Friday, December 28, 2018
Four Days, $35,000 to go!
There's only four days left in the year, but we have one job left to do.
Generous support is allowing us to give you an opportunity to double the impact of your tax-deductible donations to the Right to Life of Michigan Educational Fund.
Our goal for this year is $75,000, a huge increase from last year's goal of $50,000. We're still $35,000 short with less than a week to go!
Without your support, our educational work doesn't happen. That means 150,000 people wouldn't have gotten information from our website in 2018. 446,800 people wouldn't have received the Right to Life of Michigan News this year. Last month, 76,000 people would have seen a cat video instead of important prolife news and information last month on Facebook and Twitter.
There are many more ways the Educational Fund reaches people with prolife information, but all of these efforts rely on generous gifts from prolife people.
Will you help us cross the finish line? Will you help us prepare Michigan for a world without Roe v. Wade?
PLEASE DONATE TODAY
Friday, December 21, 2018
Michigan Legislature Paves New Way to Revive Stillborn Child Tax Credit
The Michigan Legislature has sent a bill to Governor Rick Snyder’s desk that allows parents to claim a stillborn child as an exemption on their state income taxes. The bill received unanimous support in both chambers.
Right to Life of Michigan President Barbara Listing said, “This bill cannot take away the grief from the loss of a child, but it will help with the financial burdens of a stillbirth.”
The Stillborn Child Tax Equity bill is similar to legislation passed in 2006 that gave a tax credit to parents of a stillborn child. That tax credit was eliminated in 2011, along with many other tax credits.
HB 4522 allows families that experience a stillbirth after 20 weeks to claim the child as a deduction on their state income taxes in the year of the stillbirth. The parents will need a certificate of stillbirth provided by the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services.
The one-time deduction is intended to help families cover the costs of prenatal care or possible funeral arrangements.
Listing said, “Miscarriage and stillbirth are difficult topics for our society to address. Because they aren’t discussed often, the costs associated with them can be overlooked. Parents of a stillborn child who died a day before birth should be treated the same as parents of a child who died a day after birth.”
HB 4522 was passed unanimously by the Michigan House on April 11. It was passed unanimously by the Michigan Senate on December 20, and the House concurred to changes on December 21.
Background Information:
HB 4522
Right to Life of Michigan President Barbara Listing said, “This bill cannot take away the grief from the loss of a child, but it will help with the financial burdens of a stillbirth.”
The Stillborn Child Tax Equity bill is similar to legislation passed in 2006 that gave a tax credit to parents of a stillborn child. That tax credit was eliminated in 2011, along with many other tax credits.
HB 4522 allows families that experience a stillbirth after 20 weeks to claim the child as a deduction on their state income taxes in the year of the stillbirth. The parents will need a certificate of stillbirth provided by the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services.
The one-time deduction is intended to help families cover the costs of prenatal care or possible funeral arrangements.
Listing said, “Miscarriage and stillbirth are difficult topics for our society to address. Because they aren’t discussed often, the costs associated with them can be overlooked. Parents of a stillborn child who died a day before birth should be treated the same as parents of a child who died a day after birth.”
HB 4522 was passed unanimously by the Michigan House on April 11. It was passed unanimously by the Michigan Senate on December 20, and the House concurred to changes on December 21.
Background Information:
HB 4522
Michigan Legislature Passes Bills Creating Baby Boxes in Michigan
A package of bills is heading to Governor Rick Snyder’s desk allowing specialized “baby boxes” for safe surrendering of a newborn. The package passed with bipartisan votes in both the Michigan House and Senate.
These bills modify the existing Safe Delivery of Newborns Law to allow the baby boxes and increase the current age of surrender from 72 hours to 30 days after birth. The baby boxes will be climate-controlled, lock upon closing, and trigger an alarm when a newborn is placed in them.
Right to Life of Michigan President Barbara Listing said, “Abandoned infants are a tragedy that still happens too often. These baby boxes could make the difference between life and death for newborns in these situations.”
Michigan’s Safe Delivery law currently allows anonymous surrender of a newborn baby to an emergency service provider. The baby is then placed for adoption. A parent may change his/her mind and request that the infant be returned within 28 days of surrender.
Listing said, “We must help young women and teens be better informed about this law. If they think they are in a situation with no other choice, there is a confidential life-saving option for them. The baby boxes help reassure women that surrendering the newborn is confidential.”
The Michigan House passed the package of bills (HB 5750, 5751, 5953 & 5954) on May 16. The Michigan Senate passed the package on December 18, and the House concurred with two small amendments on December 21.
The late State Representative Patty Birkholz played an integral role in originally crafting the Safe Delivery of Newborns Law in 2000. Birkholz served in the Michigan Legislature from 1997 to 2008.
Listing said, “Patty Birkholz was passionate about bringing this law to Michigan to help make sure no child was ever abandoned. We are happy her law is still saving lives and we’ll keep building on this legacy.”
The Safe Delivery law took effect on January 1, 2001. The Michigan Department of Health and Human Services announced that the 200th infant had been safely delivered under the law on June 7, 2017.
Indiana, Ohio, and Pennsylvania have laws allowing similar baby boxes.
Background Information:
SAFE DELIVERY OF NEWBORNS LAW
HB 5750
HB 5751
HB 5953
HB 5954
Tuesday, December 18, 2018
RLM Calls on Gov. Snyder to Make Webcam Abortion Ban Permanent
Right to Life of Michigan is calling on Governor Rick Snyder to sign SB 1198 to make our state’s ban on webcam abortions permanent.
Right to Life of Michigan President Barbara Listing said, “Governor Snyder signed our state’s ban into law originally, and we hope he will now make it permanent.”
A webcam abortion involves a medical abortion using the RU-486/mifepristone pill regimen. The abortionist speaks remotely with a woman using a video camera, pushes a button to open a drawer containing the abortion pills, and the woman takes the pills. The abortionist never physically examines the woman.
Right to Life of Michigan supported legislation to ban this practice in 2012. The original webcam abortion ban was signed into law by Governor Snyder. The law contained a sunset provision and will expire at the end of 2018.
According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, at least 22 women have died taking the abortion pill. Because of potential side effects, the FDA requires abortion pill distributors to undergo risk evaluation and mitigation strategies (REMS). The FDA states the abortion pill may only be dispensed under the supervision of a certified healthcare provider who can diagnose ectopic pregnancies accurately and provide access to follow-up emergency care.
Listing said, “Having an abortionist talk to a woman he’s never met via a webcam may save the abortion facility money, but cheap medicine is not safe medicine. Planned Parenthood should follow the FDA guidelines, not try to expand abortion by cutting corners.”
FDA guidelines for the abortion pill were recently revisited in 2016, and the REMS requirements were maintained.
Planned Parenthood in Michigan claims the practice is safe and no different than other telemedicine practices, but the revised FDA guidelines reflect the continued need for a licensed doctor to be physically present and available to give adequate follow-up care.
Listing said, “Planned Parenthood in Michigan already has a poor record of follow-up care. Cree Erwin died following a botched abortion at Planned Parenthood’s Kalamazoo facility in 2016. If they can’t provide adequate follow-up care now, how will they do it when the woman is hundreds of miles away?”
According to statistics reported to the Michigan Department of Health & Human Services, only two percent of women are referred to the abortionist by a physician. Most women meet the abortionist only briefly before the procedure. Common telemedicine consultations involve an actual relationship between the patient and the provider.
Listing said, “The abortion industry says abortion has to be legal because it’s between a woman and her doctor. Now they want to make it between only a woman and a webcam.”
The Michigan House passed SB 1998 on December 12, 2018, by a vote of 62 to 47. The Michigan Senate passed the bill on November 29, 2018, by a vote of 25 to 12. The Michigan Senate concurred with slight changes to the bill on December 18, 2018.
Background Information:
SENATE BILL 1198
WEBCAM ABORTION PROCESS
FDA GUIDELINES
CREE ERWIN CASE
MDHHS STATISTICS
Right to Life of Michigan President Barbara Listing said, “Governor Snyder signed our state’s ban into law originally, and we hope he will now make it permanent.”
A webcam abortion involves a medical abortion using the RU-486/mifepristone pill regimen. The abortionist speaks remotely with a woman using a video camera, pushes a button to open a drawer containing the abortion pills, and the woman takes the pills. The abortionist never physically examines the woman.
Right to Life of Michigan supported legislation to ban this practice in 2012. The original webcam abortion ban was signed into law by Governor Snyder. The law contained a sunset provision and will expire at the end of 2018.
According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, at least 22 women have died taking the abortion pill. Because of potential side effects, the FDA requires abortion pill distributors to undergo risk evaluation and mitigation strategies (REMS). The FDA states the abortion pill may only be dispensed under the supervision of a certified healthcare provider who can diagnose ectopic pregnancies accurately and provide access to follow-up emergency care.
Listing said, “Having an abortionist talk to a woman he’s never met via a webcam may save the abortion facility money, but cheap medicine is not safe medicine. Planned Parenthood should follow the FDA guidelines, not try to expand abortion by cutting corners.”
FDA guidelines for the abortion pill were recently revisited in 2016, and the REMS requirements were maintained.
Planned Parenthood in Michigan claims the practice is safe and no different than other telemedicine practices, but the revised FDA guidelines reflect the continued need for a licensed doctor to be physically present and available to give adequate follow-up care.
Listing said, “Planned Parenthood in Michigan already has a poor record of follow-up care. Cree Erwin died following a botched abortion at Planned Parenthood’s Kalamazoo facility in 2016. If they can’t provide adequate follow-up care now, how will they do it when the woman is hundreds of miles away?”
According to statistics reported to the Michigan Department of Health & Human Services, only two percent of women are referred to the abortionist by a physician. Most women meet the abortionist only briefly before the procedure. Common telemedicine consultations involve an actual relationship between the patient and the provider.
Listing said, “The abortion industry says abortion has to be legal because it’s between a woman and her doctor. Now they want to make it between only a woman and a webcam.”
The Michigan House passed SB 1998 on December 12, 2018, by a vote of 62 to 47. The Michigan Senate passed the bill on November 29, 2018, by a vote of 25 to 12. The Michigan Senate concurred with slight changes to the bill on December 18, 2018.
Background Information:
SENATE BILL 1198
WEBCAM ABORTION PROCESS
FDA GUIDELINES
CREE ERWIN CASE
MDHHS STATISTICS
37% Down, 63% to Go for Matching Gift!
Every year, generous support enables us to give prolifers an opportunity to double the life-saving impact of their resources.
Our supporters helped us met our goal of $50,000 in 2017 in year-end tax-deductible online donations to the Right to Life of Michigan Educational Fund. However, 2018 showed us that we have much more educating on prolife issues to do.
We'll be facing BIG challenges in 2019, but also BIG opportunities. The U.S. Supreme Court could potentially overturn Roe v. Wade at any moment; are the citizens of our great state ready to directly deal with the issue of abortion once again?
We were able to go BIG with a goal of $75,000 in matching gifts to close out 2018. Today we are at 37% of our goal. Please help us cross the finish line!
Your support helps many of our projects and programs. Here's a new one we just rolled out that you should be aware of: HelpintheD.org.
Statistics show abortion is decline, but abortion rates are not declining as much in urban areas, particularly among minority populations. In Michigan, that means Detroit. Persistent problems fuel a cycle that pits mother against child. Each new life is an opportunity to embrace, but the overall message from our society (especially to minorities) is that every new child is just a burden to care for.
HelpintheD.org is a website to help flip the script on motherhood. In reality, the city of Detroit is home to many organizations that can offer free help to women, men, and families in need. HelpintheD.org lists a lot of places women can go for material support, which helps them to realize motherhood can work for them.
We know the talking point that "prolifers don't care about the baby after it's born" is untrue. It's especially frustrating to hear abortion supporters use that line while doing their level best to defame and even shut down prolife pregnancy help centers. HelpintheD.org is just one example of the ways we use our Educational Fund tools to connect women with people who will help them care for the baby after she or he is born.
Please help make sure our prolife information is in the hands of as many people as possible, including women about to make life and death decisions. Help us take advantage of 100% of this BIG opportunity.
DONATE TODAY
Our supporters helped us met our goal of $50,000 in 2017 in year-end tax-deductible online donations to the Right to Life of Michigan Educational Fund. However, 2018 showed us that we have much more educating on prolife issues to do.
We'll be facing BIG challenges in 2019, but also BIG opportunities. The U.S. Supreme Court could potentially overturn Roe v. Wade at any moment; are the citizens of our great state ready to directly deal with the issue of abortion once again?
We were able to go BIG with a goal of $75,000 in matching gifts to close out 2018. Today we are at 37% of our goal. Please help us cross the finish line!
Your support helps many of our projects and programs. Here's a new one we just rolled out that you should be aware of: HelpintheD.org.
Statistics show abortion is decline, but abortion rates are not declining as much in urban areas, particularly among minority populations. In Michigan, that means Detroit. Persistent problems fuel a cycle that pits mother against child. Each new life is an opportunity to embrace, but the overall message from our society (especially to minorities) is that every new child is just a burden to care for.
HelpintheD.org is a website to help flip the script on motherhood. In reality, the city of Detroit is home to many organizations that can offer free help to women, men, and families in need. HelpintheD.org lists a lot of places women can go for material support, which helps them to realize motherhood can work for them.
We know the talking point that "prolifers don't care about the baby after it's born" is untrue. It's especially frustrating to hear abortion supporters use that line while doing their level best to defame and even shut down prolife pregnancy help centers. HelpintheD.org is just one example of the ways we use our Educational Fund tools to connect women with people who will help them care for the baby after she or he is born.
Please help make sure our prolife information is in the hands of as many people as possible, including women about to make life and death decisions. Help us take advantage of 100% of this BIG opportunity.
DONATE TODAY
Tuesday, December 11, 2018
The US Supreme Court and Planned Parenthood
There was news yesterday that the U.S. Supreme Court failed to take up two cases involving defunding Planned Parenthood. The cases are very complicated, dealing with Medicaid law and how someone can bring a lawsuit to decide whether or not an organization can be a “qualified” provider.
By refusing to take the cases, the different rulings in the various circuit courts are left to stand. Justice Clarence Thomas authored a public dissent criticizing the other justices for being afraid to take up the case. He wrote that they ought to be taken up because of the split decisions in the circuit courts.
Without getting too deep into the weeds of Medicaid law, what are prolifers to make of all this?
First, don’t panic. We don’t know why Chief Justice John Roberts and new Justice Brett Kavanaugh didn’t want to take the cases. Maybe they agree with what the lower courts decided regarding Medicaid law. Maybe they don’t, but thought it wasn’t the right time or the right cases to decide the issue. In his dissent, Justice Clarence Thomas suggested the politics of abortion made the justices afraid to take the case now.
None of us know the exact reasoning behind their choice to not hear the case. Even if Roberts and Kavanaugh agree with the circuit court rulings, it has no bearing on abortion laws or ultimately even on defunding Planned Parenthood. Medicaid law is written to make it difficult for states to determine who is or isn’t “qualified” to receive Medicaid funding. Right to Life of Michigan hasn’t passed legislation making Planned Parenthood ineligible as a Medicaid provider, because a reading of Medicaid law indicates it’s probably not something we can legally do. We continue to pursue other avenues with higher chances of success.
There is a downside to originalist judges: if the law is written in a way you don’t like, good originalist judges will rule against you. The good news for us is Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton are so legally indefensible that we don’t need justices to be prolife warriors; we just need fair justices. So far in their judicial careers, Roberts and Kavanaugh have sided with laws directly against abortion every time.
Here’s the real question we’re asking ourselves: why is defunding Planned Parenthood so frustratingly hard?
Planned Parenthood has taken a progressively larger role as both an abortion provider and as a leader within the abortion movement. As this has occurred, defunding them has become a progressively higher priority. Sadly, Planned Parenthood has spent more than a century embedding themselves in our public institutions. Their tentacles reach into a multitude of programs, as well as government and societal institutions. Dealing with each tentacle requires a different strategy at a different level.
On the state level, we’ve successfully defunded Planned Parenthood. We took away their ability to take taxpayer money directly for abortions with our Medicaid-funded abortion ban in 1988. Recent state budgets have zeroed out Planned Parenthood funding.
The real problems for defunding Planned Parenthood are the federal-state partnership programs like Medicaid and Title X and the morass of rules they have. Federal tax dollars flow through our state government to Planned Parenthood, and there’s not a lot we can do at the state level to block that because of how the federal laws are written. The Trump Administration has a unique plan to work within the law to limit Planned Parenthood’s Title X money, and we have a law to prioritize that funding for providers who don’t do abortions, but enforcement is always a challenge.
The simplest solution is to rewrite Medicaid and Title X laws. It’s not so easy, however, because of the Senate’s filibuster rules. In order to change those laws, we need a prolife majority in the U.S. House, 60 prolife votes in the U.S. Senate, and a prolife president. Or, we need to convince 10 pro-abortion U.S. Senators not to filibuster such legislation. Or, we change the U.S. Senate rules to scrap the filibuster (a double-edged sword that could be used against us).
Senate rules do allow spending bills to avoid a filibuster. In fact, the prolife majorities tried to use those rules to make Planned Parenthood ineligible as a Medicaid provider in the annual budget, but that effort was scrapped on July 28, 2017, by John McCain at the last minute, a 49-51 vote. He objected to specifics of the plan to repeal Obamacare that was also attached to the budget.
At that juncture, the U.S. Senate had to start back at square one. After that, the unthinkable happened in a special election to fill a Senate vacancy on December 12, 2017. Alabama voters had selected a profoundly flawed candidate in Roy Moore over the prolife candidate backed by President Trump, Luther Strange, in the earlier primary. Then in the general election Alabama voters chose the pro-abortion candidate Doug Jones over Roy Moore. We went from 50 prolife votes to only 49 votes in the U.S. Senate, and the golden opportunity was gone.
What are the lessons that prolife people should take away from all this?
Elections have consequences
Whatever you think of the Alabama special election, the practical effect of the vote doomed defunding Planned Parenthood. Alabama primary voters could have chosen a far more electable candidate, but they chose a firebrand with tons of personal baggage. Several prolife pundits made the case that voting for Roy Moore would hurt the prolife movement, but some of these same pundits complained about the Supreme Court’s decision yesterday and claimed the GOP didn’t have the guts to defund Planned Parenthood—these pundits opposed the 50th vote necessary for it to happen.
Sadly, we don’t live in a perfect world with perfect candidates. It felt good for many Alabama voters to buck the “establishment” and vote for the tougher guy. It felt good for other voters and pundits to oppose the same guy for his monumental character flaws. In the end, both groups are left bitter and disappointed. Prolife voters must always keep in mind the practical real-world consequences of their choices. Importantly, if you make a choice that results in a bad practical effect, you have to accept that consequence and move on.
We don’t have a critical mass of public support yet
Polls routinely show that people oppose being forced to pay for abortions. Planned Parenthood, however, has wormed its way into many institutions, including the media. They do a great job of gaslighting even their own supporters into believing that abortion is just a minor part of their operation. While public support for defunding Planned Parenthood has grown, it needs to be higher to achieve our goal permanently. Taking away their Medicaid funding for a year or two would be outstanding, but Planned Parenthood can still achieve small pro-abortion majorities who will give the money right back to them another year.
In order to defund Planned Parenthood totally, we need otherwise pro-abortion senators to fear how voters will react if they continue giving our tax dollars to the nation’s largest abortion provider. Right now, defunding is generally a 50-50 issue politically. It needs to be a 60-40 issue or better to create the best opportunities to enact prolife policy, like popular bans on direct taxpayer funding of abortion or partial-birth abortion bans.
The largest blame goes to the media
Immediately after the U.S. Supreme Court decided not to take up the case, the media joyfully began reporting that they ruled in favor of Planned Parenthood. While the decision largely helped Planned Parenthood’s effort to keep their funding in several states, the U.S. Supreme Court didn’t rule on the merits of the case pertaining to lawsuits involving Medicaid law. The articles in many major publications didn’t do a good job of explaining the issue.
When the undercover videos showing Planned Parenthood’s human organ harvesting schemes debuted, the media reflexively took Planned Parenthood’s side, some even denouncing their own tactic of undercover exposes as unreliable. When Planned Parenthood is revealed to be engaging in Medicaid fraud, or running a “meat market” abortion facility, or kills a patient out of negligence, they get cursory coverage by a few local sources at best.
The media fails to challenge Planned Parenthood on their false claims, and sometimes even helps spread them as the gospel truth.
When Planned Parenthood selects even a popular target for shaming, the media will shame away with glee.
Without a drastic change in how they conduct themselves, the major media institutions are never going to help the prolife movement build public support for defunding the leader of the abortion movement, much less provide neutral coverage.
If you are frustrated that Planned Parenthood is still taking your tax dollars and using it to further their abortion agenda, then it’s up to you. Do the job the media won’t. Talk about Planned Parenthood. Educate your friend and your neighbors. If you don’t want to create opportunities to do that, find the courage to take advantage of opportunities when they present themselves. We have resources to help you do that.
Planned Parenthood may have a decades-long head start on us, influence amongst our elite institutions, Hollywood, big-money interests and foundations, and gobs of your own cash to use against you. However, they don’t have the truth; they can only succeed by convincing people they don’t support abortion as much as they do.
Keep working to spread the truth and let people know Planned Parenthood and abortion are inseparable.
By refusing to take the cases, the different rulings in the various circuit courts are left to stand. Justice Clarence Thomas authored a public dissent criticizing the other justices for being afraid to take up the case. He wrote that they ought to be taken up because of the split decisions in the circuit courts.
Without getting too deep into the weeds of Medicaid law, what are prolifers to make of all this?
First, don’t panic. We don’t know why Chief Justice John Roberts and new Justice Brett Kavanaugh didn’t want to take the cases. Maybe they agree with what the lower courts decided regarding Medicaid law. Maybe they don’t, but thought it wasn’t the right time or the right cases to decide the issue. In his dissent, Justice Clarence Thomas suggested the politics of abortion made the justices afraid to take the case now.
None of us know the exact reasoning behind their choice to not hear the case. Even if Roberts and Kavanaugh agree with the circuit court rulings, it has no bearing on abortion laws or ultimately even on defunding Planned Parenthood. Medicaid law is written to make it difficult for states to determine who is or isn’t “qualified” to receive Medicaid funding. Right to Life of Michigan hasn’t passed legislation making Planned Parenthood ineligible as a Medicaid provider, because a reading of Medicaid law indicates it’s probably not something we can legally do. We continue to pursue other avenues with higher chances of success.
There is a downside to originalist judges: if the law is written in a way you don’t like, good originalist judges will rule against you. The good news for us is Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton are so legally indefensible that we don’t need justices to be prolife warriors; we just need fair justices. So far in their judicial careers, Roberts and Kavanaugh have sided with laws directly against abortion every time.
Here’s the real question we’re asking ourselves: why is defunding Planned Parenthood so frustratingly hard?
Planned Parenthood has taken a progressively larger role as both an abortion provider and as a leader within the abortion movement. As this has occurred, defunding them has become a progressively higher priority. Sadly, Planned Parenthood has spent more than a century embedding themselves in our public institutions. Their tentacles reach into a multitude of programs, as well as government and societal institutions. Dealing with each tentacle requires a different strategy at a different level.
On the state level, we’ve successfully defunded Planned Parenthood. We took away their ability to take taxpayer money directly for abortions with our Medicaid-funded abortion ban in 1988. Recent state budgets have zeroed out Planned Parenthood funding.
The real problems for defunding Planned Parenthood are the federal-state partnership programs like Medicaid and Title X and the morass of rules they have. Federal tax dollars flow through our state government to Planned Parenthood, and there’s not a lot we can do at the state level to block that because of how the federal laws are written. The Trump Administration has a unique plan to work within the law to limit Planned Parenthood’s Title X money, and we have a law to prioritize that funding for providers who don’t do abortions, but enforcement is always a challenge.
The simplest solution is to rewrite Medicaid and Title X laws. It’s not so easy, however, because of the Senate’s filibuster rules. In order to change those laws, we need a prolife majority in the U.S. House, 60 prolife votes in the U.S. Senate, and a prolife president. Or, we need to convince 10 pro-abortion U.S. Senators not to filibuster such legislation. Or, we change the U.S. Senate rules to scrap the filibuster (a double-edged sword that could be used against us).
Senate rules do allow spending bills to avoid a filibuster. In fact, the prolife majorities tried to use those rules to make Planned Parenthood ineligible as a Medicaid provider in the annual budget, but that effort was scrapped on July 28, 2017, by John McCain at the last minute, a 49-51 vote. He objected to specifics of the plan to repeal Obamacare that was also attached to the budget.
At that juncture, the U.S. Senate had to start back at square one. After that, the unthinkable happened in a special election to fill a Senate vacancy on December 12, 2017. Alabama voters had selected a profoundly flawed candidate in Roy Moore over the prolife candidate backed by President Trump, Luther Strange, in the earlier primary. Then in the general election Alabama voters chose the pro-abortion candidate Doug Jones over Roy Moore. We went from 50 prolife votes to only 49 votes in the U.S. Senate, and the golden opportunity was gone.
What are the lessons that prolife people should take away from all this?
Elections have consequences
Whatever you think of the Alabama special election, the practical effect of the vote doomed defunding Planned Parenthood. Alabama primary voters could have chosen a far more electable candidate, but they chose a firebrand with tons of personal baggage. Several prolife pundits made the case that voting for Roy Moore would hurt the prolife movement, but some of these same pundits complained about the Supreme Court’s decision yesterday and claimed the GOP didn’t have the guts to defund Planned Parenthood—these pundits opposed the 50th vote necessary for it to happen.
Sadly, we don’t live in a perfect world with perfect candidates. It felt good for many Alabama voters to buck the “establishment” and vote for the tougher guy. It felt good for other voters and pundits to oppose the same guy for his monumental character flaws. In the end, both groups are left bitter and disappointed. Prolife voters must always keep in mind the practical real-world consequences of their choices. Importantly, if you make a choice that results in a bad practical effect, you have to accept that consequence and move on.
We don’t have a critical mass of public support yet
Polls routinely show that people oppose being forced to pay for abortions. Planned Parenthood, however, has wormed its way into many institutions, including the media. They do a great job of gaslighting even their own supporters into believing that abortion is just a minor part of their operation. While public support for defunding Planned Parenthood has grown, it needs to be higher to achieve our goal permanently. Taking away their Medicaid funding for a year or two would be outstanding, but Planned Parenthood can still achieve small pro-abortion majorities who will give the money right back to them another year.
In order to defund Planned Parenthood totally, we need otherwise pro-abortion senators to fear how voters will react if they continue giving our tax dollars to the nation’s largest abortion provider. Right now, defunding is generally a 50-50 issue politically. It needs to be a 60-40 issue or better to create the best opportunities to enact prolife policy, like popular bans on direct taxpayer funding of abortion or partial-birth abortion bans.
The largest blame goes to the media
Immediately after the U.S. Supreme Court decided not to take up the case, the media joyfully began reporting that they ruled in favor of Planned Parenthood. While the decision largely helped Planned Parenthood’s effort to keep their funding in several states, the U.S. Supreme Court didn’t rule on the merits of the case pertaining to lawsuits involving Medicaid law. The articles in many major publications didn’t do a good job of explaining the issue.
When the undercover videos showing Planned Parenthood’s human organ harvesting schemes debuted, the media reflexively took Planned Parenthood’s side, some even denouncing their own tactic of undercover exposes as unreliable. When Planned Parenthood is revealed to be engaging in Medicaid fraud, or running a “meat market” abortion facility, or kills a patient out of negligence, they get cursory coverage by a few local sources at best.
The media fails to challenge Planned Parenthood on their false claims, and sometimes even helps spread them as the gospel truth.
When Planned Parenthood selects even a popular target for shaming, the media will shame away with glee.
Without a drastic change in how they conduct themselves, the major media institutions are never going to help the prolife movement build public support for defunding the leader of the abortion movement, much less provide neutral coverage.
If you are frustrated that Planned Parenthood is still taking your tax dollars and using it to further their abortion agenda, then it’s up to you. Do the job the media won’t. Talk about Planned Parenthood. Educate your friend and your neighbors. If you don’t want to create opportunities to do that, find the courage to take advantage of opportunities when they present themselves. We have resources to help you do that.
Planned Parenthood may have a decades-long head start on us, influence amongst our elite institutions, Hollywood, big-money interests and foundations, and gobs of your own cash to use against you. However, they don’t have the truth; they can only succeed by convincing people they don’t support abortion as much as they do.
Keep working to spread the truth and let people know Planned Parenthood and abortion are inseparable.
Monday, December 3, 2018
Latest CDC Abortion Report Shows Further Decline
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released their latest annual report on abortion statistics last week, showing that abortion rates are lower than ever. Though it is unacceptable that any number of children should die because of abortion, it is encouraging to see that the number of lives lost decreases each year—slowly but surely.
Looking at the breakdown of abortion statistics can be helpful in discerning what category of women the prolife movement needs to reach the most, but it is also important to note that the accuracy of the CDC data is not perfect. For example, California, Maryland, and New Hampshire all fail to report annual data on abortions to the CDC.
The total number of abortions reported to the CDC in the U.S. decreased 2% from 652,639 in 2014 to 638,169 in 2015. This number has been steadily dropping; it has decreased a total of 24% since 2006, when the total number of reported abortions was 842,855. According to the Guttmacher Institute, which polls abortion facilities directly, the total national figure for all 50 states was 926,200 in 2014.
The CDC also breaks down the data into important categories such as the race and age of the woman, the gestational age of the baby, and the pregnancy and abortion history of the woman. Here's some important numbers worth keeping in mind and trends in the last decade.
Age of Woman
The age distribution of women having abortions have remained similar throughout the years, always with the highest rates of abortions had by women in their 20’s. In recent years, the average age of a woman having an abortion has been slowly increasing. The largest change in the age group of women having abortions are teens ages 15–19. From 2006 to 2015, the percentage of abortions accounted for by that age group decreased by 41%; their abortion rate decreased by 54%.
Race of Woman
According to the CDC, abortion ratio decreased from 2007 to 2015 for the three largest race/ethnicity groups. The ratio is the number of abortions compared to live births, meaning more women are choosing life. There are still large disparities between these groups, however.
Gestational Age of Baby
Between the years 2006 and 2015, the percentage of abortions after 13 weeks has been below 10%, and there has been an increase of 11% in abortions before 16 weeks’ gestation. While 1.3% seems like a small number, using more complete figures on total national abortions gives us a figure of more than 12,000 late-term abortions every year in the U.S.
Pregnancy History
A majority of women having abortions already have a child, but most do not fit the stereotype of a large family that can't care for itself; only 14.2% of abortions are performed on women who have three or more previous births. These numbers indicate a significant challenge for reaching women who are already mothers who somehow believe that a second or third child is a direct threat to their future.
Abortion History
Like the pregnancy history numbers, the high repeat abortion rate is a tragic reminder that many women who have abortion are locked into an ugly cycle. 8.2% of abortions are done on women who have had three or more previous abortions.
Conclusion
The steady decrease in abortions is encouraging, meaning that our hard work to promote life-giving options has been effective. However, this report also indicates the extent of work left to be done, as there is still a gigantic loss of life due to abortions. Even without three states reporting their numbers, the CDC abortion total would qualify abortion as the largest cause of death in America.
Looking at the breakdown of abortion statistics can be helpful in discerning what category of women the prolife movement needs to reach the most, but it is also important to note that the accuracy of the CDC data is not perfect. For example, California, Maryland, and New Hampshire all fail to report annual data on abortions to the CDC.
The total number of abortions reported to the CDC in the U.S. decreased 2% from 652,639 in 2014 to 638,169 in 2015. This number has been steadily dropping; it has decreased a total of 24% since 2006, when the total number of reported abortions was 842,855. According to the Guttmacher Institute, which polls abortion facilities directly, the total national figure for all 50 states was 926,200 in 2014.
The CDC also breaks down the data into important categories such as the race and age of the woman, the gestational age of the baby, and the pregnancy and abortion history of the woman. Here's some important numbers worth keeping in mind and trends in the last decade.
Age of Woman
The age distribution of women having abortions have remained similar throughout the years, always with the highest rates of abortions had by women in their 20’s. In recent years, the average age of a woman having an abortion has been slowly increasing. The largest change in the age group of women having abortions are teens ages 15–19. From 2006 to 2015, the percentage of abortions accounted for by that age group decreased by 41%; their abortion rate decreased by 54%.
- Ages under 15 = 0.3% of reported abortions
- Ages 15–19 = 9.8%
- Ages 20–24 = 31.1%
- Ages 25–29 = 27.6%
- Ages 30–34 = 17.7%
- Ages 35–39 = 10.0%
- Ages 40 and over = 3.5%
Race of Woman
According to the CDC, abortion ratio decreased from 2007 to 2015 for the three largest race/ethnicity groups. The ratio is the number of abortions compared to live births, meaning more women are choosing life. There are still large disparities between these groups, however.
- Non-Hispanic white women: the abortion ratio decreased 27% (from 147 abortions per 1,000 live births in 2007 to 108 in 2015).
- Non-Hispanic black women: decreased 22% (from 514 abortions per 1,000 live births in 2007 to 403 in 2015)
- Hispanic women: decreased 26% (from 205 abortions per 1,000 live births in 2007 to 152 in 2015)
Gestational Age of Baby
Between the years 2006 and 2015, the percentage of abortions after 13 weeks has been below 10%, and there has been an increase of 11% in abortions before 16 weeks’ gestation. While 1.3% seems like a small number, using more complete figures on total national abortions gives us a figure of more than 12,000 late-term abortions every year in the U.S.
- Less than 13 weeks = 91.1%
- Between 14 and 20 weeks = 7.6%
- More than 21 weeks = 1.3%
Pregnancy History
A majority of women having abortions already have a child, but most do not fit the stereotype of a large family that can't care for itself; only 14.2% of abortions are performed on women who have three or more previous births. These numbers indicate a significant challenge for reaching women who are already mothers who somehow believe that a second or third child is a direct threat to their future.
- No previous live births = 40.7% of abortions
- One or more previous live births = 59.3% of abortions
Abortion History
Like the pregnancy history numbers, the high repeat abortion rate is a tragic reminder that many women who have abortion are locked into an ugly cycle. 8.2% of abortions are done on women who have had three or more previous abortions.
- No previous abortion = 56.3% of abortions
- One or more previous induced abortions = 43.6% of abortions
Conclusion
The steady decrease in abortions is encouraging, meaning that our hard work to promote life-giving options has been effective. However, this report also indicates the extent of work left to be done, as there is still a gigantic loss of life due to abortions. Even without three states reporting their numbers, the CDC abortion total would qualify abortion as the largest cause of death in America.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)