishops, the New York State Catholic Conference celebrated pro-life trends in public opinion, technology, and the courts, but also sounded an alarm:

Even in our State of New York, often cited as the “abortion capital” of the United States, we have made pro-life progress, with solid investments in prenatal care and abortion alternatives, and conscience protection for those opposed to the procedure.
This bill would make abortions even easier to obtain, and would ensure that late-term abortions of fully-formed infants are available in the Empire State, no matter what prohibitions the U.S. Supreme Court might one day allow. It would endanger women by allowing non-physicians to carry out abortions and imperil children by thwarting any efforts to involve parents in the abortion decisions of their children.
No less alarming, this extremist proposal could be used to force all health care institutions, even Catholic hospitals, to provide abortions or risk the loss of their operating certificate. It could be used to compel every insurance company to pay for abortion and every health care provider to perform abortion.
The extremism of this proposal is couched in euphemisms like “choice” and “reproductive health care for women.” The words have become unmoored from their meaning; they cannot mask the fact that the bill attempts to legislate approval for a procedure that is always gravely wrong. A legal system that violates the basic right to life of one human being on the grounds of the “choice” of another is fundamentally flawed.

Jessica Shanahan, president of New Yorkers for Parental Rights, echoes her fellow pro-lifers’ optimism but realistically worries that the already well-established pro-choice Governor Paterson will move on the bill by way of saying, “I’m sorry for what Spitzer did [to women].” Shanahan counters that temptation by arguing, instead that: “SPITZER GIVES WOMEN A BAD ‘RHAPP’” (referring to the Reproductive Health and Privacy Protection Act in shorthand) as her group did in a press release last week. A bill that eliminates parental notification for abortions performed on minor children (as young as 12), that would obliterate conscience protection for religious institutions, that would permit non-doctors to perform abortions, and that would allow late-term abortions in out-patient clinics is far from reasonable; it would be a mark of leadership if the new governor would stand up to the abortion lobby in New York State, and simply be reasonable on this issue. In a state where news has been anything but predictable over the last week, one thing’s for certain: If pro-lifers can make it here, they can make it anywhere.