A few weeks ago, Rep. Bobby Rush, D-Ill., quietly scored a small legislative victory. More than six years after he’d originally introduced the Melanie Blocker-Stokes Postpartum Depression Research and Care Act, on July 19, the House Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection unanimously approved the bill, which would grant $3 million in 2008 to the National Institutes of Health to study and expand treatment and awareness of the condition that strikes as many as one in 10 new mothers.

But there was a catch. In order to get enough support for the bill, Rush had to add language encouraging the NIH to study the mental health effects of abortion.

Unlike postpartum depression, post-abortion depression — sometimes referred to as post-abortion syndrome — is not a recognized medical condition, but it has crept its way into the national dialogue. Sometimes spoken of as a kind of post-traumatic stress disorder, the so-called syndrome has been the subject of multiple studies (in 1989, then-Surgeon General C. Everett Koop testified before Congress on the subject), including one published last year in the Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, which concluded that the women they studied (all New Zealanders aged 15-25) who’d had abortions experienced “elevated rates of subsequent mental health problems including depression, anxiety, suicidal behaviours and substance use disorders.”

A recent article in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer examined the issue and described the current consternation this way:

Many anti-abortion activists insist there are proven, profound emotional and psychological effects from having an abortion — a so-called post-abortion syndrome. One outgrowth has been religiously affiliated retreats such as Project Rachel, aimed at helping to purge guilt.

Others say the syndrome is non-existent and just a new way to push the “pro-life” agenda, and that most women live productive, psychologically and emotionally normal lives after an abortion.

It’s possible, of course, to be pro-choice and still acknowledge that the decision to have an abortion may not always be without psychological consequences. Some depression and anxiety seem like normal reactions to a procedure that is not only surrounded by copious societal judgment, but that is by its nature a loss. But do we call it a syndrome?

Studying the psychological effects of abortion isn’t objectionable. Abortion and its aftermath are women’s health issues, after all, and it’s hard to argue against more knowledge. But there is something distinctly offensive about anti-choice politicians thwarting efforts to expand the study and treatment of a debilitating, frighteningly common disease (which led the namesake of Rush’s bill to commit suicide less than five months after giving birth) so as to equate it with the possible consequences of a procedure they already believe is immoral and should be illegal.

Does Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., need a little divine intervention in his campaign for the Republican presidential nomination? Some of his supporters think so. On Tuesday, Lonnie Berger, the self-described “prayer coordinator” for a group called “Pray for Brownback,” sent an e-mail imploring the faithful to get on bended knee to help Brownback in the upcoming Iowa straw poll.

“This may be one of the most important prayer alerts I have sent out for Sam,” writes Berger, whose e-mail is posted on USA Today’s On Politics blog. And in case supporters aren’t certain exactly what to ask God to do, Berger has a list:

FBI Director Robert Mueller’s testimony on Capitol Hill Thursday was supposed to focus on problems with the bureau’s use of national security letters, but amid questioning over the now-infamous John Ashcroft hospital visit, Mueller made a statement that seemed to directly contradict testimony Attorney General Alberto Gonzales gave when he sat before the Senate Judiciary Committee just two days before.

Monday’s CNN/YouTube Democratic debate was popular with viewers age 18-34, but the format didn’t sit well with everyone — specifically, Republican presidential candidates.

The Washington Post reports this morning that so far, only Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, have agreed to appear at the next CNN/YouTube debate scheduled for Sept. 17 in St. Petersburg, Fla. Mitt Romney told the Manchester Union Leader on Wednesday, “I think the presidency ought to be held at a higher level than having to answer questions from a snowman.”

Romney isn’t the only Republican turning up his nose at the event. According to the St. Petersburg Times, Rudy Giuliani has “scheduling issues.”

So far, reports the Post, 400 questions have been uploaded to YouTube in anticipation of the debate.

The Washington Post has a front page feature on Fred Thompson that focuses on his distinctly un-GOP former life as a litigator.

Before he was elected as a tough-on-crime U.S. senator from Tennessee or played a New York prosecutor on TV’s “Law and Order,” Fred Dalton Thompson worked as a lawyer who argued against the government’s authority to regulate drug paraphernalia or to search a boat packed with 14 tons of marijuana.

Once, two decades ago, he urged that more witnesses refuse to testify before grand juries by invoking their constitutional right against self-incrimination, boasting that “I start on the assumption that my client will not testify.” And over the years, lawsuits he filed helped a state worker win reinstatement to her job while exposing a parole bribery scheme and won money for the family of a Marine pilot killed by a helicopter blade when the family could not sue the Defense Department.

The piece also reports that Thompson accepted $1.5 million in donations from lawyers over eight years. While in the Senate, the Post’s John Solomon writes, “Thompson routinely voted against legislation aimed at shrinking the size of fees that attorneys could collect and rejected limits on medical malpractice lawsuits, bucking his own party.”

What these revelations will mean to Republican voters, of course, remains to be seen. According to the latest Washington Post-ABC poll of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents, Thompson is in third place among the GOP front-runners, just 1 percentage point behind Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., but 22 points behind Rudy Giuliani. The Post’s article ends with an anecdote, however, that might be more damaging to Thompson’s as-yet-unannounced bid for the presidency than a cozy relationship with trial lawyers. Apparently, in 1985, Thompson — who has been accused of being too lazy to run for the White House — was reprimanded by a Tennessee judge when he failed to appear in court on behalf a client because he was on vacation in Paris.

Continue Reading Close

Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., announced today that his committee will subpoena White House deputy chief of staff Karl Rove and White House deputy director of political affairs Scott Jennings.

According to CNN’s Political Ticker, Leahy said:

“We’ve now reached a point where the accumulated evidence shows that political considerations factored into the unprecedented firing of at least nine U.S. attorneys last year. Testimony and documents showed that the list was compiled based on input from the highest political ranks in the White House, including Mr. Rove and Mr. (Scott) Jennings, and today I will subpoena Mr. Rove and Mr. Jennings.”