Life Advocacy Briefing

The Fallacy in Polling

HAVE YOU NOTICED – as we have – how often media notes “abortion” as a poll response to the question about what issue motivates a voter’s decision and proceeds to cite the statistic as a warning to pro-life candidates? Has it occurred to you – as it has to us, but apparently not to the pollsters and their media partners – that a good share of those who cite “abortion” as their most motivating issue actually includes many of us who want to outlaw the evil practice?

Such generic polling data are used to intimidate pro-life candidates, and paid consultants continue to advise them to “admit” their pro-life stand if confronted and then get on to another topic.

We have several objections to this: First, voters are left largely uninformed about the cruelty of abortion, about the radical nature of our laws in too many jurisdictions and certainly about the enormity of the abortion cartel – all topics which our candidates could address in a sentence or two.

Second – and just as important – our “next topic, please” candidates sacrifice an opportunity to demonstrate character and commitment, qualities which boost a candidate’s prospects.

Third, a pro-life position is nothing to be ashamed of or to run from and is emblematic of the highest of American values.

An articulate pro-life commitment stands out as a marker of character, and it is all the more positive and admirable in a jurisdiction where the majority of the electorate are not all-in, one way or the other, on one of the principal issues of our day.

Since not every American has encountered the abortion cartel face-on – and the news media have shown themselves incapable or unwilling to do so – the best opportunity to raise the curtain is through our political candidates, whether or not they are “comfortable” with “the issue.”

Our readers can help their pro-life favorites by encouraging them to move off the bumpersticker politics of labels and take a principled stand on specific issues, not leaving it to their opponents and the media to characterize their position. We hope through Life Advocacy Briefing we equip our readers to do that.

Let Us Pray

THOUGH CITIZENS HAVE NO REAL OPPORTUNITY to influence the US Supreme Court in its deliberations, we do have the right to pray and also to speak in public forums such as online “social media” posts or letters to the editor. So, although we seldom report on cases before the high court until the justices’ decision is announced, we report today that the high court last Wednesday heard oral arguments in a case seeking to invalidate Idaho’s law criminalizing abortion.

The case seeks to determine whether the Biden Regime’s interpretation of the federal Emergency Medical Treatment & Labor Act (EMTALA) compels emergency room personnel to kill an unborn child in order to “stabilize” the condition of a baby’s mother whose health is at risk.

Idaho’s law against abortion does not have an exemption for such situations. Idaho expects its medical personnel to take all necessary actions to preserve the life of both patients – mother and child – and its law, consequently, does not exempt emergency room personnel from its pro-life protections.

The case is a perfect example of how the Biden Regime uses regulations to twist laws in order to advance the interests of the abortion cartel. Let us pray that the Supreme Court will let the Idaho law stand intact and thus thwart the Regime’s obsession with abortion. If the high court actually meant what it said in Dobbs – that every state has authority to promulgate laws governing abortion – the Idaho statute will stand. The decision is expected to be announced in late June.

Maine Pushes Abortion

LAWMAKERS IN MAINE HAVE HUNG AN ‘ABORTIONISTS WELCOME’ SIGN on their once-beautiful state.

Gov. Janet Mills (D) is expected to please her political backers by signing into law a bill passed in mid-April which, reports Bridget Sielicki for Live Action, would “shield abortionists who break pro-life laws in other states.” It would also, she notes, “protect those who travel to the state for ‘gender reassignment’ surgery or hormone injections.”

LD-277 passed the House by a 76-to-67 vote and the Senate 21 to 13.

“Many opponents of the bill,” writes Ms. Sielicki, “warned that it would protect those who traffic minors into the state for abortions.”

Warned Rep. Reagan Paul (R-Winterport), quoted in the Live Action report, “‘[The bill] outlines a vision for Maine that is truly egregious and dangerous for women in our state,’” saying it “would ‘fling the door wide open’ for abusers and traffickers to force women to abort their preborn children.” She further warned, reports Ms. Sielicki, “it would offer no protection for women who are harmed by abortionists, especially those who are breaking the law. She noted it would ‘enable  reproductive coercion and crimes against pregnant women and remove any recourse they might have if they are injured by an abortion procedure. This bill is not about access to health care,’ [Rep.] Paul said. ‘This bill is about empowering abusers.’”

The bill appears to be a face-saving fallback for Maine’s abortion-backed politicians, following their failure to stuff a “right to abortion” into the state constitution.

We encourage our readers – including those who are holding or running for office – to note Rep. Paul’s focus on protecting women as well as their children. The abortion industry truly is an abusive racket, and our pro-life public officials should not be shy about pointing that out.

Kansas Governor Vetoes [Certain] Charitable Giving

KANSAS GOV. LAURA KELLY (D) VETOED LEGISLATION in mid-April that would have benefited adoption, pregnancy care centers and maternity homes.

The benefits would have come in the form of state income tax credits, covering adoption costs, reports Calvin Freiburger for LifeSiteNews, and “for donations to charitable organizations that operate pregnancy centers” and would also have “exempt[ed] purchases by pregnancy resource centers and residential maternity facilities from sales taxes.”

The governor characterized the legislation as “‘divert[ing] taxpayer dollars to largely unregulated crisis pregnancy centers,’” declaring, “‘These entities are not medical centers and do not promote evidence-based methods to prevent unplanned pregnancies.’” She also claimed, “‘This bill goes against the wishes of Kansans.’”

Said Kansans for Life government relations director Jeanne Gawdun, quoted by Mr. Freiburger, “‘By her heartless veto, Gov. Kelly has shown once again that her only allegiance is to the profit-driven abortion industry and not to vulnerable Kansas women, children and families.’” The pro-life lobbyist urged lawmakers to override the veto.

Battle Joined in Nevada

NEVADA VOTERS WILL FACE A REFERENDUM this November seeking to cement abortion into the state’s constitution. Only a simple majority of those voting on the proposition will be required, but the process must be confirmed by a second vote in the state’s next general election.

The proposition, whose backers claim to have crossed the threshold of required signatures for ballot access, was cleared by the state’s supreme court a week ago, overturning a ruling by a lower court that the proposition violates the state’s single-subject rule for constitutional amendment initiatives, reports Calvin Freiburger for LifeSiteNews. Seven justices sit on the Nevada Supreme Court, chosen by voters in non-partisan elections.

Carson City District Court Judge James Russell had ruled in November that the amendment, notes Mr. Freiburger, is “‘probably the clearest case I have seen that I think there is a violation of the single-subject rule.’” The supreme court disagreed.

“Backed by a group called ‘Nevadans for Reproductive Rights,’” reports Mr. Freiburger, “the so-called ‘Reproductive Freedom Amendment’ would establish a state-level ‘constitutional right’ to ‘make and effectuate decisions about all matters relating to pregnancy, including without limitation, prenatal care, childbirth, postpartum care, birth control, vasectomy, tubal ligation, abortion, abortion care [sic], management of a miscarriage and infertility care.’

“It would allow abortion to be ‘regulate[d]’ after fetal viability,” notes Mr. Freiburger, “albeit with the exception of any abortion deemed ‘necessary’ for the mother’s ‘life or physical or mental health,’ a loophole that would render any ban effectively meaningless. It would also,” he adds, “establish that the state could not ‘penalize, prosecute or otherwise take adverse action’ against individuals for ‘actual, potential, perceived or alleged outcome of the pregnancy of the individual, including, without limitation, a miscarriage, stillbirth or abortion,’ which could,” opines Mr. Freiburger, “be construed as protecting infanticide.”

Summing Up Planned Parenthood’s Business Year

April 25, 2024, BreakPoint commentary by Jared Hayden

            Earlier this month, taxpayer-funded abortion giant Planned Parenthood released its annual report. Over the past year, Planned Parenthood saw a significant decrease in actual healthcare services like preventive-care visits, Pap tests, cancer screenings and adoption referrals. However, they note a significant increase in abortion and “gender-affirming” services.

            As one commentator noted, “For every adoption referral in 2023, Planned Parenthood performed over 228 abortions.” In fact, they report over 392,715 abortions, almost 20,000 more than the previous year. And, the abortion provider received almost $700 million in taxpayer support, which is $30 million more than the previous year.

            The report also notes expanded “gender-affirming” services. Forty-five locations now offer cross-sex hormones, which have serious long-term effects, often without mental evaluation, and in some places, without parental consent.

             The report points to something that the organization has long denied: That they are more of a business than a healthcare provider, and their big business is harming children.

Relentless

April 24, 2024, LifeSiteNews report by Calvin Freiburger

            The US Dept. of Health & Human Services (HHS) under the Biden Administration announced a new rule on Monday aimed at making it more difficult for law enforcement to get its hands on medical data necessary to enforce state abortion bans, specifically targeting cooperation between investigators and health professionals across state lines.

            The final rule, issued by the HHS Office for Civil Rights (OCR), modifies the Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information under the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) and Health Information technology for Economic & Clinical Health (HITECH) Act of 2009, which governs when patient health data can and cannot be shared.

            Claiming that the US Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade’s “right” to abortion “increases the likelihood than an individual’s PHI [personal health information] may be disclosed in ways that cause harm to the interests that HIPAA seeks to protect,” the new rule “prohibits a regulated entity from using or disclosing an individual’s PHI for the purpose of conducting a criminal, civil or administration investigation into or imposing criminal, civil or administrative liability” pertaining to so-called “reproductive health care” that is legal within the state or protected by federal law.

            Writing at The Federalist, Trump Administration HHS OCR director Roger Severino explains how the new rules effectively mean that “law enforcement can no longer gather critical evidence of illegal abortions possessed by doctors until they provide critical evidence of illegal abortions to those same doctors, including abortionists who are the target of the investigation.”

            “Imagine you are a doctor in Idaho treating a patient suffering from severe uterine bleeding, a common side effect of chemical abortion drugs,” he writes. “You learn your patient was otherwise in good health but an abusive boyfriend that impregnated her had ordered abortion drugs off the Internet and given them to her at an extremely high dose ‘just to be sure.’ Because the events occurred in a pro-life state, it means the boyfriend (though not the mother) has clearly violated state laws protecting unborn children from abortion. A week later you get served a duly authorized search warrant for medical records by the local sheriff investigating the illegal abortion. What do you do?

            “Well, according to the Biden rule, HIPAA prohibits doctors and hospitals from disclosing information about ‘lawful’ abortions in response to any civil or criminal investigations inquiring about the legality of the abortions themselves,” Severino continues. “The regulation then adds that all abortions, no matter where performed, must be presumed lawful unless and until law enforcement can show that the abortions they are investigating are unlawful.”

             The new rule is the latest in the Biden Administration’s “whole-of-government” campaign to preserve abortion-on-demand in a post-Roe world. …

Brace Yourself

April 23, 2024, The Washington Stand report by S.A. McCarthy

            Police officers forcing women to take pregnancy tests during traffic stops, pregnant mothers being chained to hospital beds while tests are performed to verify rape – such are the dystopian images offered by California’s pro-abortion governor in a new spate of ads aired across the country. Starting Sunday, Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA) and his pro-abortion PAC Campaign for Democracy debuted a 30-second TV spot entitled “Fugitive” in Alabama. The video depicts a young woman trying to cross state lines to seek an abortion who is pulled over by a police officer armed with a pregnancy test. A narrator intones, “Trump Republicans want to criminalize young Alabama women who travel for reproductive care.”

            The ad refers to legislation recently introduced into the Alabama House of Representatives which would criminalize aiding minors in seeking abortions without parental consent. Sponsored by Rep. Mark Gridley (R), HB-370 states, “This bill would provide that it is a Class A misdemeanor for any person, with the intent to conceal an abortion from a minor’s parents or guardian, to harbor or transport a minor girl and obtain or aid and abet her in obtaining an abortion or abortion-inducing drug.” Although Newsom’s ad expressly portrays the young woman seeking an abortion as the target of the Alabama bill, the legislation itself stipulates that it “would not authorize criminal penalties or civil liability against a minor girl.”

            Newsom took aim at similar legislation in Tennessee earlier this year, with an ad entitled “Hostage,” depicting a crying young woman handcuffed to a hospital gurney awaiting the results of a “sexual assault evidence collection kit.” Like Alabama’s bill, Tennessee’s HB-1895, sponsored by Rep. Jason Zachary (R), would outlaw attempts to seek out, harbor or transport underage girls for the purposes of committing an out-of-state abortion. While Alabama’s bill would classify such efforts as a Class A misdemeanor (punishable by up to one year in jail and fines of up to $6,000), Tennessee’s bill would make them a Class C felony (punishable by three to 15 years in prison and fines of up to $10,000). The narrator of Newsom’s ad says, “Don’t let [Trump Republicans] hold Tennessee women hostage.”

            Both ads direct viewers to “take action” by visiting Campaign for Democracy’s “Right to Travel” website to sign petitions opposing the targeted legislation. Noting that transporting minors out of state to seek abortions may soon be criminalized in both Alabama and Tennessee, as well as Oklahoma, the website says, “These are states that basically want to imprison women and young girls. It’s a backdoor nationwide abortion ban, denying women the opportunity to go to a freedom state.”

            Newsom’s out-of-state pro-abortion advertising is not a novelty. After the US Supreme Court dismantled Roe v. Wade in 2022, the Golden State governor funneled his re-election campaign money into billboards in states like Texas and Mississippi, where pro-life laws had been enacted. The billboards often depicted women in handcuffs, accompanied by slogans like “Texas doesn’t own your body. You do.” The billboards also directed people to visit an official California state government website promoting abortion and providing those in other states with instructions on how to seek abortions in California. Later that year, Newsom continued to spend re-election campaign money on TV ads supporting an effort to enshrine abortion as a constitutional right in California and make the state an “abortion sanctuary.”

            Also on Sunday, Newsom announced plans to introduce “emergency legislation” to invite Arizona abortionists to California to continue committing abortions, in the wake of an Arizona State Supreme Court ruling upholding a pro-life law and banning abortion in almost all circumstances. President Joe Biden also launched a series of pro-abortion ads in Arizona, endorsing a ballot initiative which would enumerate a “right” to abortion in the state’s constitution.

             Democrats across the nation have made abortion the central pillar of their 2024 campaign. The Biden-Harris campaign reportedly “plans to spend every day until Nov. 5” focusing on abortion, including stunts such as Vice Pres. Kamala Harris’s nationwide “abortion tour” and Biden’s scheduled visit to Florida to promote a pro-abortion ballot initiative. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is targeting at least seven states, all of which will feature abortion-related ballot initiatives in November, for pro-abortion messaging, hoping to score a potential 18 Congressional seats on the strength of abortion alone. Meanwhile Republicans have largely abandoned the issue of abortion, either following former Pres. Donald Trump’s lead and declaring it a “states’ issue” or else outright adopting pro-abortion rhetoric.