Off-year Elections Very Important

2002: CONTINUING TO BUILD ON SUCCESS

By Carol Tobias, NRL PAC Director

If the history of our Movement proves anything, it is that with dogged determination and sheer grit, underdogs can and will prevail.

For 30 years we've been the media's favorite punching bag and the people many, if not most, academics, foundation heads, and multi- millionaires love to try to defeat. Do not count the establishment among our admirers.

In spite of all this, a strong pro-life President is in the White House. It can not be said often enough: Thank you for everything you did to help elect George W. Bush!

Every phone call that you made to find volunteers and to get out the vote, every piece of literature you distributed, every friend or neighbor that you talked to - - everything you did - - made a difference. In fact, in an incredibly close election, It made the difference.

Am I exaggerating? Consider: for almost two years leading up the election, abortion supporters bombarded voters with a multi- million dollar advertising campaign which relentlessly hammered then-Gov. Bush.

The National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League (NARAL) ran at least six ad campaigns attempting to scare Americans about a Bush presidency. The Planned Parenthood Action Fund reportedly spent over $10 million in just the last two months, much of it on television advertising laced with a strongly anti-Bush message.

Jane Fonda was the lone contributor to an organization called " Pro Choice Vote." She gave $11.7 million dollars to underwrite a television campaign featuring Whoopi Goldberg to "educate" voters about George W. Bush's position on abortion.

Some estimates have our opponents spending almost $70 million dollars on this election. Guess what? We beat them anyway!

Why? Because grassroots pro-lifers were undaunted. Winning out in the face of long odds is what you do best. You conducted a marvelous campaign to elect President Bush, as well as dozens of House and Senate candidates.

But that incredible grassroots effort must continue. Yes, we won the White House, we secured the big prize. But President Bush needs our help. There can be no slackening in our effort. First of all, President Bush needs our prayers.

Second, pro-lifers need to help him by electing more pro-life men and women to Congress. We have at best a very narrow pro- life majority in the House of Representatives and we don't have the votes in the Senate to pass much needed pro-life legislation. Our work is cut out for us this year.
Senators will be elected from 34 states. About one-third of those elections could be tough, challenging races.

We expect there will be hard-fought races to hold pro-life seats in New Hampshire and Arkansas. There will be opportunities in Minnesota, Missouri, and South Dakota. Certainly, other states will present strong challenges (or good opportunities) and pro- lifers must be more-than-ready for those battles.

However, the focus cannot only be on the Senate. Our numbers in the House of Representatives need to be shored up as well.

Political boundaries in 2002 will reflect the changes made as the results of the every-ten year census. Redistricting, which changes the lines of congressional districts in most states, could create some great opportunities. Pro-lifers need to take advantage of every opening.

In addition, so far 22 members of the House have announced that they are retiring or seeking another office. This offers new possibilities for fresh faces.

What can you do?

There are many educational activities your local chapter can conduct; activities that do not require a political action committee (PAC).

Take the time to educate friends and neighbors about where their representatives, both on a federal and state level, stand on the life issues, particularly how these members vote. Work with the NRLC affiliate in your state to identify more pro-lifers. (See story, page 9.)

Don't forget to conduct voter registration drives to sign up these newly-identified pro-lifers. Make sure the pro-lifers already on your list are registered to vote.

But does it make political "sense" for a candidate to be pro-life? The data are clear: being pro-life helps a candidate in his or her race.

In a typical national race, pro-lifers can deliver at least a 3% to 4% net advantage to the pro-life candidate. Given the enormity of the pro-abortion outlays, was that advantage delivered again in this last election?

A Wirthlin Worldwide post-election poll found that 42% of the people said that abortion affected their vote--23% said they voted for pro-life candidates and 19% voted for pro-abortion candidates. In general, that was a 4% advantage.

When we look specifically at the presidential race, it gets a little closer. Our opponents worked hard, spending tens of millions to defeat Bush, an unambiguously pro-life candidate.

Each election cycle, the major news networks put together a consortium that conducts exit polling election day. It asks about 15,000 people whom they voted for and why.

Abortion used to be one of the options that voters could select as to why they voted for their particular candidate. Alas, the consortium doesn't include abortion in their list of issues anymore.
I am absolutely convinced it's because for many years, we could use their poll to show how the pro-life candidate received more votes that the pro-abortion candidate on this issue. So we don't have their polling figures anymore. But we do have other sources.

The Los Angeles Times found that 14% of the voters said abortion was one of the top two issues in voting for president. They voted in favor of George Bush 58% to 41%.

When you work this out, this advantage among the subset of voters who told the Times abortion was one of the top two issues in voting for president meant an overall + 2.4% for Bush.

Do Democrats agree? Early last year, the Democratic Leadership Council conducted a study on "Why Gore Lost and What's Next for the Democrats." Its pollster, Mark Penn, found that Gore won on most specific issues.

However, there were three exceptions: guns, taxes, and abortion.

Penn's poll found that 7% of the voters cared deeply about abortion. They went 61% to 30% for George Bush, a net gain of 2.2 percentage points for Bush.

That 2.2% increment did not magically appear. It is the result of your hard work. Pro-lifers must do everything they can to see that pro-life increment not only remains but grow in the 2002 elections.

A final thought. In 1776 Thomas Paine wrote, "These are the times that try men's souls: The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of his country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph."

You are not the summer soldier or the sunshine patriot. You do not shrink from the service of this country. You deserve the love and thanks of man and woman, and I believe that when future generations look back at this time in history, you will have their thanks.

We know that nothing comes easy in this movement. If things are going well, we take two steps forward and one step back. But remember: the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph.
The 2000 election was a huge step forward. This year, we take another step forward. And eventually, we will triumph. Roe will be overturned.