FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Chicago, Illinois — Americans United for Life (AUL) today released its sixth annual ranking of the most and least pro-life states.  Pennsylvania, Louisiana, and South Dakota top the ranking, while California, Hawaii, and Vermont ranked lowest.

“AUL’s annual ranking highlights the significant progress we are making each year toward a more pro-life America,” said Dr. Charmaine Yoest, AUL President & CEO.  “There is every reason for optimism even in the face of new challenges.  Since the election, we have seen a huge outpouring of grassroots support for our work opposing the radically pro-abortion Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) as well as hundreds of inquiries about life-affirming legislation.”

While AUL’s criteria covers states’ treatment of all life issues, final rankings depend largely on each state’s enactment of prudent and well-supported laws.  Such laws fence in the abortion license granted by the U.S. Supreme Court in its 1973 decision, Roe v. Wade.  Among the laws AUL looks for are informed consent, parental involvement for minors, medically-supported regulation of abortion providers, and limitations on the use of taxpayer dollars for abortion.

“We are making progress — state by state and law by law — to build a culture of life in America,” said Denise Burke, AUL’s Vice President of Legal Affairs.  “In states that have passed common-sense limitations on abortion, abortion rates have declined by nearly 20% over the past 10 years.  These laws also underscore the growing and irrefutable evidence of the negative impact of abortion on women.”

The complete state rankings are available at http://dl.aul.org/your-state and will be featured in the soon-to-be-released Defending Life 2009.

About Defending Life 2009
AUL’s annual publication, Defending Life 2009: Proven Strategies for a Pro-Life America, is the definitive legal guide to abortion, bioethics, healthcare freedom of conscience, and the end of life.  Cutting through the murky cloud of media chatter and controversy, Defending Life provides comprehensive, timely, and thought-provoking information to anyone who wants to understand key pro-life issues and utilize proven strategies to address them.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
December 11, 2008

Americans United for Life Releases Eight New Model Legislation & Policy Guides: Twenty-Three Model Legislation & Policy Guides Now Available

Chicago, Illinois — Americans United for Life (AUL) today released its 2009 Model Legislation & Policy Guides. With the addition of eight new guides this year, AUL now offers 23 pieces of model legislation on key issues related to abortion, protection of unborn victims of violence, bioethics, healthcare rights of conscience, and the end-of-life.

Dr. Charmaine Yoest, AUL President & CEO said, “AUL is the leading developer of cutting-edge pro-life legislation that saves lives today and lays the groundwork for a nation in which everyone is welcomed in life and protected in law.”

New additions to AUL’s library of model legislation include a state legislative resolution opposing the federal Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA), a prohibition on coerced abortions, and The Child Protection Act—comprehensive legislation to ensure abortion providers report child sexual abuse and prevent the transportation of children across state lines for clandestine abortions.

Denise Burke, AUL Vice President of Legal Affairs added, “Each year, AUL legal and policy experts provide extensive consulting and support to legislators across the nation, helping to enact protective laws that advance a culture of life. We look forward to partnering with legislators and pro-life allies in 2009 to build on our past successes.”

All of AUL’s Model Legislation & Policy Guides are available at http://www.aul.org/Legislative_Guides

Advocates for Plan B, or the “morning after pill,” have consistently argued that increased availability of Plan B would decrease the number of unplanned pregnancies and thereby result in a drastic reduction in abortion rates. Abortion rights advocates have claimed that Plan B –- not incremental protective laws like informed consent statutes, parental involvement requirements, and basic health and safety regulations for abortion clinics –- would significantly reduce abortions. This argument was relied on to make Plan B available over-the-counter and without a prescription, both in America and abroad.

The promises of abortion advocates have proven to be empty, and their conclusions have been shown to be utterly false and misleading. The latest statistics demonstrate that greater accessibility to Plan B has lead to an increase in abortions. In addition, the most recent scientific study on Plan B shows that its effectiveness rate is actually much lower than the rates utilized by abortion advocates in their campaigns to increase availability to Plan B.

Sweden
Plan B became available over the counter in Sweden seven years ago. However, the abortion rate did not decline in Sweden; rather, statistics show that from 2000 to 2007, the abortion rate in Sweden increased by 17 percent.

In Sweden’s capital city, Stockholm, sales for Plan B have tripled since 2000. Despite this dramatic increase in sales, the abortion rate in Stockholm has risen significantly. In just a single year, from 2006-2007, the abortion rate in Stockholm rose by 6.9 percent.

Similarly, nationwide sales of Plan B in Sweden have doubled since 2000. Yet, the abortion rate has since skyrocketed by 17%, going from 30,980 abortions in 2000 to 37,205 abortions in 2007.

Scotland
In the face of Plan B supporters’ thriving campaign to promote over-the-counter access to Plan B in Scotland, abortion rates in Scotland have been steadily increasing. This May, the British National Health Service (NHS) announced that the 2007 abortion rate in Scotland has reached its historical height since abortion was first legalized in Great Britain in 1967.

NHS reports show 12, 603 Scottish abortions in 2005. In 2006, the Scottish abortion rate increased by about 3.8%, with a total of 13,081. It hasn’t gotten any better. The NHS reported that in 2007, the Scottish abortion rate rose once again, this time by 4%, with a total of 13,703 Scottish abortions.

Increase in Repeat Abortions
Recent statistics demonstrate that Plan B has resulted in a sharp rise in the number of women having repeat abortions. Persuaded by Plan B campaign jargon that the morning after pill is effective, will result in fewer unplanned pregnancies, and will make abortions rare, women have increased their use of Plan B, only to find themselves pregnant and in need of an abortion once again. The NHS released new data showing 26.3% of Scottish women who had abortions in 2007 had at least one prior abortion.

It is clear that Plan B advocates’ claims that the pill would decrease abortions has misled women and resulted in more unplanned pregnancies and abortions, including repeat abortions.

New Data on Plan B’s Effectiveness Rate
Abortion advocates consistently advertise Barr Laboratories’ finding that Plan B has an 89% effectiveness rate. However, a more recent, more detailed study reveals that Plan B actually has only a 72% effectiveness rate.

Associate professor of family and preventive medicine at the University of Utah School of Medicine, Dr. Joseph Stanford, reported that he and his research team “did more a precise meta-analysis that shows it’s effective only 72 percent of the time, and even that number is optimistic” (emphasis added) This is not surprising, as Dr. Stanford noted, studies from Europe, the United States and China show that Plan B does not in fact reduce abortions as its advocates claim.

The Need for Incremental Protections
Clear evidence has proven that over-the-counter access to Plan B increases unplanned pregnancies and abortions. Abortion advocates claims have been shown to be false and misleading. It is apparent, now more than ever, that enactment of incremental protective laws – such as informed consent statutes, parental involvement laws, and basic health and safety regulations for abortion clinics – is the only real way to decrease abortion rates. Such laws have been proven, time and time again, to reduce abortion rates nationally and abroad. Making abortion rare is in our grasp, and Plan B is not the way to get there.

For more information on recent Plan B statistics and data, see http://lifenews.com/int891.html.

AUL President Clarke Forsythe is scheduled to appear on Relevant Radio from 9:00–10:00 am on Wednesday, July 2.

He will be discussing incremental legislation in today’s political climate.

Relevant Radio is broadcast at 950 AM in Chicago or you can listen online at http://www.relevantradio.com/

Last year before the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, Barack Obama told pro-abortion activists:

“The first thing I’d do as President is sign the Freedom of Choice Act.”

With a single stroke of the pen, Barack Obama would wipe away virtually every state law on abortion nationwide. Instantly, it will undo thirty-seven years of legal work, research, and educational successes that AUL has accomplished in the 50 states. Put another way: Barack Obama will undermine the very reason we exist — to protect human life state by state.

Sen. Barack Obama has co-sponsored this “Freedom of Choice Act” legislation with 18 other Senators. The bill has the support of 110 Members of Congress, too. The stated aim of this legislation is to “end the abortion wars.”

Let me be clear: to these legislators, “ending the abortion wars” means allowing abortion-on-demand in all nine months of pregnancy for any reason and without any restrictions nationwide. This would eradicate state and federal laws that the majority of Americans support — such as requirements that licensed physicians perform abortions, fully-informed consent, and parental involvement — and prevent states from enacting similar protective measures in the future.

AUL Vice President & Legal Director Denise Burke has prepared an analysis of the “Freedom of Choice Act,” which we’ve just posted on our website. Please click here to read Denise’s analysis of this horrendous legislation.

On June 30, AUL’s fiscal year comes to a close. In order to end the year with the funds necessary to fight this looming threat, we must raise $269,000 by June 30. AUL, like many organizations, experiences a dip in donations in the summer time. Please, if you are in a position to give a substantial gift, even a sacrificial one, don’t delay.

As life-affirming laws in Michigan increase, the abortion rates in Michigan continue to plummet. Michigan state health officials announced last week that the abortion rate in the state have dropped to a record low since record-keeping began in 1979. The current abortion rate shows a 50% drop since the peak in 1987, and a 3.7% drop from 2006. The Michigan Department of Community Health reported that in 1987 there were 350 abortions for every 1,000 live births. In 2007, the number of abortions dropped to 200 abortions for every 1,000 live births.

The drastic drop in the Michigan abortion rate in 2007 is no surprise. Americans United for Life (AUL) ranked Michigan as the #1 pro-life state for 2007. AUL bases its rankings on the number of pro-life laws being enforced in a state, and the breadth of protection provided by each law.

Michigan currently has a number of women’s health and safety laws in effect, including:

• a comprehensive informed consent for abortion statute;
• a statute providing an option for women to view an ultrasound image of the unborn child;
• parental consent statute for abortions performed on minors;
• minimum health and safety requirements for abortion facilities;
• and a prohibition of the use of public funds and school health coverage plans for abortions.

Michigan law also contains provisions that specifically protect the health and safety of the unborn and the newly born. Michigan law defines the killing of an unborn child as a form of homicide, and defines non-fatal assaults on an unborn child as a crime. In addition, Michigan law requires that infants who survive an abortion and are born alive must be given immediate and appropriate care.

In terms of bioethics, Michigan law bans human cloning, for both reproductive and research purposes. Michigan also bans fetal experimentation and non-therapeutic research on a live human embryo, fetus, or neonate. As for end-of-life issues, Michigan treats physician-assisted suicide as a felony.

Lastly, Michigan law protects the rights of conscience of healthcare providers in the abortion context. Under Michigan law, healthcare professionals and healthcare facilities who object on grounds of conscience may not be forced to participate in the performance of an abortion, and may refrain from participation.

It is no coincidence that the abortion rate in Michigan has dropped to its all-time low, and that Michigan has the best pro-life, incremental legislation in place. Research shows that incremental protections are effective means of lowering the number of abortions performed. Michigan is a concrete example of this conclusion. The effectiveness and importance of passing life-affirming, incremental legislation in the states has been made clear enough. For those interested in making abortion rare, Michigan stands out as a model.

To go to National Right to Life’s article elaborating on congruent abortion data click here.

In the May issue of Christianity Today, Stan Guthrie addresses those who wish to “move on” from abortion, telling them, “We’re Not Finished.”

In other words, these [Jim Wallis, Ron Sider] and other voices seem to be saying that fighting legalized abortion—the deliberate, state-sanctioned taking of 50 million unborn human lives from their mothers’ wombs since 1973 (and the accompanying national guilt)—should simply be one item among many on an ever-expanding evangelical to-do list. I agree that we have multiple responsibilities as Christians, and different callings. But if everything is a priority, then nothing is. While no one is saying that defending unborn human life is optional, the way we sometimes talk about our broader agenda appears to minimize the importance of abortion.

Pressing the case, Guthrie adds:

And faltering now would be doubly tragic, because the tide is turning. According to the pro-choice Guttmacher Institute, the abortion rate has dropped to its lowest level since 1974. The number has also fallen, from 1.6 million abortions in 1990 to 1.2 million in 2005. While that’s still far too many, and the prospect of actually overturning Roe seems distant, it’s real progress nevertheless.

And he concludes:

No, we will not all be called to picket or pray in front of an abortion clinic or pass legislation or support an unwed mother or adopt a child or write letters to the editor. But we all can do something.

Opposing abortion is not simply another agenda item for evangelicals. It is our sacred duty. Whatever other good deeds we are called to do—and there are many—we cannot say abortion is someone else’s business. It’s our business.

Gonzales v. Carhart: One Year Later
Letting the People Decide

By Denise M. Burke
Vice President & Legal Director, Americans United for Life

One year ago, the public debate over abortion was irrevocably altered. In the landmark Gonzales v. Carhart decision, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the federal ban on partial-birth abortion and, more importantly, abdicated, at least in part, its role as the “National Abortion Control Board.”

In its decision, the Court signaled an increasing willingness to blunt attempts by abortion extremists to use the courts to unilaterally impose their radical agenda on the American public, and an increasing willingness to let the people decide abortion policy. The immediate reaction of activists, state legislators, and the public confirmed this critical shift.

While abortion extremists hastily recycled the hyperbolic rhetoric of the 1970s, legislators and the public increasingly considered prudent responses to the mounting evidence of the negative impact of abortion on women. [more]

AUL’s Oklahoma State Network Affiliate, Maressa Treat sends the following message about activity in her state.

Last night Oklahoma Governor Brad Henry vetoed SB 1878, an omnibus pro-life bill, but today pro-life legislators came together and overrode the veto!

The Oklahoma State Senate voted at 11:00 am to override Governor Henry’s veto, 37-11. And thirty minutes later the Oklahoma House voted 81-15 to override.

Thanks to many prayers and our pro-life legislators working fast to defend the sanctity of life, SB 1878 has become law.

For more on the history and content of SB 1878 see Pro-Life Legislation Passes Oklahoma Senate

Maressa Treat, AUL’s liaison in Oklahoma, has worked with a coalition of pro-life groups and individuals to pass Senate Bill 1878, a sweeping piece of pro-life legislation. The bill now awaits the Governor Brad Henry’s signature.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Oklahoma State Senate
Senator Todd Lamb, R-Edmond

Pro-Life Legislation Passes Senate

State Capitol, Oklahoma City – An omnibus pro-life bill passed the Oklahoma State Senate Wednesday with a bipartisan vote.

Senate Bill 1878 by Senator Todd Lamb, R-Edmond, and Representative Pam Peterson, R-Tulsa, contains several pro-life initiatives, passing the Senate with a vote of 38-10.

By combining various pieces of legislation from Senator Lamb and members of the House of Representatives, Senate Bill 1878 now does the following:

• creates the Freedom of Conscience Act which protects the rights of healthcare providers to refuse to take part in the destruction of human life (SB 1878—Sen. Lamb, Rep. Peterson);
• regulates the use of the dangerous chemical pill RU-486, used when the unborn child is about two months old (HB 2181—Rep. McNiel);
• ensures the mother’s consent to abort is truly voluntary, and protects against coerced abortions (HB 3059—Sen. Williamson, Rep. Hamilton);
• provides a woman with an ultrasound of her unborn child which she can view prior to undergoing the abortion (HB 3144—Sen. Lamb, Rep. Billy);
• cultivates respect for disabled children by banning the wrongful-life lawsuits that claim a baby would have been better off aborted (HB 2814—Sen. Crain, Rep. Sullivan).

“The provisions spelled out in this legislation are critical pro-life advances,” said Senator Lamb. “Working with pro-life members of the House and Senate to protect the sanctity of life and develop this comprehensive bill has been an honor. I am encouraged by the bipartisan support to protect innocent life today in the Senate.”

The next stop for Senate Bill 1878 will be the Governor’s desk for his signature.

While abortion has been legal in the United States for 35 years and remains legal and available throughout pregnancy for any reason, public recognition of the negative impact of abortion on women is increasing and more pro-life laws are in effect than ever before.

“Abortion-on-demand has been imposed on our nation because the courts and others have accepted — and even advanced — at least two pervasive myths: that abortion is ‘good’ for women and that the interests of women and their unborn children are necessarily in opposition,” says Americans United for Life (AUL) Vice President & Legal Director Denise Burke. “To restore a culture that respects and values human life, we first have to counter these myths with facts.”

“In the 35 years that abortion has been legal in the United States, much information has accumulated demonstrating that abortion hurts women in devastating ways,” states AUL Staff Counsel Mailee Smith.

The five most well-documented medical risks from abortion are: (1) a heightened risk of pre-term birth in future pregnancy, (2) an increased incidence of alcohol and drug abuse, (3) an increased risk of suicide, (4) a heightened risk of placenta previa in future pregnancies, and (5) the loss of protective effect against breast cancer from a first full-term pregnancy.

Smith adds, “These risks are in addition to the significant risks inherent in the procedure itself and the substandard health and safety conditions that exist in many abortion clinics around the nation.”

“Until all the pieces are in place to make the overruling of Roe a realistic possibility and until the truth has replaced misinformation about abortion,” says Burke, “laws that put fences around the abortion license and highlight the negative impact of abortion on women are imperative.”

Prudent and effective regulations to reduce abortion and limit its negative impact include rigorous informed consent, parental involvement for minors seeking abortions, limitations on public funding for abortion, minimum health and safety standards for abortion clinics, and many others.

“Abortion simply does not promote the psychological or physical health of women,” declares AUL Staff Counsel Maggie Datiles. “Once the scope of the negative impact of abortion on women is fully understood, support for most or all abortions will erode and a renewed culture of life will be within our grasp.”

AUL attorneys and policy staff are available for interviews.

Media Contact:
Matthew Eppinette
312-568-4701

About Defending Life 2008
AUL’s annual publication, Defending Life 2008: Proven Strategies for a Pro-Life America, is the definitive legal guide to abortion, bioethics, and the end of life. Cutting through the murky cloud of media chatter and controversy, Defending Life 2008 provides clear, thoroughly researched, and accurate information and is available to anyone who wants to understand key pro-life issues and utilize proven legal strategies to address them.
Defending Life 2008: http://www.aul.org/?p=Defending_Life

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 every human being 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.
Website: http://www.AUL.org
Blog: http://blog.AUL.org

Steve Chapman’s latest column weighs in on the recent news that abortion rates continue to fall, pointing out that it is a combination of legislation and education that is responsible.

By now, pro-life groups know that outlawing most abortions is not a plausible aspiration. So they have adopted a two-pronged strategy. The first is to regulate it more closely — with parental notification laws, informed consent requirements and a ban on partial-birth abortion. The second is to educate Americans with an eye toward changing “hearts and minds.” In both, they have had considerable success.

Americans United for Life Releases Ranking of Pro-life States
Michigan at Top, Oregon at Bottom

January 15, 2008 – Chicago, IL – Americans United for Life (AUL) today released its fifth annual ranking of the most and least pro-life states based on laws in the states. For the third year in a row, Michigan topped the list, followed by Louisiana, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Kansas.

“These states have made great strides in protecting women and their children from the negative consequences of abortion,” said Denise M. Burke, AUL’s Vice President & Legal Director.

While AUL’s criteria covers each state’s treatment of all life issues, the final ranking depends largely on each state’s enactment of prudent and well-supported laws that fence in the abortion license granted by the U.S. Supreme Court in its 1973 decision, Roe v. Wade. Among the laws that AUL looks for are informed consent, parental involvement for minors, abortion clinic regulations, and funding limitations on the use of public monies for abortion.

“Until all the pieces are in place to make the overruling of Roe a realistic possibility and until the truth has replaced misinformation about abortion, ” said Clarke D. Forsythe, AUL’s President, “laws that put fences around the abortion license and highlight the negative impact of abortion on women are imperative. And those laws are being passed in the 50 states. ”

The ranking also seeks to answer the question: Thirty-five years after Roe, are we making progress to restore a culture of life in America?

“We are making progress, state by state and law by law. In states that have passed these types of laws, the abortion rates have declined by up to 20% over the past 10 years, ” responds Burke. “Further, these laws highlight the significant dangers–physical, psychological, and relational–posed by abortion.”

“Once the scope of the negative impact of abortion on women is fully understood, support for most or all abortions will erode and a renewed culture of life will be within our grasp,” continued Burke.

Added Forsythe, “Women need to be much better informed about the medical risks of abortion, and these common-sense laws seek to do that. ”

The least protective states according to AUL were Oregon, California, Connecticut, New Jersey, and Vermont.

2008 State Rankings

Evaluation Criteria (PDF)

For more information about AUL’s annual ranking, visit www.AUL.org

About Defending Life 2008
AUL’s annual publication, Defending Life 2008: Proven Strategies for a Pro-Life America, is the definitive legal guide to abortion, bioethics, and the end of life.
Cutting through the murky cloud of media chatter and controversy, Defending
Life provides clear, thoroughly researched, and accurate information and is available to anyone who wants to understand key pro-life issues and utilize proven legal strategies to address them.

Defending Life 2008: http://www.aul.org/?p=Defending_Life

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 every human being 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’s Frontline program chronicled AUL’s successful efforts in Mississippi.

Website: http://www.AUL.org

National Review Online today published an article by AUL President Clarke Forsythe and AUL Vice President & Legal Director Denise Burke on state human life amendments (HLAs).

Pro-life activists in a few states are now exploring the merits of amending their state constitution by ballot initiative with a state “human life amendment.” In considering the prudence of a state human life amendment (HLA), organizational leaders and activists should ask a number of questions about the meaning, potential impact, implications, and costs of state amendments and the ballot initiative process.

The overarching question, however, is prudential — connecting means to ends: What is the goal of a state human life amendment and, given the resources involved, is it an effective means to achieve that goal? Answering this overarching question requires prudent analysis and a realistic view of the current legal, political, and social environments in the state.

Continue Reading at NRO . . .

Gary Bauer of American Values and Campaign for Working Families writes in National Review Online about both the importance of and the success of the incremental approach to ending abortion.

Abortion opponents’ emphasis on informed-consent laws underscores a fresh strategy that’s emerged after decades of thwarted attempts to place even the slightest restrictions on abortion (and though it was helpful in other ways, even the federal partial-birth-abortion ban, twelve years in the making, won’t prohibit a single abortion). It’s a strategy that recognizes that laws restricting abortion are a necessary but not sufficient condition to ending abortion in America.

Most of all, it’s a strategy that allows pro-lifers to talk about abortion in a more complete way: not only in terms of the unborn child’s right to life, but also in terms of a woman’s right to full information. So while abortion supporters speak of protecting and expanding women’s right to choose, pro-lifers — seizing the liberal mantle of science and free inquiry — now focus on informing women exactly what it is they are choosing.

Read the whole thing