Who’s Pro-Life and Who’s Not?

Commentary by Leslie Hanson

As a seasoned pro-life advocate/voter, I have found it somewhat disturbing to see the current election cycle so scrambled for my fellow citizens who value pro-life priorities. After hearing several candidates talk about the current state of affairs in Jefferson City as well as what they’re hearing on the campaign trail, pro-life values voters are facing a perplexing election. With eyebrows raised and a piqued curiosity, I have now spoken with several dozen political observers who apparently share the same universal concerns. Let me try to explain.

A visit to Missouri Right to Life’s (MRL) website is confusing to some and frustrating to others. In a chart documenting the pro-life votes of all 163 members of the House and 34 members of the Missouri Senate there are no final scores or ratings. Lacking a final analysis, interested viewers naturally inspect the chart to see how their lawmakers’ pro-life votes compare to others. This is where the confusion and frustration begins. Far too many Senators and Representatives who have a reputation of being pro-abortion and even brag about their support for abortion, seem to have voted more in line with MRL than tried and true pro-life committed legislators!

MRL answers questions about their official scorecard by saying they have only published legislators' votes on important pro-life bills. However, this does not explain how so many pro-life lawmakers have been portrayed as voting worse than pro-abortion politicians who filibuster to kill pro-life measures.

Calls to most legislators of both bodies, including Democrats and Republicans, results in one’s ear being filled with unflattering ranting and raging about MRL. Many of those comments would not be suitable to repeat here. Lawmakers and many of their constituents alike are primarily upset over MRL’s 2007 Legislative Scorecard on most legislators’ performance, which is posted on MRL’s website. Some of the bills chosen by MRL to include in their scorecard, simply do not fit in MRL’s characterization of lawmaker’s pro-life commitments.

Case in point. State Representative Dr. Bob Onder a Republican representing the 13th District, Lake St. Louis, is unquestionably pro-life. He served as the original Chairman of the Board for Missourians Against Human Cloning, the group created specifically to oppose human cloning. MRL’s President, Pam Fichter, served on the Board of Directors of this same group. Dr. Onder actively contributes his labor and personal money into protecting embryonic life from all threats of destructive stem cell research. In fact, just this year, he sponsored the key pro-life legislation supported by MRL.

Contrast this pro-life legislative leader to Rep. Jeanette Mott Oxford, District 59, a Democrat from St. Louis City. She is a proud feminist, an openly and unashamed lesbian, and vehemently pro-abortion. These two lawmakers are total opposites to say the least. They almost always vote contrary to one another on issue after issue. In fact, their names appear next to one another on MRL’s alphabetized scorecard and on every single vote they opposed each other.

Now comes the confusion. Rep. Onder and Rep. Oxford have earned the same pro-life and/or pro-abortion MRL score! Onder, according to MRL’s scorecard, voted 50% of the time ‘against’ rated pro-life bills. Oxford on the other hand, voted 50% of the time ‘in favor’ of pro-life bills. Confused? Which one is only 50% pro-life and which one is only 50% pro-abortion?

MRL’s scorecard leaves voters to assume that Dr. Onder is no better than Jeanette Mott Oxford. This level of confusion causes deep frustration and can possibly lead to devastating results for the pro-life cause.

These two are not mere glitches in MRL’s scorecard. Time after time pro-abortion lawmakers are reported to have voted in favor of more pro-life bills (or against pro-abortion and pro-death bioethics bills) than their pro-life counterparts. The confusion and frustration is easy to see. After all, why would anti-life politicians be so consistently voting with a pro-life advocacy organization?

In the Kansas City region the same problem exists as it does all around the state. Absolute pro-abortion House members such as John Burnett (D-40), Beth Low (D-39), Trent Skaggs (D-31) all of Kansas City, and Paul LaVota (D-52) of Independence, each share the same 50% voting record of pro-abortion members from St. Louis. But, according to MRL’s scorecard, readers would never know if they were 50% pro-life or 50% anti-life!

This is a real problem not to be shrugged off with “it’s just their voting record.” Something is terribly wrong with the scorecard when unquestionably pro-life advocates voting on the same bills and issues as anti-life advocates rate no more than 50% and, in some cases, even less! In the KC region consider Stanley Cox (R-118) of Sedalia, Ed Emery (R-126) of Lamar, Bob Nance (R-36) Excelsior Springs, Jerry Nolte (R-33) Gladstone, Bryan Pratt (R-55) Blue Springs, Brian Stevenson (R-128) Webb City, Larry Wilson (R-119) Flemington, and Jeff Grisamore (R-47) of Lee’s Summit (who’s wife is about to deliver their tenth child). Every one of these men are solid pro-life activists within the capitol who, according to MRL, have voted no better (or even worse) than several pro-abortion lawmakers who brag about endorsements from organizations pushing for abortion rights!

In the Senate the contrast on this misleading scorecard is even more disturbing for Kansas City region pro-lifers looking for guidance. Luann Ridgeway (R-17) Smithville, Bill Stouffer (R-21) Napton, and Delbert Scott (R-28) Clinton (the same Senator Scott who passed MRL’s priority bill in the same year as the scorecard) all are recorded as having only voted with MRL no more than six times. While Senator Scott gets two additional credits for signing letters supported by MRL, he is also recorded as having voted anti-life 19 times against his grand total of eight pro-life actions. Yet, his Senate anti-life colleagues who strive to filibuster pro-life legislation have sometimes voted more than twice as often with MRL? Chuck Graham (D-19) of Columbia, inspired by his pro-abortion supporters, voted 16 times with MRL while Jolie Justus (D-10) from Kansas City (the Missouri Senate’s first open lesbian and a strident pro-abortion activist) voted 14 times with MRL. This borders on insanity. No wonder lawmakers are upset with MRL.

The entire political culture of Missouri is abuzz about the nuttiness of all this. Emotions are running higher than the Mississippi River! Many have gone so far as to say that anger over this scorecard has fueled an anti-pro-life-legislative environment in the state capitol. But no one seems to be able to explain the situation in clear or convincing terms. To compound matters, we are now in the throws of the 2008 political campaign season and MRL’s candidate endorsements have been handed out. Or, rather they have been withheld from multiple pro-life statesmen and women leaving even more Missourians scratching their heads.

The answer is simple. Obviously, some of the votes included in MRL’s unrated scorecard (but used to determine endorsements) simply do not fit. MRL seems to be too close to the forest to see the trees or able to discern between one kind of tree from another.

Including multiple votes in which anti-life lawmakers voted time and again for life while pro-lifers voted to the contrary, with both groups predominately casting their votes as near universal blocks, reveals something much deeper is going on. There is wisdom in taking counsel from ‘on the scene observers’, but when someone reports such grave inconsistencies it behooves one to question the observers’ eyesight.

Another case in point is the 7th District Senate seat up for grabs in the August Primary Election. Due to term limits, the office is being vacated by Senator John Loudon. In a three-way primary, there are two main Christian conservative contenders; State Rep. Jane Cunningham and Gina Loudon the wife of Senator Loudon.

Gina is a newcomer to the race with no direct legislative experience. Jane, who established her intentions in this race well over a year before Gina stepped in, is an eight-year veteran member of the House of Representatives and is perhaps the only member of the Legislature that has taken the initiative to introduce pro-life bills every single year she has been in office.

MRL has chosen to endorse Gina over Jane. Not being a mind reader, I can only surmise that since Gina doesn’t have a voting record MRL put a lot of weight on her responses to their candidate survey. The same candidate survey that MRL commonly uses to blast lawmakers who, in MRL’s opinion, have flip-flopping on MRL’s issues once they are in office. This makes no sense to me whatsoever. At the very least, one would think a dual endorsement would have been in order for this race.

MRL is only one of nine pro-life lobby groups in Jefferson City. (It is not known how many other groups flow in and out of the state capitol, such as Missourians Against Human Cloning, Lutherans for Life, SEMO Life Savers, etc., which do not maintain a consistent registered lobbying presence.) Of those lobbying institutions formally registered with the State Ethics Commission, there are three basic classifications: Three single interest pro-life lobby organizations; Missouri Right to Life, Missouri Campaign Life, and Americans United for Life. Four additional pro-life voices which are multi-issued pro-family groups; Missouri Family Network, Missouri Eagle Forum, Concerned Women of America – Missouri, and the newly formed Missouri Family Policy Council. Two religious institutions are also major pro-life voices; the Missouri Catholic Conference and the Missouri Baptist Convention.

Not a single one of the other eight organizations adopt MRL’s current endorsement policies or necessarily the candidates they chose to endorse. For committed pro-life voters, campaign rhetoric can be confusing enough. Yet, in this election cycle, the confusion is only greater thanks to the help of one of the key organizations that is supposed to help us cut through the fog.

Political endorsements are an imperfect tool in an imperfect system of mankind-centered politics. After all the years of depending on MRL endorsements for election day direction and discernment, pro-life voters may want to dig a little deeper for clarity. Pro-life value voters must not depend upon mere political endorsements until the confusion is cleared and the frustration subsides.

Leslie Hanson is a registered dental hygienist licensed in Florida and Missouri who has been practicing for 30 years and is the past Chairman of the Missouri Dental Hygiene Association's Political Action Committee.  As a seasoned pro-life advocate and voter, she is keenly aware of pro-life issues and their impact on the culture. Leslie has also served in the campaigns of Col. Jack Jackson, former MO Representative for the 89th District.