By Karen Cross
On ABC’s “The View” today, while discussing the Texas sonogram law, Barbara Walters inaccurately stated, “First of all, it is interesting in every primary the subject of abortion comes up and it is always so controversial and so divisive and yet in the actual election, it plays a very small part. I always find that fascinating. It’s always an issue, but people, with it all, do not vote for the president on that issue.”
Not-surprisingly, many in the media would have you believe that voters do not vote on the issue of abortion. The irony is that Walters is making this ridiculous statement almost exactly when “social issues” like abortion and PPFA’s involvement in it, are assuming prominence once again.
But even if there wasn’t a resurgence of interest in abortion publicly, one should never underestimate pro-life voters. Even if the media wasn’t covering the issue, pro-life voters would still vote their values. They would still vote their hearts. They would still vote for the most vulnerable among us. They are selfless and passionate and in 2010, they soundly voted against Obama’s abortion agenda.
What evidence demonstrates pro-lifers make a difference? According to a November 2, 2010, post-election poll conducted by the polling companyTM inc., pro-life candidates enjoyed a large advantage. Thirty percent of voters said that abortion affected their vote. Of that 30%, 22% voted for pro-life candidates, while only eight percent voted for pro-abortion candidates, giving pro-life candidates a net pro-life advantage of 14 percent.
Is this a one-time advantage? Not at all. National Right to Life PAC was organized in 1980, and in the 30 years that followed, in election after election, National Right to Life PAC has consistently seen a definite advantage for pro-life candidates over pro-abortion candidates among those voters who base their vote on abortion.
Despite being vastly outspent by pro-abortion groups, candidates supported by National Right to Life PAC fared well in 2010. National Right to Life PAC actively worked in 130 of the most competitive federal races nationwide. Of those, 88 won.
Twenty candidates were in highly competitive races against candidates who were supported by the well-funded pro-abortion group, EMILY’s List. EMILY’s List is a pro-abortion political action committee which supports only women Democratic candidates who support abortion on demand, partial-birth abortion, and using tax dollars to pay for abortion.
EMILY’s List raised and spent more than $38,000,000 in the 2010 elections. Despite that, in fourteen of those twenty races (or 70 percent), the pro-life candidate supported by National Right to Life PAC won.
Pro-life candidates benefit because the American people are pro-life; the majority of the country is opposed to the vast majority of abortions.
Since 1973, more than 54,000,000 defenseless babies have been aborted—more than 3,300 each day, 365 days a year.
As NRL PAC looks to 2012, one thing is certain. Congress will consider various legislation concerning issues pro-life people everywhere hold dear. Obama is fulfilling his promise to nominate pro-abortion Supreme Court justices. To follow these developments and learn how you can help fight the Obama abortion agenda, please frequent our webpage at www.nrlpac.org or www.nrlc.org or http://stoptheabortionagenda.com/.
The 2012 elections give NRL PAC another opportunity to persevere for those who cannot speak for themselves—to strengthen pro-life support in the House and Senate against the Obama abortion agenda, so that we can continue forward with the goal of protecting the most vulnerable.
We know that the political landscape has changed in the last year. This means there are more pro-life seats to protect and more opportunities to unseat pro-abortion members of Congress.
We know that the electorate is challenging pro-abortion incumbents in places formerly thought to be “safe.” We know that when we stay home on election day, more babies die.
But we also know that if we stay the course, if we continue to work and organize, 2012 will truly bring needed change to Washington, D.C. and to our nation.
