Dear Colleague:

When it comes to the issues that matter to us, each candidate must be
considered on more than his own merits.

Steven W. Mosher
President

PRI Weekly Briefing
3 November 2006
Vol. 8, No. 43


The Issues That Matter to Us
By Joseph A. D'Agostino


Though they may not be the focus of much mainstream media talk currently,
the issues of importance to pro-life and pro-family Americans have not
lost any of their import.  And of course, Tuesday's elections could have a
powerful impact on those issues.

In the United States, there is no such thing as a national election.  Each
state is sovereign in how it conducts elections (aside from stuff made up
by federal judges), and each county generally conducts elections
independently of all others.  Unlike in Great Britain and elsewhere,
voters here vote more for the individual candidate than they do for party.
 Yet no matter what the merits and demerits of an individual candidate,
his party affiliation is crucial since whichever party controls Congress
is likely to have a major effect on life and family issues.

For example, a pro-life congressional candidate of a pro-abortion party
will vote to place his party leaders in control of the U.S. House of
Representatives.  These leaders will then work to stifle pro-life
legislation and advance pro-abortion legislation.  Even if the individual
candidate votes pro-life, placing him into office could advance the
pro-abortion cause.  This isn't true if the pro-life member of the
pro-abortion party fights tooth-and-nail for the cause of life.  Then, his
presence can make a difference.  But most pro-life members of pro-abortion
parties focus their efforts on issues more palatable to their party
elders, placing life issues on the back burner.

This argument does not apply to candidates not running for legislatures.
For example, the late Bob Casey, Democratic governor of Pennsylvania,
pursued a strongly pro-life agenda.  He didn't have to work under
legislative party leaders, and he apparently didn't have ambitions to run
for President to prompt him to flip-flop on abortion as so many other
prominent Democrats have over the years.

Unfortunately, Casey's son, also named Bob, is far more nuanced as he runs
for U.S. Senate.  He says he is opposed to abortion but downplays any
suggestions that he might do something about it.  In fact, he has said he
would vote for federal judicial nominees who support the invented
constitutional right to abortion.  Since the federal courts decide most
questions relating to abortion, that seriously damages his credibility as
a pro-life candidate.  Radical pro-abortion activists even cite this in
Casey's favor.  "The most important thing is the Supreme Court and Bob
Casey will stand with Democrats against any nominee who threatens women's
right to choose," Kate Michelman, until recently president of the National
Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL), has said.

Sen. Rick Santorum, Casey's opponent, has always taken strongly pro-life
positions and fought for them on the floor of the Senate.  He has always
voted to confirm President Bush's pro-life judicial nominees, and has
consistently supported other pro-family causes.  Perhaps it is easier for
him since his party is officially pro-life and pro-family.

Since change in Washington will come if the Democrats take control of one
or both houses of Congress, let's look at the life and family issues that
Democrats say they want to advance and have advanced in the past.  We do
not have to speculate on what Democratic control would mean, since
Democrats have a long track record on these issues and usually do not hide
their views on them in any case.

If Democrats take over one or another house of Congress, expect major
efforts to:

1. Stop constitutionalist judicial nominees if Democrats take the Senate.
Democrats have already filibustered many for ideological reasons, denying
them votes on the Senate floor even though a majority of senators favored
them.  Certainly, no Supreme Court nominee from President Bush who does
not swear fealty to Roe v. Wade will be confirmed by a Democratic-majority
Senate.  Since pro-abortion Justice John Paul Stevens is 86 years old,
another vacancy could easily appear on the court in the final two years of
Bush's presidency.

2. Remove "A" and "B" from ABC sex education.  Leading Democrats often
ridicule the teaching of the abstinence and being faithful to one partner
aspects of the federal government's "abstain, be faithful, and use condoms
when necessary" sex ed criteria.  There will be a major effort to refocus
federal sex ed on the use of condoms and to promote the acceptance of
sodomy by schoolchildren.  Abstinence-only funding will probably be
eliminated if Democrats take the House, in which all spending bills
originate.

3. Override the Mexico City policy.  Right now, organizations that lobby
for abortion overseas don't get money from the federal government.  Expect
that to change.

4. Repeal the Kemp-Kasten amendment that has allowed Bush to withhold
money from the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA).  UNFPA promotes
population control and abortion around the world and subsidizes China's
forced abortion and sterilization program.

5. Increase funding for the U.S. Agency for International Development's
population control efforts around the world, despite global declining
birthrates.

6. Increase funding for Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers.
Unfortunately, the Republican Congress and President have shamefully
continued to fund the family planning side of Planned Parenthood, which
allows the organization to transfer money to its abortion side.  Expect
major increases in family planning funding if Democrats take over,
especially since some Democrats are trying to seem more pro-life by saying
increased contraception funding will reduce abortion-even though the
opposite has been true historically.

7. Pass legislation requiring all groups that receive federal funding to
cease discrimination against homosexuals.  That leaves out all
Bible-believing Christians and Jews.

8. Grant special legal status to homosexuals by making crimes against them
"hate crimes," with greater punishments than for the same crimes committed
against normal people.

This list does not include all the proposed legislation that would be
definitely stopped by a Democratic Congress, though passage with a
Republican Congress hasn't occurred yet and may never.  This includes
extensions of Bush's tax cuts, including the child tax credit, and Rep.
Lee Terry's Parents Tax Relief Act, which would eliminate much of the
discrimination against homemaking mothers in the federal tax code.

Americans should rightly look first at each candidate's strengths and
weaknesses.  But there are other considerations as well.


Joseph A. D'Agostino is Vice President for Communications at the
Population Research Institute.

________
PRI
P.O. Box 1559
Front Royal, Va. 22630
USA
Phone: (540) 622-5240 Fax: (540) 622-2728
Email: jad@pop.org
Media Contact: Joseph A. D'Agostino
(540) 622-5240, ext. 204
Website: www.pop.org
_________
(c) 2006 Population Research Institute. Permission to reprint granted.
Redistribute widely. Credit required.
_________
If you would like to make a tax-deductible donation to PRI, please go to
http://pop.org/donate.cfm. All donations (of any size) are welcomed and
appreciated. _________
To subscribe to the Weekly Briefing, go to:
http://pop.org/subscribe-weekly.cfm or email us at pri@pop.org and say
"Add me to your Weekly Briefing."
The pro-life Population Research Institute is dedicated to ending human
rights abuses committed in the name of "family planning," and to ending
counter-productive social and economic paradigms premised on the myth of
"overpopulation."