Pro-Life Voters Make a Difference in Crucial Senate Races

The Pro-Life Increment - 2002

By David N. O'Steen,
Ph.D. NRLC Executive Director

Pro-lifers knew well before November 5 that the national battle for the United States Senate was also a battle between pro-life and pro-abortion forces to determine whether pro-life or pro-abortion leadership would win Senate control. But as the nature of this political contest shaped up, it became as stark a battle over abortion as one could imagine. In each of the nine key Senate races that collectively were to determine control of the Senate, a pro-life Republican faced a pro-abortion Democrat and abortion was a major campaign issue.

The pro-life candidate won in seven of the nine contests (see story, page one). Post-election polling shows that abortion played a very major role in determining how votes were cast in these pivotal contests--with results that certainly didn't please NARAL and EMILY's List.

The Zogby polling firm conducted a post-election poll of 5,408 people with a margin of error of 1.3% in the nine Senate-race states of Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, North Carolina, South Dakota, and Texas.

In these states collectively 41% of the voters said the abortion issue affected their vote. Of these, 55% said they voted for the pro-life Republican U.S. Senate candidate, and only 39% said they voted for the pro-abortion Democrat.

When you do the math you see this means that 23% of the electorate in these states was influenced by the abortion issue and voted for the pro-life candidate, while only 16% was influenced by the abortion issue and voted for the pro-abortion candidate. This yields a very significant 7% pro-life increment which played a pivotal role in electing pro-life candidates.

Zogby also asked the 41% who were influenced by the abortion issue if they voted for candidates who favored abortion or opposed abortion. Of those, 61% (25% of the electorate) voted for candidates who opposed abortion, while only 31% (13% of the electorate) voted for candidates who favored abortion. This yields a 12% increment for pro-life candidates. Supporting evidence verifying this dramatic pro-life advantage came from other sources as well.

Exit polling by Fox News/ Opinion Dynamics conducted in the three states (Georgia, Minnesota, and Missouri) in which a pro-life Republican won a seat previously held by a pro-abortion Democrat confirmed the pro-life voting trends found in the Zogby poll.

Fox News asked voters which issue mattered most in their vote for U.S. Senate.

In Georgia, 9% of voters picked abortion as the most important issue. Of these 73% (7% of the electorate) voted for pro-life Saxby Chambliss, while 22% (2% of the electorate) voted for pro-abortion Sen. Max Cleland, giving Mr. Chambliss a 5% advantage because of his pro-life stand.

Of the 14% who cited abortion as the most important issue in Minnesota, 81% (11% of the electorate) voted for pro-lifer Norm Coleman, while only 17% (2% of the electorate) voted for pro-abortion Walter Mondale, according to Fox News. This yielded a 9% pro-life increment for Coleman.

In the hotly contested race for the U.S. Senate in Missouri, pro-life Jim Talent went up against pro-abortion Sen. Jean Carnahan. A remarkable 17% of Missouri voters cited abortion as the most important issue influencing their vote. Of these, 80% (14% of the electorate) voted for Talent while 19% (3% of the electorate) voted for Carnahan. This gave Jim Talent a pro-life advantage of 10% (after rounding).

NRL PAC DELIVERS

In a testament to the hard work and effectiveness of National Right to Life PAC, and the thousands of pro-life volunteers in these key states, the Zogby poll found that an astounding 40% of voters in eight of these Senate-race states recalled hearing, receiving, or seeing pro-life political information from National Right to Life PAC.

In Minnesota, Zogby asked voters if they recalled hearing, receiving, or seeing pro-life political information from the Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life (MCCL) Committee for a Pro-Life Congress. An overwhelming 54% said yes, which explains how the MCCL Committee for a Pro-Life Congress won not only a new Senate seat, but also the governorship and an additional seat in the U.S. House of Representatives!

Taking a pro-life position is the right thing to do for the children. And contrary to the "conventional wisdom" often expounded in the media, it has again been shown to be the politically wise thing for candidates to do as well.