14th Edition of "Who Decides?" Finds "Bleak Situation" for Pro-Abortionists
By Dave Andrusko

The 14th annual edition of NARAL's "Who Decides?" rarely an upbeat report even in the "best" of times, says that "the nation's overall grade for women's reproductive rights dropped to a D-" in 2004.

As it has since 1992, the report assesses a grade on women's "reproductive rights" for each state and the District of Columbia, and offers an overall assessment. In addition to summarizing state laws, this year the report "includes new sections citing key findings and political trends."

Released January 13, the report laments, "In the last 4 years, as George Bush's anti-choice presidency has emboldened anti-choice activists around the country, the nation's grade has steadily declined from a C- to a deplorable D-." According to Nancy Keenan, the organization's president, "State legislators are continuing to chip away at women's freedom - - and they are prepared to go much further if George Bush succeeds in his goal of overturning Roe v. Wade."

Predictably, most media attention fastened on the [regrettably] inaccurate prediction that, "As many as 19 states will quickly ban abortion as soon as Roe is overturned. As many as 19 more could follow closely behind." Mary Balch, NRLC's director of state legislation, gave NRL News a much more balanced - - and accurate - - analysis.

"NRLC, no more than NARAL, can look into a crystal ball and predict with accuracy what will happen once Roe v. Wade falls," she said. Generally speaking, Balch said, there are two statements that can be made with assurance.

"You have to remember than even the most commonsensical laws have run head-on into the fortress the Court has built to surround the essentially unlimited 'right' to abortion," she explained. "When a more sensible Supreme Court finally dispatches with Roe, this will be a 'necessary but not sufficient' step."

Asked to explain, Balch said that once Roe falls, states would be free to enact their own abortion statutes. But, she added, in and of itself, overturning Roe would not stop any abortions.

"The other truism is a corollary: each state will be a battleground," Balch said. "How the Movement fares in a given state will reflect how strong is the state's pro-life organization and how determined it is to fight pro-abortion groups which will be digging in to stop all pro-life initiatives." So now is the time to prepare by continuing to build our own grassroots right to life chapter and our state affiliates she added.

By turns analytical and hysterical, "Who Decides?" paints an unrelievedly grim picture from the pro-abortion perspective. The introduction says it all: "At the beginning of 2005, a woman's right to choose is on the brink of being taken away."

What explains the gloom and doom?

On the one hand, "Despite the efforts of millions of pro-choice Americans, George W. Bush, the most anti-choice president in history, was narrowly re-elected in November 2004." On the other hand there is the sheer volume of pro-life initiatives.

"Anti-choice state legislators once again stepped up their efforts to restrict or eliminate a woman's right to choose in 2004, considering 714 anti-choice measures," according to the report. "This is a 28 percent increase from last year, when 558 measures were considered."

Yet, from NARAL's perspective (and according to the way it tallied the results), there were certainly rays of hope. Of those 714 initiatives, "29 anti-choice measures were enacted," a "33 percent decrease from 2003, when 45 anti-choice measures were enacted."

Likewise, there was a 62% increase over 2003 in the number of "pro-choice" measures introduced last year, according to the report. Thirty of them passed - - "a 36 percent increase from 2003, when 22 pro-choice measures were enacted." So, fundraising considerations aside, why does NARAL have such a bleak outlook for state legislation?

Balch attributed it to a realistic assessment of what happened in 2004. "Pro-life legislation that should have passed was sidetracked by clever pro-abortion legislative leaders," she explained. "We'll be wiser this time around."

And the election results of November 2004 "sent a clear message: the pro-life movement is on the move," Balch said. "Pro-abortion legislators who felt confident of their invulnerability a few months ago now know they are the wrong side of history."