Draft:Safe, legal, and rare

Safe, legal, and rare refers to a type of pro-choice position on abortion. The position maintains that abortion should be safe and legal, yet simultaneously should be "rare" in the sense that they are infrequent.

History
The term first entered common usage when it was used regularly by Bill Clinton during the 1992 United States presidential election campaign.

In modern times, the term has been abandoned by Democrats in favour of a stronger position, particularly some, such as Tom Steyer, who feel that abortion rights are being curtailed in deep red states. Steyer said that he considered the phrase "old language". In 2016, opposition to the Hyde Amendment was included in the Democratic plank for that election year, which the Guardian noted as a "strong reversal" from the usual safe, legal, and rare position. The Democrats for Life group attempted to get the amendment restored to the platform in 2020, but this was unsuccessful.

The phrase is used by a small subset of Republicans, though Politico observed that the number is "vanishingly small". In particular, they followed the campaign of Matt Gunderson, who is campaigning in the competitive California's 49th congressional district, and analysed how the phrase could be used by moderate Republicans in "solid blue" states.

Usage
The term has been used by several major politicians, including Bill Clinton, his wife and future presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

Viewpoints
Writing in the New York Times, Ross Douthat presented a critical view of the safe, legal and rare mantra, opining that it was an 'illusion'. Writing further, he commented: "At the same time, if liberal social policies really led inexorably to fewer unplanned pregnancies and thus fewer abortions, you would expect “blue” regions of the country to have lower teen pregnancy rates and fewer abortions per capita than demographically similar “red” regions." The phrase has also recieved criticism from those on the left of the political spectrum, in particular for being a "paradoxical position", and for harming women's health to prevent social conflict.

Conversely, it has been praised for being an "inspired way to bring together a range of abortion supporters".