HERE are the Facts

Media Matters stated:  “In a new anti-choice ad, the conservative Americans United for Life presents several nuggets of misinformation regarding how abortion is being treated in Democratic proposals for health care reform.  Because they lack any factual grounds for their argument, the group resorts to ominous music, sarcasm, and misdirection.”

Our Response:  All of the statements in the advertisement are facts.  If Media Matters truly wishes to dispute the accuracy of our statements, they should do that – not just paste in statements made by other sources about health care reform.  Nonetheless, below is the background information on our statements. 

Our assertions in the ad:

1.     “Senator Max Baucus’ health care bill requires the taxpayers to spend $6 billion establishing co-ops that could cover abortion.”

The Senate Finance (Baucus) Bill authorizes $6 billion in funding to create a Consumer Operated and Oriented Plan (CO-OP) program, which is described on pages 43-45 of the Redline, the most recent version of the bill (note – the bill is still only written in conceptual language, not statutory language).  The purpose of the CO-OP is “to foster the creation of non-profit, member-run health insurance companies that serve individuals in one or more states.”  The Federal funds (i.e. tax dollars) will be distributed as loans and grants.

Nothing in the Senate Finance Bill states whether or not these federally-funded health insurance companies will cover abortion; however, if they do, $6 billion in federal (taxpayer) funds will be used to set up insurance companies that cover abortion.  If members of the Finance Committee did not intend for these companies to include abortion coverage in their health care plans, why did they defeat Senator Hatch’s amendment during the Finance Committee’s mark-up that would have prohibited the authorization or appropriation of federal funds for “elective abortions and plans that cover such abortions”?  (Amendment #C14, failed 13-10).

Without the inclusion of explicit language excluding abortion coverage, like the amendment offered by Senator Hatch, there is no guarantee that abortion coverage will be excluded.

2.     The Capps Amendment routes federal dollars to private health insurance plans that cover abortion. 

The Capps Amendment to the House health care bill, H.R. 3200, provides the following:  “In the case of a qualified health benefits plan, the plan is not required (or prohibited) under this Act from providing coverage of services described in paragraph (4)(A) or (4)(B). . . .” (Subsection (d)(2), page 1, line 12 through page 2, line 5, emphasis added).  The referenced “services” in (4)(A) and (4)(B) are all abortions (those for which federal funding is allowed under the Hyde Amendment (rape, incest and the life of the mother) and those for which federal funding is prohibited under the Hyde Amendment).

In other words, private health care plans that cover abortion are allowed to participate in the “health insurance exchange” created by H.R. 3200.  Individuals who qualify to receive “affordability credits” (federal dollars) to help pay their insurance premiums may then select health care plans that cover abortion.  The end result – federal dollars subsidize health care plans that cover abortion.

Supporters of the Capps Amendment argue that this is not problematic, because the amendment establishes an accounting mechanism designed to separate the federal funds flowing into a health insurance plan that covers abortion from the portion of the premium paid by an individual.  In theory, only the portion paid by the individual may be used to pay for abortions, while the federal dollars are used to pay for non-abortion related services. The mechanism creates “silos” of money in an attempt to claim that no federal taxpayer dollars will fund abortion.

The Capps accounting mechanism is flawed because it is a restriction in name only. It will not work because money is fungible. Funds are funds, and money is freely exchangeable or replaceable, in whole or in part. Corporations, households, and small business all have one bottom line, and funding diverted away from abortion simply allows “unearmarked” money that a health plan would otherwise have used to pay for other types of care to flow towards abortion services. For instance, if your household received a tax credit to pay for child care, that would free up the money you had budgeted for child care expenses, allowing you to spend those dollars on other household expenses. Your household realizes a net gain of the amount of the child care tax credit.

Under Capps, even if certain funds have restrictions on use for abortion, an abortion-providing health care entity can simply substitute unrestricted funding in its place. In this way, federal taxpayers are supporting plans which offer abortion coverage and contributing funds towards the provision of abortion.   

3.     The Capps Amendment will include abortion in the public option . . .

The Capps Amendment provides that “[t]he public health insurance option shall provide coverage for services described in paragraph (4)(B) [“abortions for which funding is allowed” under the Hyde Amendment – currently in cases of rape, incest, and the life of the mother].  Nothing in this Act shall be construed as preventing the public health insurance option from providing for or prohibiting coverage of services described in paragraph (4)(A) [“abortions for which public funding is prohibited” under the Hyde Amendment]” (Subsection (d)(3), page 2, line 6 through 12, emphasis and brackets added).

In other words, the Capps amendment requires the public option to cover any abortions for which federal funding is currently allowed under the Hyde Amendment (rape, incest, and the life of the mother).  Therefore, in the event that the Hyde Amendment is ever eliminated or its exceptions are broadened, coverage of more or all abortions would be required. 

Furthermore, the amendment permits the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to include elective abortion (Sec. (4)(A)) as a mandatory minimum benefit in the public option.  There is little doubt that abortion will be included in the public option, given the proabortion stance of the current Secretary of HHS, Kathleen Sebelius, and President Obama’s statement at a Planned Parenthood conference on July 17, 2007:  “In my mind, reproductive care [i.e. abortion] is essential care, it is basic care . . . so it is at the center and at the heart of the plan that I proposed . . . .”

4.     . . . and ensures that every area of the country will have at least one health insurance plan that covers abortion.

The Capps Amendment provides that “[t]he Commissioner shall assure that, of Exchange participating health benefits plans offered in each premium rating area of the Health Insurance Exchange—there is at least one such plan that provides coverage of services described in subparagraphs (A) and (B) of section 122(d)(4) . . .” (Subsection (e), page 3, line 5 through page 4, line 14).

In other words, for the first time in history, the federal government will ensure that every area of the country has access to a private health insurance plan that includes abortion coverage. 

5.     All five committees defeated amendments that would have stopped an abortion mandate in health care reform. 

Below are the amendments defeated in the five committees of jurisdiction (three in the House and two in the Senate) that would have prohibited abortion coverage and funding:

House Ways and Means Committee

            The amendment offered by Rep. Sam Johnson (R-TX) to prohibit abortion coverage failed by a vote of 18-23. 

The amendment offered by Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA) to prohibit abortion funding failed by a vote of 19-22.

House Education and Labor Committee

            The two amendments offered by Rep. Mark Souder (R-IN) to prohibit abortion coverage and funding failed by votes of 19-29. 

House Energy and Commerce Committee

The two amendments offered by Rep. Stupak (D-MI) and Pitts (R-PA) to prohibit abortion coverage and funding failed by a vote of 30-29 and 27-31, respectively.

Senate Health, Education, Labor, & Pensions

An amendment offered by Sen. Hatch (R-UT) to prohibit abortions funding failed. (amdt. 227).

An amendment offered by Sen. Mike Enzi (R-WY) to prohibit abortion coverage failed (amdt. 276).

Senate Finance Committee

An amendment by Senator Hatch (R-UT) (#C14) to prohibit the authorization or appropriation of federal funds for “elective abortions and plans that cover such abortions,” with an exception for rape, incest, or the life of the mother failed 13-10.

6.     The pro-abortion legislators are telling you that the Hyde Amendment will stop federally funded abortions in health care reform.  Don’t be fooled. The Hyde Amendment does not apply to the current health care reform proposals. 

The Hyde Amendment is a spending limitation added to the yearly Labor, Health & Human Services (LHHS) Appropriations bill to prohibit federal funding from being used to pay for abortions, except in the cases of rape, incest or life of the mother.  Spending falls under Hyde if:

1)      The money is appropriated yearly through the Appropriations process, AND

2)      The money flows through HHS (as with Medicaid).

Both 1 & 2 are required for Hyde to apply.  The Hyde Amendment is used to prevent Medicaid funds from being used to pay for abortion. 

None of the new benefits discussed above meet both of these criteria.  Therefore, the Hyde Amendment will not apply to them.

• H.R. 3200 establishes a separate funding mechanism for the affordability credits (it bypasses the Appropriations process).  The credits are routed through a newly established Trust Fund financed through taxes on, among other sources, individuals and small businesses who do not meet health insurance coverage mandates. (See Sec. 207 (c)(2)).  Funding for the affordability credits neither runs through HHS nor depends upon the yearly Appropriations process; therefore, Hyde does not apply. 

• In the Senate HELP Bill, the Hyde Amendment will not apply toward the tax credits because the HELP bill bypasses the Appropriations process (See Sec. 3111). Funding for the tax credits will not depend upon the yearly Appropriations process; therefore, Hyde does not apply. 

• In the Senate Finance Bill, the Hyde Amendment will not apply toward the tax credits because the Baucus bill bypasses the Appropriations process.  Funding for the tax credits will not depend upon the yearly Appropriations process; therefore, Hyde does not apply. 

7.     President Obama and congress, when will you write explicit language excluding abortion from health care reform? America wants to know.  Don’t let your tax dollars go to abortion.

The detailed explanations above demonstrate that the health care reform proposals under consideration provide for federal coverage and funding for abortion.  All are changes in the status quo on abortion.  Without explicit language excluding abortion coverage and funding, these proposals will lead America down the road to paying for the destruction of innocent human life.

The U.S. Supreme Court has refused to hear an appeal in Choose Life Illinois v. White, upholding a Seventh Circuit ruling that the Illinois system for approving specialty plates was not discriminatory. 

The case was filed in 2004 after citizens had collected more than the requisite number of signatures, but were denied a “Choose Life” license plate.

Dr. Charmaine Yoest, President and CEO of Americans United for Life, observed, “Ever-increasing numbers of pro-life Americans want to proudly display the ‘Choose Life’ message on their vehicles — as evidenced by the fact that 22 states now offer such plates.  Illinois is unfairly censoring the freedom of speech of its citizens by not allowing them to obtain a plate with a life-affirming message.”

Mailee Smith, AUL Staff Counsel, noted, “Pro-life citizens in Illinois followed the rules in applying for a ‘Choose Life’ license plate, but were prohibited from obtaining the plate because the Illinois Secretary of State did not like its pro-life message.  As the last defense for constitutional rights, the U.S. Supreme Court should have stepped in to correct the State’s clearly unconstitutional action.”

As in other states, the proceeds from the proposed “Choose Life” license plates would have gone to organizations such as pregnancy care centers that provide adoption counseling and referrals.

Americans United for Life filed an amicus brief in the Seventh Circuit on behalf of a large coalition of Illinois pregnancy care centers.  That brief is available at http://www.aul.org/xm_client/client_documents/briefs/ChooseLifeILvWhite.pdf.  However, that court refused to accept amicus briefs filed by pro-life organizations.

A new poll from the Pew Research Center shows that support for legalized abortion has dropped to its lowest level in years. In the past year, the number of Americans who said abortion should be legal in most or all cases dropped from 54 percent to 47 percent – and pollsters note the shift “could be connected to Obama’s election.”

Dr. Charmaine Yoest, president and CEO of Americans United for Life, who met with the White House last month on the issue of abortion in health care, said of the dramatic shift, “The political implications of the shift illustrated by this poll are significant: including abortion in health care reform is a move out of touch with the American people.  Congress needs to remove the abortion mandate out of the current health care proposals.”

Despite Americans’ opposition to having their tax money pay for abortions, Minnesota Democratic Sen. Max Baucus’s health care bill requires the government to spend $6 billion establishing co-ops that could cover abortion. An amendment proposed last week by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) that would have explicitly prohibited federal funding and coverage of abortions was defeated by the Senate Finance Committee by a vote of 10-13.  The committee also voted down an amendment by Senator Hatch that would have prevented discrimination against any individual or entity that refused to provide, pay for, provide coverage of, or refer for abortions. 

Dr. Yoest added, “We continue to see a gap between rhetoric and reality on the Hill:  If members of Congress do not intend for the health care reform bills to fund and mandate abortion coverage, then why have they voted against all amendments that would have included explicit language excluding abortion funding and coverage?”

Today Family Research Council released its report, A Passion to Serve, A Vision for Life, highlighting the contributions of pregnancy resource centers (PRCs) over the last 40 years.  The release comes at an interesting time—the President is attempting to make abortion a recognized form of “health care,” and we are seeing increasing attacks on PRCs each legislative session in the form of draconian legislation regulating the activities of PRCs and sometimes even attempting to force them to present information on abortion.

The report released today offers a great rebuttal to those efforts: real health care protects women.  Real health care involves caring guidance to women in need, focusing on both her physical and psychological health.

In a press conference broadcast live over the internet, a panel of speakers—including physicians, clients served by PRCs, and the presidents of three national pregnancy center networks—discussed the impact of PRCs on women’s, adolescent, maternal, and child health and how the movement’s growth is driven by the public’s desire to support abortion alternatives.

This desire is also demonstrated each legislative session.  While we are seeing increasing bills targeting PRCs, those bills are far out-paced each year by bills providing funding and state support to abortion alternatives.

During the press conference, co-author of the report Chuck Donovan, Senior Research Fellow at Heritage Foundation, stated that abortions were reduced by tens of thousands last year through the work of PRCs, and that this work results in enormous healthcare savings.

Co-author Moira Gaul, Fellow and Director of Women’s and Reproductive Health at FRC, added that these volunteer-run PRCs assist over 5,000 Americans on a daily basis, providing a “substantial public health benefit to our nation.”

Ironically, as I drafted this blog entry, AUL received word that the Senate Finance Committee voted down important pro-life amendments that would have prevented the federal funding and coverage of abortion and protected the conscience rights of healthcare providers.

In AUL’s press release, Dr. Charmaine Yoest, President of Americans United for Life, said that the defeat of these amendments illustrates the gap between rhetoric and reality on the Hill over abortion in health care reform:

“President Obama, Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid have all told the American people that abortion will not be in health care reform.  Nevertheless, the defeat of these amendments demonstrates the gap between rhetoric and reality. These rhetorical assurances are not adding up to action.  The pro-life community will continue a vigorous fight to keep abortion out of health care reform.”

Obama’s claim that he wants to reduce abortions is mere rhetoric.  The amazing work of PRCs on a daily basis in truly reducing abortions is reality.

A Passion to Serve, A Vision for Life is available at http://www.apassiontoserve.org.  AUL will be posting an in-depth analysis of the report’s findings.

It was reported last week that, for the first time, surgeons in the U.K. have successfully treated an extremely ill heart patient with a combination of an artificial heart and his own stem cells.  The patient was fitted with a mechanical pump and then injected with 6 million of his own stem cells, in hope that those cells would repair damage in the patient’s heart.

This success raises questions for us in the United States.  First, why are embryonic stem cell advocates—and the President and his administration—still pushing for destructive research that has yet to successfully treat a single human person, while ignoring the need for substantial funding of adult stem cell research?  Once again, AUL is here to point out that adult stem cells have been used to treat or cure patients with over 70 different diseases and conditions, while there have been absolutely no successes with embryonic stem cell research.  We’re starting to feel like a broken record.

Yet the message is still not getting across.  To date, only sixteen states promote or encourage the use of umbilical cord cells and/or other forms of adult stem cells for research.

But an underlying question is also raised, one that is timely as we wait to find out what kind of health care we will be left with once the federal government takes over. 

In relaying the patient’s story, Sky News reported that NHS in the U.K. will not pay for this life-saving treatment.  Instead, the patient said he “relies on charity funding—or travels abroad to implant pumps in countries where governments are prepared to fund the £60,000 devices.” 

Interesting.  This patient—in a country with nationalized healthcare that is the predecessor to what President Obama is seeking for the United States—has to travel outside of the U.K. to other countries that are willing to pay for his treatment.

The surgeon himself stated, “I am very frustrated that all the work that I have done back home in the UK has to be translated into patient care in other countries,” and “”[w]e have helped to develop implantation programmes in France, Greece and Japan. It’s time we did it in the UK.”

He believes that this treatment protocol for heart patients could save 12,000 patients each year.

The article continues:

The Greek government has recently agreed to fund pumps for some patients with serious heart failure.

Professor Papakonstantinou [a heart surgeon at the Ahepa University Hospital in Thessaloniki] said they offer good value for money because patients are able to leave hospital and do not need drug treatment.

But in Britain, the NHS will only fund pumps in transplant patients who are waiting for a donor heart. Around 100 a year are implanted.

In a statement, the Department of Health said: “Before making such technology more widely available as an indefinite long-term treatment in end-stage heart failure, the NHS needs to ensure there is clear evidence of benefit.

Apparently 11,900 extra lives saved isn’t a clear enough benefit.
I’m not sure this is what most Americans have in mind when they think “health reform.”

The article from Sky News can be viewed at http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Health/Artificial-Heart-And-Stem-Cells-Save-Mans-Life-In-Pioneering-Surgery-By-British-Surgeon/Article/200909415387553?lpos=Health_Second_UK_News_Article_Teaser_Region_0&lid=ARTICLE_15387553_Artificial_Heart_And_Stem_Cells_Save_Mans_Life_In_Pioneering_Surgery_By_British_Surgeon

Senator Max Baucus (D-MT), Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee (SFC), released his Committee’s health care reform bill on September 16, 2009.  The SFC bill, America’s Healthy Future Act of 2009, provides the spending cuts which will offset the costs of health care reform.  The SFC and the Senate HELP Committee share jurisdiction over health care reform in the Senate, but only the SFC can determine the funding offsets.

The SFC is scheduled to mark up its bill this week.  For daily updates on life-related amendments in the SFC mark-up, click here.  The SFC marks up “in concept” as opposed to amending specific statutory language.  In other words, the process works like this:  First, a member of the Committee offers an amendment to change a provision of the bill.  After debating the amendment, the Committee members vote on it.  If a majority of the members vote in favor of the amendment, the bill’s language will reflect the change made by the amendment.  Three Senators, Orrin Hatch (R-UT), Michael Enzi (R-WY) and Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) plan to offer amendments during the mark up concerning abortion.

Currently, the SFC bill addresses abortion in a way that closely parallels the abortion provisions in the House health care reform bill, H.R. 3200, America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009, as added by the Capps amendment. One key difference in the SFC bill, however, is its rejection of the public health insurance option. Where the Capps amendment assures abortion will be a mandatory public plan benefit, the SFC bill does not raise this same concern because it does not include a public plan option.

Pro-life Provisions

On abortion the SFC bill:

Leaves intact state laws regarding the prohibition or requirement of coverage or funding for abortions, and state laws involving abortion-related procedural requirements (see pg. 25); and

Ensures that at least one insurance plan in each state exchange does not provide coverage for abortion (except for abortions in cases of rape, incest or life of the mother) (see pg. 27).  

On conscience protection:

Maintains Federal conscience protections and abortion-related antidiscrimination laws (see pg. 25).

Pro-abortion Provisions

However, the SFC bill also:

Allows qualified health plans to provide coverage for all abortions (see pg. 26) and mandates that at least one plan in each state exchange provide coverage of all abortions (see pg. 27);

Permits “cost-sharing credits” to go to private plans that cover abortion services provided that the plans “segregate” the funds and use only premium dollars to pay for the abortion services (however, this accounting mechanism does not hide the fact that the government is allowing the plans that cover abortions to receive the credits) (see pg. 26);

Would allow the federal government to mandate abortion coverage for abortions in private health insurance if the Hyde amendment ever fails (see pg. 26).

Is not funded through the Labor, Health and Human Services (LHHS) Appropriations Bill, so the Hyde Amendment (which prohibits the use of taxpayer money for abortion through the Medicaid program) does not apply to the bill. 

AUL Action urges the SFC to accept the pro-life amendments offered by Senators Hatch and Enzi in the upcoming days and to respect life through this important reform.

End of Life Provision

There are no provisions addressing end-of-life issues in the Bill.

Physician Quality Reporting / Rationing Provision

The SFC bill would require the Secretary of HHS “to provide reports to physicians that compare their resource use with that of other physicians or groups of physicians caring for patients with similar conditions.”  Beginning in 2015, “payment would be reduced by five percent if an aggregation of the physician‘s resource use is at or above the 90th percentile of national utilization.”  In other words, doctors who fall in the top 10% of expenditures, compared to doctors treating similar patients and conditions, would be penalized.  This could lead doctors to make decisions based on reimbursement concerns rather than concerns for their patients.

This week, Americans United for Life’s legislative arm AUL Action met with senior White House officials Melody Barnes, Tina Tchen and Joshua DuBois.  AUL Action President and CEO Dr. Charmaine Yoest called on the White House to clarify President Obama’s recent statement of support for keeping abortion funding out of health care reform.  After the meeting, Dr. Yoest stated that the White House remained noncommittal on explicit language excluding abortion from the health care bill. 

“After the meeting, we remain deeply concerned about abortion funding and the abortion mandate in health care reform.  Ms. Barnes reiterated the President’s statement about opposing abortion funding in his address before Congress last week but the White House would not commit to language that explicitly excludes abortion from health care reform.  The reality on the Hill right now is that the health care bills do include abortion funding. 

Without a specific statutory amendment that includes an explicit ban on federal funding and coverage, taxpayers will be paying for abortion.  Including abortion in health care is something the pro-life movement will oppose vigorously.”  

Dr. Yoest provided the White House with a brief from the Americans United for Life legal team that documents why anything less than a explicit ban on abortion funding and coverage will allow government-funded abortion.     

Dr. Yoest also delivered a petition with over 39,000 signatures from pro-life Americans telling President Obama that they urge him to veto any bill that does not specifically forbid mandating insurance companies to cover abortion.  The petition also urges the President to veto any bill that could make taxpayers responsible for directly or indirectly paying for abortion.  

For further information, please visit AUL’s health care website: www.RealHealthCareRespectsLife.com

CBN Story: Pro-Lifers Suspicious of New Health Care Bill

Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT) has released his proposal for “America’s Health Future Act.”  This bill has been said to address the pro-life community’s concerns about abortion funding and coverage and freedom of conscience. The proposal deals with the issue of abortion by incorporating similar language to the Capps amendment to H.R. 3200, which does not explicitly exclude abortion coverage and funding; in fact, the Capps Amendment mandates abortion funding. 

Americans United for Life’s President and CEO Dr. Charmaine Yoest said, “This bill provides $6 billion for the establishment of health insurance cooperatives which would be permitted to cover abortion.  Under the Baucus bill, abortions permitted under the Hyde amendment (currently in cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother) can be mandated in the minimum benefits package. If the Hyde Amendment is ever eliminated, the Baucus bill would mandate coverage for all abortions.  Real health care respects life and the pro-life community will never support any bill that does not explicitly say that abortion funding and coverage is not allowed. ”

Americans United for Life’s sister organization, Americans United for Life Action, is meeting with the White House tomorrow to discuss concerns regarding abortion funding and coverage, conscience protection and end of life issues in the current health care reform proposals. 

Mary Harned, Americans United for Life’s Staff Counsel cautions that there is still a long road ahead in the health care fight: “The mark-up of the Baucus bill will begin next Tuesday.  Even if language expressly excluding abortion funding and coverage is added to the bill, it will then need to be reconciled with the bill reported from the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee.  After that process, the bill will then: (1) go through an amendment process on the Senate Floor; (2) go to conference where it will be reconciled with whatever bill the House produces.”

 For further information, please visit AUL’s health care website: www.RealHealthCareRespectsLife.com

In his address to a Joint Session of Congress this evening, President Obama repeated his claim that “no federal dollars will be used to fund abortion.”  However, he failed to commit to supporting language that explicitly prohibits the use of taxpayer dollars for abortion.

AUL’s President and CEO, Dr. Charmaine Yoest, expressed disappointment in the President’s address, stating, “President Obama has previously articulated a desire to see a decrease in the number of abortions performed in the United States.  Yet he is throwing his support behind legislation that will equate abortion with basic health care.”  Dr. Yoest further explained that “Americans understand that abortion is not health care, and that the women and unborn children in our country deserve better.” 

AUL’s Staff Counsel, Mary Harned, said, “No matter how President Obama and Congress change the structure of the health care reform proposals — whether there is a public option, co-op, exchange, or the like — any legislation that provides government funding for health care must contain explicit language that excludes abortion.  Abortion is not health care; however, based on how courts have interpreted Medicaid, we know that courts will interpret any legislation relating to government-funded health care as requiring abortion coverage unless there is an explicit prohibition (like Hyde).”

In their legal memoranda, AUL’s legal team has carefully explained how existing law will not prevent the health care bills from mandating taxpayer funding of abortion.  They also documented how seven circuit courts have held that abortion is covered under Medicaid, necessitating an explicit prohibition on the inclusion of abortion.  Dr. Yoest stated that “courts will certainly interpret any legislation that provides federal funding for health care as they have interpreted Medicaid in the past.  So, any health care reform must include an explicit prohibition on abortion funding and coverage.”

Current proposals mandate abortion coverage and funding in a number of ways, including:

1. An amendment to H.R. 3200 permits and may require abortion coverage in the public health insurance plan, and permits taxpayer funding of private plans that cover elective abortion through the provision of affordability credits
2. The Senate HELP bill delegates to a “Medical Advisory Committee” the role of deciding what benefits any private or public health care plan must offer. This Committee is expected to include abortion as a required minimum benefit.
3. Prior court holdings that state that abortion is included within several of Medicaid’s mandatory categories of care (inpatient services, outpatient services, and preventative care) will certainly apply to any federal statute revising Medicaid and involving health care reform.
4. The rejection of several key pro-life amendments in the House and Senate Committees, which would have ensured that abortion was not funded in the bills, demonstrates that the bills are intended to mandate abortion.

WASHINGTON, DC – Bryan Slater has joined Americans United for Life as Vice President of Operations.  Mr. Slater will be overseeing all administrative, operational and financial functions which includes personnel and development.

Dr. Charmaine Yoest, AUL President & CEO said: “I am very pleased Bryan has joined our team.  He brings a background of extensive administrative experience and additional political background that will be a tremendous asset to AUL in this period of expansion.”

Mr. Slater said: “It is a great honor to be a part of AUL, a thriving organization with a reputation for excellence and unparalleled expertise as the legal arm of the pro-life community.  Working to coordinate AUL’s new DC office is a significant strategic move forward for AUL.  I am honored to be a part of this impressive organization as it expands its organizational infrastructure in a time critical to defending life.”

Before joining AUL, Mr. Slater served at the Department of Labor as the White House Liaison and Director of Intergovernmental Affairs at the Small Business Administration. Previously, he served for three years as the Secretary of Administration in the Cabinet of former Governor of Virginia Jim Gilmore.  There, he managed 14 state agencies for a combined budget of over $500 million.   Prior to that, he managed two of Governor Gilmore’s campaigns — for the gubernatorial race and Gilmore’s prior Attorney General campaign.  He also was the Political Director at the RNC and the Executive Director of the Georgia Republican Party.

He is a graduate of Ferrum College and of the University of Richmond where he majored in Political Science.

Media Contact
Heather Smith
202-270-9962
heather.smith@aul.org
##

Washington, DC – This week, the Montana Supreme Court heard arguments in a case which could make Montana the first state to legalize assisted suicide – and even active euthanasia – by judicial fiat, without the involvement or consent of the state legislature or the people of Montana.

For nearly two years, Americans United for Life (AUL) has taken a primary role in defending Montana’s existing ban on assisted suicide against a challenge brought by national advocacy groups promoting assisted suicide.  AUL filed the lead amicus (“friend of the court”) brief in the case, representing 28 bipartisan Montana legislators and arguing that there is no right to assisted suicide under the Montana Constitution.

AUL also coordinated the efforts of more than a dozen groups and individuals who also filed amicus briefs supporting the ban.  AUL Senior Vice President of Legal Affairs William Saunders recently participated in moot court preparations of the Montana Attorney General for yesterday’s arguments.

Dr. Charmaine Yoest, President and CEO of Americans United for Life stated, “Suicide advocates disingenuously argue that no one is harmed in assisted suicide.  Not only does this claim ignore the fact that physicians are put in a position of killing their patients, but it also ignores the immeasurable damage caused to families of the victims and the inherent and considerable threats it poses to our most vulnerable citizens and to the medical community as a whole.”

In December 2008, a state district court ruled that, under the Montana Constitution, individuals have a right to suicide, and a right to assistance in committing suicide, striking down the state’s longstanding ban on assisted suicide.  Notably, the ruling did not place any restrictions on the practice, leaving room for the active euthanasia of patients by their physicians.

Mailee Smith, AUL Staff Counsel, noted, “Suicide advocates conveniently ignore compelling evidence, primarily from the Netherlands, proving that legalized assisted suicide inevitably leads to the active euthanasia of patients – even without their consent.  The lower court’s decision places no restrictions on the use of physician-assisted suicide and, if the Montana Supreme Court allows this frightening decision to stand, the active euthanasia of patients will follow.”

The Montana Supreme Court is expected to issue a ruling before the end of the year.  AUL’s brief in the case is available at http://www.aul.org/xm_client/client_documents/2009-04-Baxter_v_MT.pdf.

Media Contact
Heather Smith
202-270-9962
heather.smith@aul.org
##

Washington, DC — An Illinois trial court enjoined the enforcement of a draconian rule intended to force individual pharmacists and pharmacies to fill prescriptions for so-called “emergency contraception” in direct violation of federal law, the Illinois Health Care Right of Conscience Act, and the conscience rights of targeted pharmacists and pharmacies.

Dr. Charmaine Yoest, CEO & President of Americans United for Life, responded, “As our nation debates health care reform, it is critical that we reach the same conclusion as the Illinois court:  real health care reform respects conscience.  Protecting the conscience rights of all health care providers is critical to the continuing viability and safety of our health care system.”

Denise Burke, AUL Vice President of Legal Affairs added, “Protecting conscience helps to ensure that providers enter and remain in the health care professions, helping to meet the rising demand for quality care.  On the other hand, failing to protect conscience will most certainly compromise basic health care for the entire nation.”

The case, Morr-Fitz v. Quinn, involves a constitutional challenge to a 2005 Executive Order signed by then-Governor Rod Blagojevich mandating that all prescriptions for Plan B or so-called “emergency contraception” be filled “without delay” and, consequentially, without regard to the conscience objections of individual pharmacists or pharmacies.  In December 2008, the Illinois Supreme Court reinstated the case, overturning the decisions of two lower courts to dismiss it, and returned the case to the circuit court in Springfield which entered an injunction against the enforcement of the Order on August 21, 2009.

AUL provided legal support to the plaintiff-pharmacists and pharmacies from the initiation of this case, most recently filing an amicus brief before the Illinois Supreme Court on behalf of American Association of Pro Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, the Christian Medical & Dental Associations, the Catholic Medical Association, and other medical groups. The brief argued that the Plaintiffs’ rights of conscience — specifically their rights to decline to dispense prescriptions in violation of their consciences — are guaranteed under both federal and Illinois law.

AUL’s brief is available at http://www.aul.org/xm_client/client_documents/briefs/Morr-FitzvBlagILontheMerits.pdf

Media Contact
Heather Smith
202-270-9962
heather.smith@aul.org
##

Washington D.C. — The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals has dissolved an injunction against the enforcement of an Ohio law strictly regulating the provision of the dangerous abortion drug, RU-486.

Dr. Charmaine Yoest, CEO and President of Americans United for Life, stated, “This is a victory for women’s health. Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers have readily admitted that they administer RU-486 in violation of the FDA-approved protocol for the drug. In response, Ohio rightly sought to protect women from such dangerous practices and the Sixth Circuit has ratified that decision.”

In July, the Ohio Supreme Court clarified that the 2004 law mandates that abortionists comply with the FDA-approved protocol when administering RU-486 and follow the instructions contained in the drug’s label. In light of that clarification, the Sixth Circuit vacated the injunction prohibiting the enforcement of the law and remanded the case to the federal district court.

Mailee Smith, AUL Staff Counsel, stated, “The drug manufacturer has publicly admitted that 29 women around the world have died after using RU-486. Eight of those women were American. That Planned Parenthood would even argue that it should be permitted to administer RU-486 in an untested and unapproved manner is appalling.”

AUL filed an amicus brief in the Sixth Circuit on behalf of Senator (Dr.) Tom A. Coburn, M.D. (OK), and Representatives Roscoe Bartlett (MD), John Boehner (OH), Steve Chabot (OH), Trent Franks (AZ), Jim Jordan (OH), Patrick McHenry (NC), Joseph Pitts (PA), Jean Schmidt (OH), Chris Smith (NJ), and Mark Souder (IN). It is available at
https://secure3.convio.net/xm_client/client_documents/briefs/AUL-PP_v_Strickland.pdf.
AUL also filed an amicus brief before the Ohio Supreme Court, which is available at
https://secure3.convio.net/xm_client/client_documents/briefs/Rogers_v_PlannedParenthood.pdf.

About Americans United for Life
Americans United for Life (AUL) is a nonprofit, public-interest law and policy organization whose vision is a nation in which everyone is welcomed in life and protected in law. The first national pro-life organization in America, AUL has been committed to defending human life through vigorous judicial, legislative, and educational efforts at both the federal and state levels since 1971. The Wall Street Journal has profiled AUL, and PBS’ Frontline program chronicled AUL’s successful efforts in Mississippi.

Media Contact
Heather Smith
202-270-9962
heather.smith@aul.org
##

It’s nearly Independence Day, and, here in the Yoest household, that means a road trip! Friday afternoon, Jack and I are filling up our black Suburban and taking our ‘Penta-posse’ — our five kids — to Charlottesville, VA, for our 14-year-old son John’s all-star baseball tournament. How wonderful to spend July 4th in a city steeped in American history near the University of Virginia (my alma mater!), which was founded by Thomas Jefferson just a few miles from his Monticello home.

John Yoest, age 14

But although the calendar — and the heat index — says it’s July 4, in my heart it feels like late November.

Independence Day has always been a kind of early Thanksgiving for me. I think about the sacrifices made by the Founding Fathers and their families, and of the blood shed by patriots so that America could be free, and I am so very thankful to be able to raise my children in the greatest country in the world.

The Founders wrote in the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

In naming three inalienable rights as endowed by humanity’s Creator, the Declaration’s authors were recognizing something unique and beautiful about being human. Taken together, those rights enable all the goods necessary for human flourishing.

More than that, the order in which the Founders listed the rights carries special meaning; it reveals the way one right flows from another. The right to liberty — the freedom to thrive — flows from the right to life, and from that liberty flows the ability to seek the happiness that will give one’s life meaning and purpose.

I’m so honored to be working with the AUL team to further the understanding that the right to life enshrined in our Declaration extends to all humanity and includes the unborn.

The right to life is the foundation of all the freedoms we enjoy as Americans. This is what we must teach our children on this family holiday, so that they and their children and their children’s children may continue to live in a free country long after you and I have left this world.

Jack, Helena, Hannah, Charmaine, John, James, and Sarah at Hannah’s recent Sweet Sixteen celebration.

My friend and AUL colleague Bob told me today about a wonderful Fourth of July tradition in his family. Every year, he and his wife host a barbecue that is highlighted by having one of the children present, usually his own daughter, read out loud the entire Declaration of Independence.

Jack and I like that idea so much that we are adopting this as a Yoest family tradition. I think we’ll have Helena, our 12-year-old who has a dramatic flair, read the Declaration of Independence before we watch the fireworks after John’s baseball game. If you’d like join us in that tradition, click here for a printable copy of the Declaration.

Wishing you and your family a happy and healthy Fourth,

Charmaine, and the Yoest family

P.S. On Monday, the AUL team will be back at the job of defending the right to life, all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court. For the latest news on President Obama’s high-court nominee, visit Sotomayor411.com. It’s a one-stop resource we’ve created to share in-depth background and analysis from our legal team on Judge Sotomayor, including detailed information on why she is worse on life issues than retiring Justice David Souter.

Thanks to your support, this past week saw AUL at the center of two national news stories, including an outstanding victory for life.

• The Associated Press, CBS News, and dozens of other media outlets across the country spotlighted Sotomayor411.com — our one-stop resource for background on Judge Sotomayor’s record on our life issues — and our campaign showing she would be “Worse than Souter.”
• In a case that featured heavy AUL involvement, the Fourth Circuit upheld Virginia’s partial-birth infanticide law. What’s more, the arguments our legal team presented to the court featured prominently in its decision.

These and other AUL success stories testify to the power of our pro-life advocacy to influence minds and hearts.

But we must reach higher.

With the Sotomayor confirmation hearings set to begin on July 13, we need “all hands on deck” to show the Senate and the nation that Judge Sotomayor’s radical record — including her longtime participation in a pro-abortion advocacy group — makes her unfit for the highest court in the land.

AUL is not only America’s oldest national nonprofit working exclusively to promote life. We also have the largest and most experienced team of pro-life attorneys working to defend life in law.

We have already been meeting on Capitol Hill with members of the Senate Judiciary Committee to brief them on Judge Sotomayor’s agenda and urge them to ask her the tough questions.

But to do that takes long hours of legal research and lots of legwork on Capitol Hill.

That’s why I’m asking you to stand with us. Our fiscal year ends on June 30, and we must close strong. Over the last few months we’ve been able to hire new attorneys – Bill Saunders, a Harvard-trained expert in life issues, and Mary Harned, former Chief Counsel on the Judiciary Committee to Senator Tom Coburn – and we plan to bring in even more expertise to keep the focus on life in these challenging times.

We only have 48 hours left before we close out our books for the year. We need your support now to make sure Congress hears your opinions about Judge Sotomayor! Join our support team today. By acting before midnight, Tuesday, June 30, you further enable us for the confirmation battle which begins just two weeks from today.

When U.S. Sen. Jim DeMint, a pro-life Republican from South Carolina, asked Judge Sotomayor if she believed the unborn had any rights whatsoever, she told him she had “never thought about it.” We need to get the Senate Judiciary Committee to think about the consequences of confirming a Supreme Court justice whose radical record shows she would vote to overturn all legal protections for the unborn.

Will you join us? Make your donation today and be part of this historic effort to protect and defend the hard-won victories of the pro-life movement.

Thank you for supporting our work and and standing with us For Life!

Charmaine Yoest, Ph.D.
President & CEO
Americans United for Life

P.S.  If Judge Sotomayor makes it to the U.S. Supreme Court, she will have the power to read a fundamental right to abortion into the Constitution. Send your donation by midnight tomorrow, June 30, and help us make sure the Senate Judiciary Committee calls her to account for her radical record.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Washington, DC — Former Chief Counsel on the Judiciary Committee staff of Senator Tom Coburn, Mary Harned has joined Americans United for Life (AUL) as Of Counsel to assist in spearheading America’s oldest national pro-life organization through its efforts to counter the confirmation of U.S. Supreme Court nominee Judge Sotomayor.

Dr. Charmaine Yoest, AUL President & CEO said: “I am very pleased to have Mary join our team.  We are extremely fortunate to gain the benefit of Mary’s track record on Capitol Hill.  She will be a valuable resource for us as we continue our active involvement providing legal expertise in advance of the Senate’s confirmation hearings.”

Ms. Harned said: “I am honored to join AUL in this crucial time of a judicial confirmation.  I look forward to helping AUL bring attention to Judge Sotomayor’s record of radicalism on the abortion issue and her outspoken defense of judicial intervention.  It has been a long-time dream of mine to work with AUL to defend and protect life.”

A cum laude graduate of the University of Alabama School of Law, Ms. Harned comes to AUL after serving as Chief Counsel to U.S. Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) on his Judiciary Committee staff.  She was his legal counsel during the Roberts and Alito confirmation hearings.  Prior to that, she served as Legislative Counsel and Judiciary Counsel to Alabama U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions, the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee.  She lives with her husband and son on Capitol Hill.

A big “thank you” to the hundreds who participated in last week’s conference call to learn the inside story about the Judge Sotomayor nomination. This week’s edition of “For Life!” features opportunities for you to get involved in defending the dignity of human life in your state and throughout the country.

Currently the Senate confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nomineee Judge Sonia Sotomayor are scheduled to begin July 13. Make sure to visit AUL’s new Web site Sotomayor411.com, and bookmark it, as we’ll be adding important information and initiatives to the site as the hearings approach.

Thank you for your work and for being a part of this movement!

Charmaine Yoest, PhD
President & CEO

Who Is the Real Judge Sotomayor? Get the 411!
The White House is attempting to paint Judge Sotomayor as one who would maintain the liberal “balance” on the Supreme Court but her record of abortion activism shows she is even worse on life issues than retiring Justice David Souter. With the confirmation hearings coming up fast, help us get the word out to pro-life America about her pro-abortion agenda. Visit our NEW site, Sotomayor411.com, a one-stop resource for all the essential information about where Judge Sotomayor stands on the life issues.

Don’t let your friends be in the dark about this important judicial nomination. One way you can help is to spread the word on our Web site by adding a Sotomayor411.com button to your own Web page.

Hear Our Experts Weigh In
Did you miss our conference call on Judge Sotomayor? Now you can listen to the call online. You’ll learn what to expect in this important U.S. Supreme Court nomination and the latest on AUL’s work to protect life.

Take AUL to the Beach
Christianity Today magazine just named Politics for the Greatest Good: The Case for Prudence in the Public Square, by AUL’s own Senior Counsel Clarke D. Forsythe, as one of “Ten Theology Books for Your Beach Bag.” The editors write: “The senior counsel for Americans United for Life advocates the neglected virtue of prudence for fighting abortion” and adds that “his timing is impeccable” in light of current events. Order your copy today from Amazon.com.

When CNN, ABC, the Washington Post, National Public Radio, and hundreds more news outlets wanted expert pro-life legal commentary on President Obama’s nomination of Second Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court, Americans United for Life (AUL) was there. Drawing upon our legal team’s months of research, I and other AUL experts explained to the media why pro-lifers should be concerned about Judge Sotomayor’s long history advocating radical judicial activism.

Now, as the confirmation process begins, I would like to invite you to listen to the latest on Judge Sotomayor from that same team of pro-life legal experts. Please join me for a 45-minute conference call on Thursday, June 11, at 9:00 pm ET / 6:00 pm PT. The conference call is free, but space is limited—please register online.

Dial in to the conference call to hear the inside story and ask questions on the Sotomayor nomination, with reports from me and the AUL legal team whose insights are making the news:

• Senior Counsel Clarke Forsythe, sharing the results of our legal team’s research into Sotomayor’s record and judicial philosophy;
• Senior Counsel William Saunders with a report from Washington on where things stand with the nomination;
• Vice President of Legal Affairs Denise Burke, discussing current trends in legislation and the importance of the Supreme Court in working to build a nation where every human being is welcomed in life and protected in law;
• And Vice President of Governmental Affairs Dan McConchie, giving talking points to use when contacting your Senators and when discussing the nomination with your friends and family.

This is a critical time in our nation’s history, when the courts are at a crossroads, and critical abortion regulations like the partial-birth abortion ban and informed-consent laws hang in the balance.

Will you join me for this call and learn how you can use the latest information on Sotomayor to influence Congress and the rest of the nation in favor of protecting life? Register now for the conference call.

I look forward to your participation as we work to build a pro-life America.

For Life,

Charmaine Yoest, Ph.D.
President & CEO

P.S. — Please register now and join AUL’s pro-life legal experts on Thursday, June 11, 9:00 pm ET / 6:00 pm PT.  And please consider a gift to assist with this and our other pro-life efforts. 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Washington, DC — Heather Smith has joined Americans United for Life (AUL) as Director of Communications.  Her focus will be to oversee corporate communications including traditional media, internet, and new media.

Dr. Charmaine Yoest, AUL President & CEO commented: “I am very pleased Heather is joining our team.  As a veteran producer of radio, television, and film, she brings a wealth of experience and an insider’s perspective to our communications efforts.”

Miss Smith said: “It is a great honor to join the foremost pro-life organization in the country.  I look forward to expanding AUL’s media outreach and working with the AUL legal team toward our goal of seeing a nation in which everyone is welcomed in life and protected in law.”

She has produced three top-10 nationally syndicated radio programs: The G. Gordon Liddy Show, The Laura Ingraham Show, and most recently, The Lars Larson Show.  She has also worked at FOX News Channel, where she produced Weekend Live with Tony Snow and FOX News Live, and booked guests for FOX’s breaking news special programming.   In addition, she has produced film documentaries hosted by former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich and by Dick Morris.  Previously she booked interviews for WFLA-AM’s The Shannon Burke Show and worked on several documentaries for PBS and History Channel. 

Miss Smith has been in front of the microphone as well, having begun her media career in 1997 as an alternative rock disc jockey and radio talk show host.  She has also been interviewed on FOX News Channel, CNN, MSNBC, and nationally syndicated talk radio programs about grassroots-activism campaigns she oversaw in Florida.

Princeton University Prof. Robert P. George, who sits on Americans United for Life’s Board of Advisors, recently engaged in a discussion at the National Press Club with Pepperdine University Prof. Douglas Kmiec, who created a stir during the last presidential campaign with his assertion that Barack Obama’s agenda supported the pro-life movement’s goals.

George’s opening speech, “Obama and His Pro-Life Apologists,” outlined the stark differences between his views and those of Kmiec:

So it is clear that what divides us as a nation, and what divides Barack Obama, on one side, from Robert George and Douglas Kmiec, on the other, is not whether the being whose life is taken in abortion and in embryo-destructive research is a living individual of the human species—a human being; it is whether all human beings, or only some, possess fundamental dignity and a right to life.

Taxpayers in New York may soon be paying women to put their lives at risk.

The ethics committee of New York’s Empire State Stem Cell Board recently recommended that taxpayer money be given to researchers who have paid women for the harvesting of their eggs for research purposes.  If the full stem-cell board agrees, New York will become the first state to allow such reimbursement.

But the ethics committee shirked a glaring problem: egg harvesting endangers women’s health.  Egg donation requires preliminary hormone treatment, and this hormone therapy is accompanied by serious health risks including an increased risk of ovarian cancer and complications with future pregnancies.  Other risks include ovarian hyper-stimulation syndrome (OHSS), which can cause loss of fertility, organ failure, and death.

And in the current economic climate, more women will be putting their lives at risk.  At a “reimbursement” rate around $10,000, women hard-hit by the economy will be more likely to take risks they would not have otherwise taken.  The result is the commoditization of eggs and the exploitation of women.

What’s more is that there is no benefit in sight, and certainly not to the women involved.  Quoting Dr. David Prentice, Wesley Smith in Human Dignity in the Biotech Century explains that it is not possible to obtain even enough eggs to treat diabetic patients in the U.S., let alone all of the other patients who have been promised (intangible) benefits from embryonic stem cell research.  Dr. Prentice has computed that it would take 800 million eggs just to treat the 16 million Americans suffering from diabetes.  Smith concludes, “There simply aren’t enough women of childbearing age to supply all these eggs.”

In other words, the harvesting of eggs will not help produce cures, and women’s lives are placed in danger simply to satisfy scientific curiosity.  This can be categorized as nothing other than the exploitation of women.

In 2008, AUL, in conjunction with Dr. Prentice, provided an extensive report to New York’s stem cell board demonstrating that therapies utilizing adult stem cells are already treating patients and that any taxpayer money should be used for treatments that are already proven to be working.  The ethics committee ignored these hard facts.

Apparently, scientific whim is more important than the lives of women.

Americans United for Life President & CEO Dr. Charmaine Yoest says in a commentary for National Public Radio:

When President Obama described the kind of judge he would pick for the Supreme Court, his top requirement wasn’t fidelity to the Constitution. It was feelings — or, as Obama put it, “empathy.”

Now, with his choice of Sonia Sotomayor to fill the vacancy on the highest court of the land, no one can say the president didn’t warn us. Sotomayor is a judge who makes it clear she decides cases on feelings, not facts. She is a radical judicial activist who readily admits that she applies her personal political agenda when deciding cases.

Read the rest of Dr. Yoest’s commentary on NPR.org.

Dear Friend, 

I know you’ve seen all of the polling data that’s been circulating recently about Americans’ views on life issues.  In interviews I’ve done over the past week on FOX News, in the New York Times, and in the Los Angeles Times, the media seems shocked by the country’s pro-life attitude.  But you and I aren’t surprised.  We know how important a culture of life is to Americans.

Just this week, AUL sponsored a poll to learn what Americans want in a Supreme Court nominee.  And the overwhelming majority said that they don’t want liberal activist judges legislating from the bench. 

That’s not all.  Democrats, Republicans, and Independents all agree that the President’s nominee should be someone who won’t reverse common-sense abortion regulations or support partial-birth abortions.  (The results of the poll on our website, along with a letter I sent yesterday to every U.S. Senator.)

And yet, as we detailed in the report we released last week, the current “short-list” of potential Supreme Court nominees is filled with pro-abortion ideologues and committed judicial activists.  For example, one person on the list is Janet Napolitano, the current head of Homeland Security . . . and the same person who defended the DHS report that listed abortion opponents among extremists because we’re pro-life!

The new administration in Washington wants to ignore what AUL’s new polling data confirms:  Americans oppose activist judges with a political agenda.  But they underestimate us — you and me and millions of other people who won’t stay silent when it comes to protecting life in this country. 

That’s why it’s so important we continue to make ourselves heard.  As President Obama prepares to nominate someone for the Supreme Court, we need to continue to make our commitment to life known.  

In the DHS report, bumper stickers were mentioned as indicators of “extremism” . . . so we’ve got one for you!

Will you help us by publicly standing together with AUL to tell the federal government that we won’t be silent?  With a gift of $25, $10, or even $5, you can receive an AUL window decal as a way to demonstrate your commitment to life and solidarity with AUL’s efforts. 

We want to send a loud and clear message that we will not be intimidated into backing down.  Do you have friends who will join us in speaking up for those who can’t defend themselves?  We’ll send you decals for them as well! 

Even the Washington Post has noticed how “energized” pro-lifers are!  The stakes are so high — thank you for standing with us! 

For life,
 

Charmaine Yoest, Ph.D.
President & CEO
Americans United for Life

P.S. — Please take a public stand that you are pro-life.  With your gift of $25, $10, or even $5, we will send you AUL window decals so you can publicly demonstrate your commitment to life.  Thank you for standing up for life with AUL!

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Washington, DC — William L. “Bill” Saunders today joined Americans United for Life (AUL) as Senior Counsel.  Mr. Saunders will be leading the development of an international edition of AUL’s definitive legal guide Defending Life and contributing to AUL’s work on bioethics, rights of conscience, and end of life issues.

Dr. Charmaine Yoest, AUL President & CEO said: “I am very pleased Bill is joining our team.  As a Harvard-trained attorney with extensive publications and a prominent reputation in the pro-life movement, Bill’s addition is a strategic move for AUL as we head into our next phase of development. He will be an important resource for us as we move toward the coming Supreme Court nomination.”

Mr. Saunders said: “It is a great honor to be a part of AUL, an organization with a reputation for excellence and unparalleled expertise.  Working to expand the protection of human life beyond our national borders and to provide more resources to pro-life allies around the globe is a significant venture.  This new project is critical as we see the targeted threats to life growing internationally.”

Mr. Saunders was featured in Harvard’s first Guide to Conservative Public Interest Law in 2003, and again in the 2008 edition, and he served on Harvard’s Advisory Committee for its 2008 celebration of public interest law.
 
He speaks and writes frequently on international law and life-related topics such as stem cell research and cloning.  He has submitted testimony on several occasions to the President’s Council on Bioethics and has briefed Congressional staff multiple times on stem cell research and cloning.  He delivered the annual J. Michael Miller Lecture at the University of St. Thomas (on international law) in February 2007, the annual R. Wayne Kraft Memorial Lecture (on bioethics) at DeSales University in February 2004, and the annual James Moore Lecture (on Sudan) at Millikin University in 1999.  He has also lectured, and/or has been published, in many countries, including Italy, Germany, Poland, Slovakia, Mexico, Qatar, Malaysia, Romania, Hong Kong, and the United Kingdom.
 
President Bush appointed Mr. Saunders to serve on the United States delegation to the UN Special Session on Children in 2001-2002.  In 2004, he served on the NGO Working Committee in connection with the Doha Intergovernmental Conference for the Family.  He served on the organizing committee for the conferences of the World Congress of Families in Mexico City (2004), in Poland (2007), in Amsterdam (2009), and is a member of that organization’s Management Committee.

Mr. Saunders served previously as Senior Fellow, Human Rights Counsel, and Director of the Center for Human Life and Bioethics at the Family Research Council.  He has also practiced law with the firm Covington and Burling and taught law at the Catholic University of America.  A member of the Supreme Court bar, he has authored numerous legal briefs in state and federal (and foreign) courts.

Abortion has been a very hot topic in the news lately, with the retirement of Justice Souter, Obama’s stance on the issue coming to the forefront, several pro-life bills presented in various states, Gallup’s new poll concluding the majority of Americans consider themselves pro-life, among others. As a result of abortion becoming the center of much dialog around the country, Americans United for Life has been one of the main go-to pro-life groups in the news. Below are a few (among many) articles appeared over the weekend, highlighting AUL’s recent activity in the media.
 
Abortion, gay marriage complicate Supreme Court decision, Los Angeles Times

51% identify as ‘pro-life’ in U.S., Los Angeles Times

Obama’s Short List of Abortion Supporters, by Charmaine Yoest, Human Events

In addition to these media appearances, AUL’s President & CEO, Charmaine Yoest, will appear on Special Report with Bret Baier on Fox News TONIGHT. Tune in during the 6pm EST hour to hear her discuss the recent Gallup Poll studies.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
MAY 15, 2009

Washington, DC — Americans United for Life (AUL) announces today a new legal prospectus on the probable “short list” of President Obama’s Supreme Court nominees, and their records on life issues. AUL is the nation’s first national pro-life organization and the leading legal and public policy organization in the pro-life movement.

The comprehensive, concise document identifies nine probable nominees and highlights cases, past writings, opinions, and arguments indicating affinities for pro-abortion activism.  In addition, it explains how past interpretations by some of the individuals could be applied to future rulings on life issues.  The prospectus also identifies personal endorsements of and political contributions to extreme, pro-abortion activist groups.

For example, Solicitor General Elena Kagan tops many ’short-lists’ and yet she has publicly and repeatedly criticized federal regulations that prohibit federally funded abortion counseling.  Kagan argues that the regulations amount to the subsidization of “anti-abortion” speech.  Another short-list topper, Judge Diane Wood, has disputed the constitutionality of partial-birth abortion bans enacted in Illinois and Wisconsin.

To access the prospectus, visit: http://www.aul.org/ussc_potentials

AUL President Dr. Charmaine Yoest states:

“The records of these potential nominees are absolutely the most radically pro-abortion our country has ever seen.  Every potential nominee is pro-abortion and would advance President Obama’s radical agenda to enact FOCA, eliminating every restriction on abortion nationwide.  In their records, we see examples such as ruling in favor of taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand, vetoing common-sense abortion regulations, favoring an expansive right to privacy, and restricting the First Amendment rights of pro-life activists.

“One of the reasons for the controversy surrounding President Obama’s visit to Notre Dame this weekend is the gap between what he says and what he does with respect to life issues.  In his first 100 days in office, he has made policy changes, appointments, and public promises that directly contradict his claim of wanting to reduce the number of abortions.

“We expect that with this upcoming nomination, he will continue the rhetoric of valuing the protection of all human life while in reality undermining protections currently in place.  We will continue to work to draw attention to this gap, and we will make the pro-life voice heard during this nomination process.”

Probable “Short List”

• Elena Kagan, Solicitor General of the United States
• The Honorable Diane Wood, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
• Janet Napolitano, U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security
• The Honorable Leah Ward Sears, Chief Justice of the Georgia Supreme Court
• The Honorable Sonia Sotomayor, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Other Potential Nominees

• Governor Jennifer Granholm of Michigan
• Governor Deval Patrick of Massachusetts
• Kathleen M. Sullivan, Stanford Law School
• Cass Sunstein, White House Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulator Affairs

About Americans United for Life
Americans United for Life (AUL) is a nonprofit, public-interest law and policy organization whose vision is a nation in which everyone is welcomed in life and protected in law.  The first national pro-life organization in America, AUL has been committed to defending human life through vigorous judicial, legislative, and educational efforts at both the federal and state levels since 1971.  The Wall Street Journal has profiled AUL, and PBS’ Frontline program chronicled AUL’s successful efforts in Mississippi.

Americans United for Life (AUL), a national public interest law and policy organization defending human life through vigorous legislative, judicial, and educational efforts, seeks highly-qualified and motivated law student to serve as research assistant to AUL’s Senior Counsel.  The position is unpaid and may be undertaken for credit (as approved by the law school involved) or to fulfill other graduation requirements.
 
Qualifications
• Excellent legal research and writing skills.
• Demonstrated initiative and attention to detail.
• Ability to work with minimal direct supervision. Candidates are not required to be in the Chicago area, but must be available by telephone and email.

Duties & Responsibilities
• Provide research and other assistance to AUL’s Senior Counsel in the development of book projects on the impact of legalized abortion.
• Research, draft, and edit articles for law reviews, national magazines, and websites on life issues.

To Apply
• Send a resume, writing sample, and list of three references to Resumes@AUL.org with “2009 Summer Research Assistant” in subject line
• For more information, email Resumes@AUL.org or call 312-568-4700.
• Deadline:  Until the position is filled.

Today Americans United for Life (AUL) filed an amicus curiae brief before the Montana Supreme Court on behalf of 28 bi-partisan Montana Senators and Representatives, arguing that there is no right to assisted suicide under the State’s constitution.

Dr. Charmaine Yoest, President & CEO of AUL stated, “It is appalling that the district court has attempted to unilaterally manufacture a state constitutional right to assisted suicide – a right that has no basis in the history of our nation.  Instead, Montana has compelling interests in protecting all human life and in preventing the abuses inherent in assisted suicide.”

In December 2008, a state district court ruled that, under the Montana Constitution, individuals have a right to suicide, and a right to assistance in committing suicide.  However, the judge did not impose any restrictions on the practice, even leaving room for the active euthanasia of patients by their physicians.

“The district court held that a person’s constitutional rights are ‘defeated’ if she does not receive assistance in dying.  This means that anyone—even a patient who cannot administer lethal drugs herself—is entitled to have a physician kill them,” observed Mailee Smith, AUL Staff Counsel. 

She continued, “What’s even worse is that there is no requirement that another person witness the suicide request or that there be written documentation of the request and the basis for it.  Physicians can unilaterally decide that their patients want to die, with no paper trail to hold them accountable.  That is not assisted suicide—that is euthanasia.”

AUL worked in conjunction with the Montana Attorney General’s office in coordinating amicus curiae briefs supporting the State’s prohibition of assisted suicide.  AUL’s brief can be accessed here.

Below is the press release for AUL’s model bill:

OKLAHOMA CITY – Legislation increasing legal protections for pregnant women and their unborn children received committee approval today.

Senate Bill 1103, by state Sen. Glenn Coffee and state Rep. Mike Thompson, would create the “Use of Force for the Protection of the Unborn Act.”

“Too often, pregnant women who refuse to abort a child are attacked by their partner in an effort to force a miscarriage,” said Thompson, R-Oklahoma City. “This legislation will make it crystal clear that those women can use lethal force to protect the life of their child in those cases.”

Under the bill, a pregnant woman is legally justified in using deadly force if she “reasonably believes” an attacker is “threatening her unborn child” and “use of force or deadly force are immediately necessary to protect her unborn child.”

According to the American Pregnancy Association, 240,000 pregnant women are subject to domestic violence each year and pregnant women face twice the risk of battery.

Senate Bill 1103 passed the House Judiciary Committee today. It now proceeds to the floor of the Oklahoma House of Representatives. The bill previously passed the state Senate 44-0.