Romney's positions shift with wind
By WASHINGTON POST
Published February 22, 2007
WASHINGTON - Precisely two years ago, then-Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney sat in the coffee shop of a Washington hotel, doing his best not to explain his views on abortion.
Romney was speaking to a few of us from the Washington Post, and a colleague noted the similarity between Romney's expressed views on abortion rights and the stance of another Massachusetts politician, Sen. John F. Kerry: Both men said they were personally opposed to abortion but did not support making it illegal.
From there, Romney proceeded to expound one of the odder positions I've heard in years: "I can tell you what my position is, and it's in a very narrowly defined sphere, as candidate for governor and as governor of Massachusetts," he said. "What I said to people was that I personally did not favor abortion, that I am personally pro-life. However, as governor I would not change the laws of the commonwealth relating to abortion.
"Now I don't try and put a bow around that and say what does that mean you are - does that mean you're pro-life or pro-choice, because that whole package - meaning I'm personally pro-life but I won't change the laws, you could describe that as - well, I don't think you can describe it in one hyphenated word."
Got it? I didn't. I asked, "Do you support making abortion illegal? I'm not talking about what you would do as governor of Massachusetts."
Romney: "But that's the furthest I'm going to take you right now. I'm governor of Massachusetts, and I'm telling you exactly what I will do as governor of Massachusetts, but I'm not going to tell you what I'd do" in other elected positions.
It was hard to see how a man with deeply held convictions on abortion rights could take a position so calibrated and inconclusive. Listening to Romney that day was like watching a chameleon in the fleeting moment that its color changes to suit its environment. Indeed, several months later, Romney wrote in the Boston Globe about how his views on the subject had "evolved and deepened."
Evolved, indeed. During his Massachusetts races, Romney paraded his conviction that "abortion should be safe and legal." Now he says he opposes abortion except in cases of rape and incest, and supports overturning Roe vs. Wade.
Romney's makeover goes beyond abortion rights. Once he supported allowing gays to serve openly in the military and backed a law to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation - not anymore.
Romney told the Boston Globe in 1994 that, as a registered independent, he voted in the 1992 Democratic primary for Paul Tsongas because Tsongas was from Massachusetts and he favored Tsongas' ideas over Bill Clinton's. Appearing last weekend on ABC's This Week, Romney said: "When there was no real contest in the Republican primary, I'd vote in the Democrat primary, vote for the person who I thought would be the weakest opponent for a Republican."
To give this explanation the credit it doesn't deserve, Romney's rationale boils down to arguing that he didn't really mean his vote; he was just trying to game the political process. Those considering Romney in 2008 have reason to wonder what a politician who admits so freely to that kind of manipulation is willing to do to win their votes.