c. 1996 Religion News Service

(Charles W. Colson, former special counsel to Richard Nixon, served a prison term for his role in the Watergate scandal. He now heads Prison Fellowship International, an evangelical Christian ministry to the imprisoned and their families. Contact Colson via e-mail at 71421.1551(at)compuserve.com.)

(UNDATED) Despite the urgent need for a campaign on moral issues, it will be, indeed, the economy, stupid, that will drive Bill Clinton and Bob Dole in their quest for the presidency. Anyone who believed the 1996 presidential campaign would focus on anything else could, at best, be considered naive.

Clearly, the Democrats and the Republicans have decided to fight one another over whether America would be better off with a 15 percent across-the-board tax cut or”targeted”cuts, despite Dole’s sensible assertion in his acceptance speech that Clinton’s 1992 rallying cry _”It’s the economy, stupid”_ was an insult to Americans.

Is this strategy smart for the GOP? No. And it’s clearly bad for the country.

I would not for a second suggest that a strong economy is not vital. Yet by choosing to fight the Democrats primarily on the economy, the GOP is illustrating the strategy of playing their weakest card.

The economy under Bill Clinton has performed steadily, if not dynamically. Historically speaking, presidents who preside over stable economies are difficult to oust. On other economic matters, such as free trade, there is little difference between the parties, so if the economy is the only issue, voters can be excused for staying on the horse that has brought them this far.

End of story? It needn’t be. Moral issues _ none more so than abortion _ are what truly separate the parties, yet the GOP leadership treats moral issues as if they were cancer. Mentioning them might _ heaven forbid _ suggest that the religious right were still alive and well.

To my mind this strategy is shortsighted, cowardly and stupid.

Yes, Clinton has presided over an economy that provides plenty of bread _ that is, material comforts _ but this does not ensure victory. Why? Because we are living in the midst of a great paradox. While many Americans enjoy relative material comfort, a majority, according to polls I’ve seen, believe the country is on the wrong track. They worry about crime and the effects of popular culture, illegitimacy and drugs. Ordinary Americans know, even if their politicians don’t, that we do not live by bread alone.

We are, in short, back at that most basic question, posed in the Old Testament and found at the root of Aristotle’s definition of politics: How shall we live? Here is where the debate should be joined. The GOP should ask this question: Have some of our public policies, which seem acceptable on a personal level, actually polluted the cultural environment?

Abortion intersects many of these concerns and is, in fact, at the heart of our cultural debate. The GOP has allowed the opposition to frame this purely as a matter of individual choice. But this so-called choice was created by the Supreme Court in 1973, many observers believe, primarily to accommodate the demands of the sexual revolution. This revolution has been a debacle. It has hardly provided the promised freedom _ for women, at least _ though it greatly aided men who desired to flee traditional family responsibilities.

So another case can be made. Has the nearly sacrosanct value of”choice”really provided Americans with the type of society they value, or has it caused the cultural decline that haunts an otherwise prosperous America?

I realize what I am about to say may shock many, but a majority of Americans believe that our current abortion policies are unacceptable. Their quibble is not minor. A recent Tarrance Group poll shows that 52 percent of Americans actually favor banning abortion in all instances save in cases of rape, incest, and when the life of the mother is in danger (these categories comprise 1 percent of abortions).

Only 13 percent, according to the poll, believe in abortion at any stage in pregnancy, which is basically our current policy. Through the magic of media objectivity the position embraced by 13 percent is said to be”mainstream,”while the position of the 52 percent is”extreme”_ a bizarre reading of the numbers, of course, but one that has cowed GOP strategists.

I submit that most members of this majority, and many other Americans, would agree that the widespread acceptance of abortion undermines respect for life in general _ an attitude that is hardly beneficial to the maintenance of a civil society. They might also understand that the abortion rights crusade also set the stage for the promotion of the gay agenda, the radical feminist movement, and the unraveling of the family.

Yet the GOP is scared to make such a case. By running from abortion and other resulting cultural concerns, the GOP turns its back on a solid constituency within their party _ a desertion that will, if not reversed, come back to haunt Republicans in a very big way.

JC END COLSON