Activists predict abortion will be a hot issue in campaigns
ASSOCIATED PRESS
In this photo taken Dec. 22, 2015, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton speaks in Keota, Iowa. With a deeper-than-ever split between Republicans and Democrats over abortion, activists on both sides of the debate foresee a 2016 presidential campaign in which the nominees tackle the volatile topic more aggressively than in past elections.
ASSOCIATED PRESS
In this photo taken Dec. 23, 2015, Republican presidential hopeful Ted Cruz speaks in Oklahoma City. With a deeper-than-ever split between Republicans and Democrats over abortion, activists on both sides of the debate foresee a 2016 presidential campaign in which the nominees tackle the volatile topic more aggressively than in past elections.
ASSOCIATED PRESS
In this Dec. 14, 2015, file photo, Republican presidential candidate Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla. pauses while speaking in Las Vegas. With a deeper-than-ever split between Republicans and Democrats over abortion, activists on both sides of the debate foresee a 2016 presidential campaign in which the nominees tackle the volatile topic more aggressively than in past elections.
NEW YORK >> With a deeper-than-ever split between Republicans and Democrats over abortion, activists on both sides of the debate foresee a 2016 presidential campaign in which the nominees tackle the volatile topic more aggressively than in past elections.
Friction over the issue also is likely to surface in key Senate races. And the opposing camps will be further energized by Republican-led congressional investigations of Planned Parenthood and by Supreme Court consideration of tough anti-abortion laws in Texas.
“It’s an amazing convergence of events,” said Charmaine Yoest, CEO of the anti-abortion group Americans United for Life. “We haven’t seen a moment like this for 40 years.”
In the presidential race, Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton is a longtime defender of abortion rights and has voiced strong support for Planned Parenthood — a major provider of abortions, health screenings and contraceptives — as it is assailed by anti-abortion activists and Republican officeholders.
In contrast, nearly all of the GOP candidates favor overturning the Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion nationwide. Some of the top contenders — including Sens. Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio — disapprove of abortions even in cases of rape and incest.
“We may very well have the most extreme Republican presidential nominee since Roe — a nominee who’s not in favor of abortion in any possible way,” said Stephanie Schriock, president of EMILY’s List. The organization, which supports female candidates who back abortion rights, says it is en route to breaking its fundraising records. A similar claim is made by some anti-abortion political action groups.
Don't miss out on what's happening!
Stay in touch with top news, as it happens, conveniently in your email inbox. It's FREE!
What’s changed for this election? One factor is the increased polarization of the two major parties. Only a handful of anti-abortion Democrats and abortion-rights Republicans remain in Congress, and recent votes attempting to ban late-term abortions and halt federal funding to Planned Parenthood closely followed party lines.
Another difference: Republicans in the presidential field and in Congress seem more willing than in past campaigns to take the offensive on abortion-related issues. Past nominees George W. Bush, John McCain and Mitt Romney opposed abortion but were not as outspoken as some of the current GOP candidates.
“Abortion will bubble over into the general election,” said Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the Susan B. Anthony List, which supports female candidates opposed to abortion. “If you don’t know how to handle this issue, you will be eviscerated.”
As the campaign unfolds, other factors will help keep the abortion debate in the spotlight.
The Supreme Court will be hearing arguments, probably in March, regarding a Texas law enacted in 2013 that would force numerous abortion clinics to close. One contested provision requires abortion facilities to be constructed like surgical centers; another says doctors performing abortions at clinics must have admitting privileges at a local hospital.
The Texas dispute will have echoes in other states as social conservatives lobby for more laws restricting abortion. Americans United for Life plans a multistate push for a package of bills called the Infants’ Protection Project; one measure would ban abortions performed because of fetal abnormalities such as Down syndrome while another would ban abortions after five months of pregnancy.
Also unfolding during the campaign will be a new investigation launched by House Republicans to examine the practices of Planned Parenthood and other major abortion providers. The panel’s chair, Rep. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, says its work will likely continue past Election Day.
The investigation — denounced by Democrats as a partisan witch hunt — is among several congressional and state probes resulting from the release of undercover videos made by anti-abortion activists. They claim the videos show Planned Parenthood officials negotiating the sale of fetal tissue in violation of federal law; Planned Parenthood denies any wrongdoing and says the programs in question at a handful of its clinics entailed legal donations of fetal tissue.
Cruz is among many Republicans who have already passed judgment on Planned Parenthood, calling it “an ongoing criminal enterprise.” He welcomed the endorsement of anti-abortion activist Troy Newman, who helped orchestrate the undercover video operation.
Donald Trump, who leads the GOP presidential polls, has been harder to pin down on the issue. He describes himself as “pro-life” and open to defunding Planned Parenthood, while acknowledging that he held different views in the past.
Planned Parenthood’s leaders say a majority of U.S. voters oppose efforts to cut off its federal funding, most of which subsidizes non-abortion health services for patients on Medicaid. Planned Parenthood’s political action fund hopes to spend a record amount — more than $15 million — on election-related advocacy.
The fund’s executive vice president, Dawn Laguens, contends that some GOP presidential hopefuls, including Cruz and Rubio, may have hurt their general election prospects by making strong bids for anti-abortion votes in the primaries.
“They’ve gone so far out on the limb that they won’t be able to crawl back,” she said.
National polls over the years show the American public deeply divided on abortion. An Associated Press-GfK poll released Dec. 22 found 58 percent of U.S. adults saying abortion should be legal in most or all cases, and 39 percent saying it should be illegal in most or all cases. Forty-five percent viewed Planned Parenthood favorably; 30 percent unfavorably.
Abortion and Planned Parenthood are likely to surface as divisive issues in several of the races that will decide control of the Senate.
New Hampshire features an intriguing race between two women. Democratic Gov. Maggie Hassan, a supporter of abortion rights, hopes to unseat GOP incumbent Kelly Ayotte, who is endorsed by anti-abortion groups and favors halting Planned Parenthood’s federal funding.
Other key Senate races likely to feature sharp divisions over abortion include those in Pennsylvania, Nevada, Wisconsin and the crucial presidential battleground of Ohio, where GOP incumbent Rob Portman is expected to be challenged by former Democratic Gov. Ted Strickland.
38 responses to “Activists predict abortion will be a hot issue in campaigns”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
That is what I love about republicans, they are now for big government. Women are unable to make these decisions, government needs to do it for them. Uncle Ron would be proud. lol
At the same time, this current big government is funding Planned Parenthood.
Thanks to the democrats. Republicans if they had their way would make planned parenthood illegal which would have one immediate result. More unwanted pregnancies due to lack of family planning. Republicans have lots to be proud of.
Boots, Republicans are not opposed to Planned Parenthood providing health care and family planning services to women. What Republicans oppose and what anyone who cares about human live should oppose are abortions on demand for no reason other than to end a pregnancy resulting from unprotected sex and irresponsible behavior and having the government pay for them. Such abortions have nothing to do with women’s health. Most Republicans do not oppose abortions to end pregnancies resulting from rape or incest or when competent medical authorities determine that a woman’s health or live is at risk. Very few abortions meet that criteria.
Actually Ronin, they are opposed to such healthcare services. By defunding PP, they are often defunding the ONLY health care and family planning services to women in many geographical locations. What no information hacks like you ignore, is that many PP clinics are often the only source of such services for many men and women that doesn’t require them to drive tens, if not hundreds of miles. So they are in fact, opposed to Planned Parenthood providing health care and family planning services to women.
Peter, it’s not the GOP pushing Life, it’s America. Also, it’s AP that is bringing this issue forward. If they did not post the article, you and your friends would not be all over the post making comments. I am very aware of your intelligence and which ever part wins the Presidential election, there will be placed on the table some two to three Supreme Court appointments and two for certain will be on the Liberal side. It does create a panic among the Democrats for all the issues that President Obama created, many will be decided in the next four to five years. Do you agree?
A woman’s right-to-choose currently a constitutional-protected law but, nobody HAS to get an abortion. If you don’t want an abortion, don’t have one. But why would you deny a woman’s right-to-choose, especially if the decision is a medical one?
women have the right to have access to a safe abortion. in the event of rape or if the pregnancy threatens the mother’s life the state should assist in funding the abortion if the woman chooses to do so.
however, if a woman seeks an abortion due to professional or recreational sex, or if the abortion is sought for cosmetic reasons, the woman should seek private funding for the abortion.
Right you Are!….St1d
Planned Parenthood is not in jeopardy,it can function perfectly fine on it’s own.Without the 400 million tax Dollars. Yes! only in extreme circumstances should abortion allowed,like “Life Threatening”,Rape and Incest. Remember taking a/any ones Life is still against the law! Infanticide is NOT about a Womans Right .
For Other excuses ,like a Blind Date gone too far or unprotected sex?….than that it’s on your dime!
Tax dollars do not fund abortion; they fund essential healthcare for millions of low-income women.
Medicaid does fund abortion in certain cases, 17 states further define that as being “medically necessary” ones only.
Those of us who have been watching this dialog for 50 plus years know that abortion denial is only the first step the “right” is determined to take. From there they will start work on denying women the right to birth control and thereby the right to their own self determination and control over their own health and body. Give them access to naming Supreme Court Justices and we will be in a very dark place for a long time.
A nonsensical issue since women have been exercising this option openly for years and planned parenthood organizations been amply funded federally. This is ploy for the Hillary campaign which is being pushed by the mainstream media? Terrorism and the economy are more important than what is already available.
IRT Boots, Kainalu, Buddy and like-minded readers to identity the specific provision in the Constitution that says a woman has the right to kill her unborn baby.
Ron why didn’t the republicans pass a personhood bill when they controlled all of government under your hero G W Bush? But in answer to your question, it is not an unborn baby, it is a fetus and is not recognized as an individual. Republicans could have changed this but they did not. Shows their real position.
Yes, liberals do not acknowledge that the fetus is a living being until it pops out of the womb, yet they considered the egg of an endangered species a living animal that you dare not harm or you will face a stiff fine and some hard time in jail. Please explain the logic of that. And, no, Republicans could not have changed it under the G.W. Bush administration because abortion was made legal when the Supreme Court was stacked with liberals and it will take another Supreme Court ruling to overturn its decision. Congress can’t do it.
Notice how Ronin never talks about expanding contraceptive or sexual education? There’s a reason. Ronin’s issue isn’t abortion. It’s something much more sinister.
Do you notice how Boots and like-minded people like Choyd, will not or cannot cite where the Constitution guarantees women the right to kill their unborn children?
The COTUS also doesn’t give us the right to an air force, NASA, or a whole host of other things.
fail less Ronin.
What is more amusing Ronin, is that rather than moving to refute me, you attack me.
Just proving my point. You don’t actually care about reducing abortions.
These activists on both sides of the abortion issue are wasting everybody else’s time.
It is only the people against abortion who are wasting everyone’s time. After all republicans are supposed to be for individual rights and small limited government. How dare they now push of increased government control. Pure hypocrisy!
What “right” does anyone have to kill an unborn human? Oh, yes, I forgot it is not a human until it pops out of the womb.
No woman anywhere ever said “Oh gee, I think I’ll have an abortion today. Sounds like fun.” It’s a terrible, heart-wrenching decision and it seems like the only people that want to make it worse are old fat white guys. (I’m an older slim white guy and I’m all for helping women make their own decisions.)
Cellodad, if you destroy the egg of an eagle or sea turtle or other animal on the endangered species list, you could be fined and imprisoned, but it is not only is legal to kill an unborn human, the government will even pay for the killing. That tells me the moral fabric of our society is badly frayed.
An egg is no longer inside the body of the female AND it can be brought to maturity without the mother. Your comparison fails.
Oh, I get it. You are saying it is OK to destroy the egg of an eagle or endangered animal while it is still in the mother like Planned Parenthood kills babies inside women’s bodies, but just don’t do it after the egg leaves the body. Thank you for enlightening me.
Ronin006, you prove on a daily basis that true enlightenment is not something that sets well with you. A fetus is not a viable human being if it has not been born. The egg HAS been born. As I said, your comparison fails.
No. In order to kill the egg inside the mother eagle, you’d have to kill the adult eagle.
You see, humans and birds reproduce differently. Eagles are also incapable of electing for a procedure like that — let alone consenting to one.
This is nothing more than the liberal media attempting to distract voters from more pressing issues. A woman’s right to have an abortion is not in jepoerdy. No viable candidate conservative nor liberal would infringe upon that right.
Right, focus on women rights instead the more pressing issues facing this Nation. National security and the false economy of spending instead of sound fiscal management.
Our national debt will sink his great nation and leave nothing for the future generations.
Every Republican candidate vows to infringe on that right, so does that mean that none of them are viable? Or are they just lying?
I’ll answer my own question since richierich has gone into hiding… I think the answer is “both”.
A better headline would be: Republicans seek to deny women their Constitutional right to decide a very personal healthcare issue
It’s only one item on a long list of Constitutional rights they are seeking to curtail. Like voting.
The Republicans are seeking to curtail the deceased from voting.
I agree fully with Richierich, Cojef, justmyview371, Ronin006, Kuroiwaj, st1d, and MoiLee. You have more important things to do and think about than discussing this.
You men go back to your football, car racing or wrestling on TV and leave the rest of us alone to discuss this issue. We have the ability to think about and discuss more than one thing at a time.
79% of women who go to Planned Parenthood have incomes below 150% of the poverty line. 75% of women who go to Planned Parenthood go there for contraception. Women who are denied abortions are 3 times more likely to fall into poverty. Cutting off funding to Planned Parenthood will throw many more women into lifetimes of poverty, and supporting women in poverty for the rest of their lives will cost far more than the savings achieved by denying them access to contraception. It simply doesn’t make financial sense, but Republicans, who claim to be against “big government,” are, hypocritically, for a government that makes deeply personal decisions for people who should be able to make those decisions themselves.