Berkley Center

The battle over what to do with the Affordable Care Act (ACA) has been bitterly fought and still isn’t over, but many pro-life Republican legislators have supported new bills proposed by both the House and the Senate, despite their potential to greatly reduce maternity benefits and to limit healthcare and access to healthcare for some of the most vulnerable in our society—the very sick and the very poor. While the newly proposed bills are not receiving much popular support, the ACA—which aimed to provide coverage to more people, including those most vulnerable in the United States—was also incredibly unpopular, especially among conservative voters who in 2012 were 87 percent in favor or strongly favor of repealing the law.

This week the Berkley Forum asks: How does one reconcile a pro-life agenda with potential deep cuts to healthcare benefits like maternity care or caps on Medicaid? Is there inherent tension between supporting a pro-life agenda and opposing a comprehensive healthcare law, as this op-ed suggests, or is there more nuance to the issues at stake? Can views on healthcare and views on issues of life be separated out into matters of policy and matters of morality, or should there ideally be consistency between the two and, if so, what would such a position look like?