So why are pro-abortion organizations “sounding the alarm” six months out from the 2022 mid-term elections?

By Dave Andrusko

The headline to the story that appeared today in The Hill is what we will be reading and hearing constantly over the next 218 days until the midterm elections: “Advocates sound the alarm on abortion rights ahead of midterms.”

It’s amusing to read how at various points in his story that Nathaniel Weixel both supports and undermines his thesis.

For example, cutting against the grain [pro-abortion] is this from Kristin Ford, vice president of communications at NARAL Pro-Choice America: “We think that once people really see the stakes and what it means for their ability to make their own decisions about their family, that that is going to translate into significant electoral activity in support of candidates who champion reproductive freedom and in opposition to candidates who are trying to take away that freedom.” 

And this from Jenny Lawson, National Campaign Director at Planned Parenthood Federation of America. 

“It is hitting people in a very real way right now and it will continue to do so as the Supreme Court makes this decision [on the Mississippi 15 week ban].

“The stakes have never been higher. The impact has never been clearer.”

So why the “alarm”? Simply because pro-abortionists don’t believe their own rhetoric and because they are desperate to gin up support among their supporters. 

There are various polls alluded to that were conduct by pro-abortion organizations with predictable results. “But despite the favorable polls, it may be difficult to translate those responses into voter turnout, especially if voters don’t believe the threat to abortion rights is imminent,” Weixel writes.

A very unfavorable survey was the Wall Street Journal poll we discussed last Friday. With lawmakers in several states pushing forward with bills that would ban abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy, 48% of voters said they would strongly or somewhat favor such restrictions, with exemptions to protect the life of the mother, while 43% were in opposition.

This comes as no surprise to our Movement. Last November, for example, Marquette University asked respondents

if they would favor or oppose a ruling to “uphold a state law that (except in cases of medical emergencies or fetal abnormalities) bans abortions after the 15th week of pregnancy” or if they haven’t heard enough about this to have an opinion. Thirty-seven percent favor a decision upholding such a law, while 32% would oppose such a ruling and 30% say they haven’t heard enough. In September, 40% favored upholding such a law, 34% opposed such a law, and 27% said they hadn’t heard enough.

And they are also the beneficiary of billionaire philanthropists such as MacKenzie Scott, the former wife of Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, who coughed up a whopping $345 million donation to Planned Parenthood.

Make no mistake, we must be vigilant and make sure we have the best pro-life candidates conducting the smartest campaigns.