But for Wales?
12:48 AM, Aug 6, 2009 • By JOHN MCCORMACK
From 1997 to June of 2009, Rep. John McHugh (R-NY), had a near perfect pro-life voting record. But since June he's gone 0 for 3 on pro-life votes. Why the change of heart? McHugh's press secretary won't say. But the likely reason is obvious: On June 2, 2009 President Obama nominated McHugh to serve as his Secretary of the Army. The Senate is expected to vote on his nomination today or tomorrow, according to McHugh's press secretary and Hill staffers.
Since June 2, McHugh has voted for a bill would establish an office that would promote abortion overseas; he didn't vote on an amendment to strip federal funding from Planned Parenthood; and he voted to allow taxpayer-funding of abortions in Washington, D.C.-a measure that will lead to the "funding of 4,000 or 5,000 abortions annually with congressionally appropriated funds, including about 1,000 abortions a year that would not happen otherwise," according to the National Right to Life Committee's Douglas Johnson.
Even if McHugh's voting with the Democrats wasn't part of an explicit quid pro quo with Obama and Rahm Emanuel, his decision to forsake his 12 years of voting pro-life simply to please his new boss would still call into question his integrity.
Contrast McHugh's apparent willingness to abandon his principles for his new job with the remarks made over the weekend by Louisiana Republican Joseph Cao, who represents the most lopsidedly Democratic congressional district in the country:
Rep. Anh "Joseph" Cao, R-New Orleans, the only member of the Louisiana House delegation who had not weighed in on where he stands on the health reform bill, said that he cannot support any bill that permits public money to be spent on abortion.
"At the end of the day if the health care reform bill does not have strong language prohibiting the use of federal funding for abortion, then the bill is really a no-go for me," said Cao, who studied to be a Jesuit priest.
"Being a Jesuit, I very much adhere to the notion of social justice," Cao said. "I do fully understand the need of providing everyone with access to health care, but to me personally, I cannot be privy to a law that will allow the potential of destroying thousands of innocent lives.
"I know that voting against the health care bill will probably be the death of my political career," Cao said, "but I have to live with myself, and I always reflect on the phrase of the New Testament, â€˜How does it profit a man's life to gain the world but to lose his soul.'"
Cao's remarks call to mind the famous scene in A Man for All Seasons where Thomas More confronts his betrayer Richard Rich, who was made Attorney General for Wales for falsely testifying against him: "Why Richard, it profits a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world... but for Wales?"
Cao clearly believes the second congressional district of Louisiana it isn't worth sacrificing his soul.
It's a shame that McHugh apparently values his own integrity less than a post in the Obama administration.