From the President
Wanda Franz, Ph.D.

IT'S GOING TO BE A TOUGH ELECTION YEAR

* "President Bush has kept at least one campaign promise he has become the only President in our nation's history to make abortion a federal crime" [by signing the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act]. --NARAL president Kate Michelman on January 22, 2004

* "If George W. Bush is allowed to fill those seats [vacancies on the Supreme Court], it could mean the end of reproductive privacy and the end of Roe v. Wade. I intend to do everything I can do to see that does not happen." --from Kate Michelman's statement announcing her retirement from the presidency of NARAL

* The National Right to Life Political Action Committee has endorsed President George W. Bush for re-election.

* All Democratic candidates for the presidency support abortion on demand and are committed to appoint only pro-abortion judges.

* The pro-abortionists and their allies have established three major initiatives for the 2004 election: The America Votes project with a budget of $85 million (although lately there has been talk of a $250 million budget), the America Coming Together (ACT) political action committee with a budget of $75 million, and the March for Freedom of Choice on April 25, 2004, in Washington, D.C. The goal is to replace George W. Bush with a pro-abortion president and "elect progressive officials at every level in 2004" (ACT).

* One project of the pro-abortion/anti-Bush groups is to broadcast anti-Bush TV advertisements targeting 17 key states: Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Iowa, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Washington, West Virginia and Wisconsin. In my home state (West Virginia) such advertisements are already a regular feature on TV.

* "I am still suspending judgment on Howard Dean, both as a candidate and as a possible president. But I have to say he has run a brilliant campaign this year and put what is really quite a competent field of rival candidates to shame." --Pulitzer Prize-winning super-columnist David Broder in the Washington Post, 12/28/2003

* "Yeeeeeeeaaarrrrrrrhhhh!" --Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean after placing third with his "brilliant campaign" in Iowa

* "Congressman Kucinich [one in the 'competent field of candidates'] is holding up a pie chart, which is not truly effective on radio." --moderator Neal Conan at the presidential candidates' debate hosted by National Public Radio, 1/6/2004

Howard Dean's style and rhetoric perfectly captured the irrationality of the "progressive" pro-abortion position. When columnist David Broder, who is well-connected to the leadership in the Democratic Party, was coyly "suspending judgment" on Howard Dean and upgrading the other candidates to "quite competent," he didn't let on that by then the party leaders and their friends in the media were arranging Mr. Dean's defeat in the early primaries.

What pro-lifers are facing then for the November election is a flood of anti-Bush TV advertisements, a massive pro-abortion media campaign, extensive and sympathetic media coverage of the "March for Freedom of Choice" in April, and a huge get-out-the-vote effort on behalf of pro-abortion candidates.

The Democratic pro-abortion nominee for the presidency, most likely Senator John Kerry, will be re-packaged as a middle-of-the-road candidate--a non-Dean. His support for abortion on demand and partial-birth abortion and the use of your taxes to pay for abortions--all this will be camouflaged by the vague phrases of "freedom of choice" and protecting "constitutional rights." His promise to appoint only pro-abortion judges who will continue the extra-constitutional tendency of legislating from the bench will be sold as nothing less than a vigorous defense of the Constitution.

The lies will be big and come in punchy phrases. And they will be repeated endlessly.

So what are pro-lifers to do? First we must realize, that we are always being outspent. What counts is how the resources are used. Grassroots pro-life work is still the most important factor. Identifying pro-lifers and educating them about our issue and the candidates' position is essential. Instinctively, people are repelled by abortion. Pro-lifers must affirm this instinctive position and supply the rational argument for the pro-life position. The next step must be to get them to the voting booth. Being pro-life and staying home and not voting on election day is bad pro-life citizenship.

Second, successful pro-life activists have learned that the pro-life candidates must be electable. Endorsements must be made accordingly.

Splitting the pro-life vote in primaries is a danger. The point is to nominate a pro-life candidate with the best chance to win the general election.

Third, when the candidate of one party is pro-abortion and the candidate of the other party is not perfectly pro-life, withholding the vote from the "imperfect" pro-life candidate or wasting the vote on a third-party candidate in protest is bad pro-life citizenship. It helps elect a pro-abortionist and damages the pro-life cause. The point is not to make a statement, but to make a difference!

Finally, don't confuse the pro-abortion stance of the Democratic Party at the federal level with the stance of sincere pro-life Democratic state candidates. In my (heavily Democratic) home state, the Democratic Party controls the legislature--but the Senate President and the Speaker of the House of Delegates are pro-life and both chambers have solid pro-life majorities. This is the result of hard and sustained pro-life work, including educating candidates for office.

For pro-lifers, this election year will be a time of smart planning, very hard work, serious financial sacrifices, and hopeful prayer.

Our cause is just. We must rise to the occasion. We all must do our part.