Saving Terri Schiavo is the newest political project to come out of Washington.

She has been in a persistent vegetative state for the last 15 years —ÿa result of massive and irreversible damage to her cerebral cortex, the engine of human consciousness. Without it, there is no function of emotion, memory, perception or cognition. Thus, Schiavo is alive only in a biological sense.

Forcibly keeping her body alive has all the underpinnings of politically motivated legislation. The first clue to this fact is that proponents have declared the legislation Congress pushed through early Monday morning as non-precedent-setting. By its very nature, all legislation is precedent-setting. Uniform standards create a coherent legal framework, without which the system would fail. To call this legislation non-precedent-setting is to admit that it is not based on logic or sound principles.

The case itself is expressive of the ongoing assault on state’s rights. Florida’s state courts have consistently ruled on the side of Michael Schiavo, Terri Schiavo’s husband and legal guardian, to allow her feeding tube to be removed. For all the lip service Republicans pay to state’s rights, we question the Grand Old Party’s integrity in determining that Florida’s state courts are incompetent to hear Schiavo’s trial.

Ironically, many of these Republicans also seek to keep her body alive through Medicaid — a program that has faced much GOP criticism, and which, if President Bush gets his way, will wither by $15 billion from budget cuts. If valuing a “culture of life” is so important, why are congressional Republicans threatening to cut Medicaid funding? After all, Schiavo is only alive at a base level and apparently told her husband she did not wish to be kept alive under such circumstances. Why is her cause more important than the many children, poor and elderly who are conscious and who need help, but are rejected by congressional Republicans?

It doesn’t make sense, and that is why proponents have declared the legislation non-precedent-setting. This political chicanery is not solely the work of Republicans, however. Our very own senator, Tom Harkin, has been instrumental in this unconstitutional endeavor. He has said that among people who are disabled, it is “hard to determine what their wishes really are or were.” The key word here is “were,” acknowledging that Schiavo no longer has thoughts or wishes. Furthermore, congressional Democrats had the ability to block this legislation but chose not to. Instead, under the leadership of Harry Reid, the legislation was passed through with sizable Democratic support.

We oppose federal intervention in this case, and hope that it does not lead to further centralization of federal power. However worded, the action itself sets a precedent that cannot be ignored.