By Carol Tobias
NRL Political Director
Pro-lifers were ecstatic with the re-election of George W. Bush as President of the United States. After a long, tough battle, we could breathe a sigh of relief, knowing a pro-life leader was in the White House for another four years.
President Bush received 51% of the vote to 48% for John Kerry. He won 286 electoral votes compared to 252 for Kerry. The almost 60 million votes cast for President Bush is more than any other presidential candidate in history.
Along with winning the White House, pro-lifers helped to elect seven new pro-life senators and 20 new pro-life members of the U.S. House.
Many hostile commentators attempted to diminish the magnitude of the President's triumph. But "Bush increased his percentage of the vote in 45 states, and his gains were particularly impressive in many of the states that he lost," wrote James W. Ceaser and Dnial DiSalvo in the Weekly Standard. "Blue America in 2004 is of a decidedly lighter hue than it was in 2000." (See President's column on page 3, and the editorial on page 2 for more details.)
The contrast between President Bush and Senator Kerry couldn't have been more clear. President Bush promoted and then signed three major pieces of pro-life legislation, threatened vetoes when members of Congress attempted to add anti-life amendments to bills, and issued executive orders such as a reinstatement of the "Mexico City Policy" which requires all international organizations seeking U.S. funding for family planning to certify that they "neither perform nor actively promote" abortion as a method of family planning in other nations.
John Kerry was at the other end of the spectrum. He voted against every piece of pro-life legislation, including the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act and the Unborn Victims of Violence Act ("Laci and Conner's Law"). Kerry vowed that his first act as president would be to overturn the Mexico City Policy and he was an active proponent of embryonic stem cell research. Kerry also had a straightforward litmus test for judges. He often stated that he would not appoint any judge, especially to the U.S. Supreme Court, who did not support Roe v. Wade.
President Bush faced an unprecedented campaign against him, not just from Senator Kerry and the Democratic Party but from new groups, so-called "527s," referring to a provision of the tax code. Most sprung up as a way of circumventing the McCain-Feingold campaign "reform" law.
The two largest 527s, America Coming Together (ACT) and Media Fund, raised and spent about $175 million in efforts to defeat President Bush. According to the New York Times, ACT "employed as many as 2,500 canvassers to register about 500,000 potential voters and stay in contact with many of them throughout the year. In the last three weeks alone, the group says it made 16 million phone calls, sent 23 million pieces of mail, and delivered 11 million fliers door to door. On Election Day, it fielded as many as 70,000 paid workers and volunteers to get people to the polls."
The Media Fund spent its funds on television, radio, print, and Internet advertising in 82 media markets in 21 states.
Another group that ran ads highly critical of President Bush in battleground states was Moveon.org, which spent more than $20 million.
The two largest contributors to these organizations were billionaire George Soros and Peter Lewis, chairman of Progressive Corp, an insurance holding company. Soros gave more than $22 million to these groups while Lewis gave them more than $21 million.
A third major component of the anti-Bush effort was the "mainstream media." As most of us would expect, its bias again came into play in the campaign.
The non-partisan research group, Center for Media and Public Affairs (CMPA), evaluated evening news reports from ABC, CBS, and NBC from September 7 to October 22. John Kerry received positive evaluations 58% of the time compared to 36% positive for President Bush. During October, Kerry's numbers soared. He was the beneficiary of 77% positive evaluations from the networks, well more than double that of the 34% positive given the President.
CMPA concluded, "John Kerry is getting the most favorable network news coverage of any presidential candidate in the past quarter century."
PRO-LIFE MOVEMENT PROVIDES INCREMENT
We have known for many years that 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. This was borne out again this year.
A Wirthlin Worldwide post-election poll, taken November 2, found that 42% of the people said that abortion affected their vote. Twenty-five percent said they voted for pro-life candidates while 13% voted for pro-abortion candidates. This comes out to a 12% increment for pro-life candidates.
Asked in another manner, 8% of the voters said that abortion was the most important issue in deciding for whom to vote. Three-quarters of this segment (6%) voted for George W. Bush while only one-quarter (2%) voted for John Kerry. This was a net increment of 4% for President Bush among voters who based their vote on the single issue of abortion.
In a close election, this 4% advantage made the difference between winning and losing.
We are, of course, very proud of the record and activities of National Right to Life PAC. The Wirthlin poll found that 22% of all voters nationwide could recall hearing or seeing advertising, or receiving information, from National Right to Life PAC.
Once again, the energy and enthusiasm of thousands of pro-lifers all over the country have prevailed. Wonderful and selfless people have given of their time, money, and talents to help save innocent unborn children, placing their concern for these children above all other issues. Your dedication and sincerity continue to triumph.