Out of power in both houses of Congress and the White House, one would think that like the Republican Party, the Pro-Life Movement is in the wilderness and without leaders. However, this couldn’t be further from the case… In fact, the Pro-Life Movement is more united then ever. Case in point: the Susan B. Anthony List Campaign for Life Dinner held earlier this month in Washington, D.C.
In case you are unfamiliar with the Susan B. Anthony List (SBA), founded in 1994, it is EMILY’s List, except the opposite: it elects Pro-Life women to Congress or Pro-Life men running against Pro-Abortion women.
This past election cycle, its connected PAC bundled and earmarked over $1 Million into key races across the country. Besided electing pro-life candidates, it mobilizes over 150,000 pro-life activists nationwide to lobby Congress on critical life issues, and even helped form the Pro-Life Women’s Caucus for the women it helps elect. It also trains future generations of activists by conducting training academies on college campuses.
Unlike many Pro-Life organizations, SBA was not left in the dust by technology, as it has a very clean, cool website. SBA also has over 1,000 friends on Facebook, is active daily on Twitter and has its own “SuzyB” blog.
SBA founder and president Marjorie Dannenfelser and former chairman Jane Abraham, with the help of Jeri Thompson, were the braintrust behind the wildly successful Team Sarah Ning website of over 60,000 members which helped defend Sarah Palin against attacks during the general election.
But, back to to the dinner, which was held at the historic Willard in downtown Washington. The dinner was so packed that there was barely any room to move around in the biggest ballroom the hotel had to offer.
To show how united the Pro-Life Movement is in the face of a White House and Congress lead by Obama and Pelosi, there were all sorts of factions of the Pro-Life movement present.
I saw many of its Catholic leaders, many of its Protestant leaders. I saw one of the leaders of the troops on the ground, 40 Days for Life founder David Bereit. I saw some of its leaders in Congress, such as Cong. Trent Franks, Cong. Jean Schmidt, Cong. Marsha Blackburn, Cong. Joseph Cao, and Cong. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, who gave a fantastic speech centered on her baby boy with Down syndrome. I saw Romney backers, I saw Brownbackers. I saw Thompson backers, which was easy since Fred and Jeri Thompson headlined the dinner. I saw Ken Blackwell, I saw Michael Steele staffers. I saw past members of Congress, such as Sen. Spence Abraham, Cong. Mike Ferguson, and Cong. Bob Livingston. I also saw future pro-life members of Congress, such as Rob Wasinger, who is a candidate for Congress in Kansas.
The mood wasn’t what you’d expect: instead of being depressed about the number of babies that will be aborted due to Obama’s anti-life policies or the millions of tax dollars that are being funneled to Planned Parenthood, the mood was… wait for it… of hope. All the speeches were about looking forward, about pro-lifers taking back Congress.
This was especially evident when SBA gave out their annual Susan B. Anthony List Trailblazer Award, which is given to young women who are making a difference in the battle to end abortion. It was especially a proud moment for my family, as my sister, Christina, was given an award for her work in the pro-life movement (she got her start in the movement as SBA’s first intern long ago). However, the climax of the night was when Lia, a very bright 12 year-old girl, received the award for a very compelling and persuasive speech on abortion to her class (which of course, school administrators tried to censor) that was put up on YouTube and has been viewed by over 500,000.
SBA also used the occasion to announce its new, groundbreaking project, “Votes Have Consequences,” a program that will target members of Congress who vote out-of-step with the pro-life views of their district. The project is being headed up by former Cong. Marilyn Musgrave, and will start targeting members in Fall of this year, well ahead of 2010 elections.
Overall, the night was a smashing success for the Pro-Life Movement. It strong, is here to stay, and isn’t going anywhere until every unborn child is welcomed into the most prosperous nation on Earth and women are protected from the horrors of abortion.
Billy Valentine is vice president of Students for Life of America and can be reached at billyvalentine(at)gmail.com
Susan B. Anthony List Trailblazer Awardees with Jeri Thompson and Marjorie Dannenfelser at the Susan B. Anthony List Campaign for Life Dinner.
12-Year Old YouTube Star Lia with Congresswoman Jean Schmidt (R-OH)
April 2nd, 2009 at 10:20 am
Billy,
Is that Kellyanne Conway in the picture?
April 2nd, 2009 at 10:21 am
Great post!
April 2nd, 2009 at 10:22 am
Billy, thanks for posting this very encouraging news.
April 2nd, 2009 at 10:31 am
Tommy, yes, that’s Kellyanne Conway, she was the emcee for the night. She did a great job.
April 2nd, 2009 at 10:36 am
Billy,
It’s encouraging to read her polling analysis with respect to women. Her association with pro-life groups may lead to some bias, but I haven’t read in any of her material any indication that she believes the abortion issue is an obstacle to us winning over more independent women (liberal democrat women, that may be another issue). In her last article in NewsMax, she essentially said the party had to go after more single women. She even pushed the GOP to be more aggressive on social issues, a concept that is anathema on this site!
http://www.newsmax.com/kessler/gop_women_voters/2009/03/24/195502.html
“They need to shock the conscience on some social issues.”
She cites Obama’s actions allowing U.S. funding for abortions overseas and for stem-cell research entailing “destruction of embryos, even though use of adult stem cells and skin cells have shown greater promise.”
April 2nd, 2009 at 10:44 am
5
Tommy Boy,
“She even pushed the GOP to be more aggressive on social issues, a concept that is anathema on this site!”
Now that’s what I’m talking about!
(On both counts, social issues and this site)
April 2nd, 2009 at 10:53 am
That is great Tommy I hadn’t seen that article yet. It is so much more effective when women speak about the pro-life issue, which is why what SBA is doing is so important.
The Party has to focus on this tough but important issue because this is where we can win Reagan Dems, old school Catholics, etc. But we have to be willing to talk about it and fight for it, we can’t just mention it once in a campaign speech or do a last-minute mailer on it — it has to be a prominent issue for our party.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:21 am
What worries me is that more Americans have broadly pro-life views and would support increased restrictions on abortion, parental consent laws, etc. but a majority in polls consider themselves pro-choice.
Clearly they are doing better at marking the battle lines. We need to get people to understand the consequences of unrestricted abortion and its long-term damage to society, which will in time become weak, old, and decrepit, in spite of high immigration levels which are maintaining it for the time being. It ought to be available only in special cases. And most importantly it’s probably a better basis on which to fight than on the ambiguity of whether human life begins at conception, viability, or birth that we like to frame the debate around. Clearly the electorate at large does not hold the party position with respect to that, otherwise there wouldn’t be any abortion. Approach it on different terms, and I think people will start to see the light.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:29 am
Interesting thing one other commentator (perhaps Matthew?) observed some time ago that’s reflected here – almost all passion in the party for federalism, fiscal conservatism, and reduced government restrictions comes from the men, whereas most conservative women tend to only be passionate social conservatives. My mother and a couple of Romneyites here are really the only exceptions I’ve seen.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:38 am
MPC, I think our best line of attack at least right now is that during an economic crisis the Democrats are busy earmarking our hard-earned dollars to abortionists, even overseas. It is also easy to make the case that the liberals in the White House and Congress aren’t pro-choice, they are pro-abortion.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:44 am
Oh, absolutely, I highly favor a sound rejection of the Democrats’ lame economics as a platform header
So yeah, I agree that’d be an issue to take them to task on provided it’s a substantial amount of money, which it almost certainly is. Obviously they aren’t about letting women choose as they claim, they are about widespread adoption of abortion, ignorant to its ultimate effects.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:52 am
MPC, I respectfully disagree with your assertion about conservative women only caring about social issues. I actually don’t know of any women like that. All of the conservative women I know are just as much concerned with the other issues such as fiscal conservatism, national security, and smaller government as with the social issues. And, if you notice our female conservative writers don’t fit your assumption, either.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:59 am
I believe that people are fooled by the generic wording of pro-life and pro-choice. My belief is that if the polls were asked thusly:
Which of the following most closely represents your attitude on abortion?
a It should be against the law to have an abortion at any time from the moment of conception.
b It should be against the law to have an abortion at any time during the pregnancy except for when the life of the mother is at stake.
c It should be against the law to have an abortion except in the cases involving the ‘life of the mother, rape, and incest.
d I should never under any circumstances be against the law to have an abortion at any stage of the pregnancy.
With answers a, b, and c being pro-life positions, I believe that a substantially higher percentage of Americans would be pro-life.
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:33 pm
As both a SoCon and an overall Conservative, I believe that we need to fight this issue on both fronts; change the law incrementally and change hearts and minds.
As for women caring about social issues, among the general public, it seems that both Conservative and Liberal women care a little more about social issues, but Billy may not be convinced of this by looking at my household.
BTW, my household can vouche for the fact that Billy is an economic Conservative as well as a SoCon.
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:55 pm
This is a war and if it takes 1000 years we have to win!
April 2nd, 2009 at 3:51 pm
fellowconservative,
You left out the one option most pro-choicers would subscribe to…
It should be against the law to have an abortion once the developing fetus would be viable outside the womb.
In reality, this argument is a red herring. 91 percent of all abortions are performed in the first trimester, and less than one percent of abortions take place after 24 weeks’ gestation (viability threshold).
April 2nd, 2009 at 3:59 pm
Agreed. And that is why I would recommend for pro-lifers in South Dakota to push for abortion rights, but only through the first trimester. While even that law would likely be deemed unconstitutional, it would nevertheless create a test case for the Supreme Court that could result in a paring back of Roe’s overreach.
April 2nd, 2009 at 4:13 pm
Aron, I thought of that choice, but it would show people overwhelmingly against late term abortion, but I’m not sure that would qualify anyone as anything other than pro-choice, unless they clicked on one of the other three. That’s why I did it.
April 2nd, 2009 at 5:40 pm
nice post Billy. Thanks.
April 2nd, 2009 at 8:18 pm
What is really a Red herring is when the Pro-Choice side says we need abortions to protect the life of the mother and in cases of rape and incest. The reality is that these comprise few cases of all abortions.
April 2nd, 2009 at 9:08 pm
Billy, I’m really glad to see that the pro-life movement is doing well. You really touched on some great points. Great post!