Stark Differences Make for Clear Contrast Between Bush and Kerry

By Dave Andrusko

In the 2000 presidential election, only 51.2% of the voting-age population in America chose to take a few minutes out of their schedules to vote in an election so close that its final outcome was not determined for 35 days afterwards.

This dismal turnout came in spite of an election that was both a referendum on the eight years of the Clinton Administration and one that offered as clear a contrast as you could ask for.

Until now, that is. In pro-life President George W. Bush and pro-abortion Sen. John Kerry, the American people have before them two men whose differences on issues in general, and those of interest to pro-lifers, in particular, could not be more marked.

The most recent illustration came in May. A divided three-member panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the federal government has no authority to stop the use of federally controlled drugs to facilitate physician-assisted suicide in Oregon.

The panel ruled against Mr. Bush's attorney general, John Ashcroft, who on November 6, 2001, had reinstated federal policy that said federally controlled drugs may not be prescribed to kill patients. Ashcroft was responding to a 1998 decision by Clinton Attorney General Janet Reno, who said this was permissible if assisted suicide is legal under state law. Oregon is, of course, the only such state.

Ashcroft's policy never took effect, because of court orders issued by U.S. District Judge Robert Jones. (See story, page 6.)

In an eery coincidence, barely a week before the decision, Kerry was asked by the Oregon Statesman Journal about the federal government's role vis à vis Oregon's assisted suicide law.

Although he said he opposed assisted suicide "in principle," Kerry said, "I think it's up to the states to decide what they're going to do there." A moment later, he added, "It's a very complicated, thorny, moral, ethical issue that people wrestle with. And I don't think it's the government's job to step in."

But given its higher profile, it is about abortion and related issues that the American people will likely see the differences spelled out most clearly. Which is not to say, of course, that pro-abortion Kerry won't try to blur his policy differences with pro-life President Bush to sound as if Kerry is "middle of the road." (See editorial, page 2.)

On the basic issue of life, President Bush strongly supports legal protection for unborn children and opposes abortion on demand. Senator Kerry just as fervently supports Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion for any reason, even as a method of birth control. He is so wedded to protecting abortion on demand that he told the Associated Press earlier this year, "I am proud that I am the only presidential candidate to pledge that I will support only pro-choice judges to the Supreme Court."

In an act rich in substance and symbolism, one of Mr. Bush's very first acts in office was to reinstate the Mexico City Policy so that U.S. tax dollars did not go to organizations that promote abortion overseas. That policy was initiated by President Reagan, maintained by Mr. Bush's father, and overturned immediately by Bill Clinton when he moved into the Oval Office.

When a reporter asked Kerry what his first executive order as President would be, he answered, "Reverse the Mexico City policy."

Kerry is quite comfortable using your tax dollars to pay for abortion. President Bush has long resisted using federal dollars to promote abortion.

Where President Bush openly and repeatedly called for the Senate to send him the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act so he could sign the measure, Kerry voted against passing the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act on six occasions! On the crucial issue of cloning, President Bush supports a ban on human cloning. Sen. Kerry supports the cloning of human embryos to be used in experiments that will kill them.

Moreover, President Bush has not wavered in his staunch resistance to using federal money to promote stem cell research that would require the killing of human embryos. John Kerry has signed a letter to President Bush urging him to allow federal dollars to be used for embryonic stem cell research that would require the killing of human embryos.

George W. Bush believes parents should be notified before their minor daughter gets an abortion. Sen. Kerry believes some other adult should be able to take the place of parents when that decision is being made.

The comparisons go on and on. Speaking at a rally two days before the "March for Women's Lives," Sen. Kerry praised NARAL's Kate Michelman as nothing less than "one of the great modern day civil rights leaders in the United States."

In a video address to the 2003 NRLCconvention, President Bush reminded attendees, "In our time, respect for the right to life calls us to defend the sick and dying, those with disabilities and birth defects, and all who are weak and vulnerable. And it also calls our nation to set a great goal: that unborn children will be welcomed in life and protected in law."

Speaking at the NRLC Educational Trust Fund's 11th annual Proudly Pro-Life Awards Dinner, pro-life Vice President Richard Cheney told his audience, "For 31 years, the National Right to Life Committee has led a great movement of conscience, and your good influence is felt not just within our country, but also in other nations and international institutions."

Alluding to the spirit that infuses our cause and the breadth and depth of the Movement, Mr. Cheney observed, "This cause, like others before it, reflects the compassion of our country, and our commitment to equality and to the dignity of every life. The convictions that drive this organization are broad and generous. And the same is true of the coalition that you've built."

It's no wonder, then, that NRL PAC has endorsed President Bush and that, for the first time, Planned Parenthood's political action arm endorsed a presidential candidate: John Kerry.

The differences between pro-life President George Bush and pro-abortion Sen. John Kerry are as stark as they are numerous.