Get FREE NRO Newsletters

 

March 5 Issue  |  Subscribe  |  Renew

Close

New on NRO . . .

The Primary Event

Tracking the 2012 election.


Print   |  Text
 

Susan B. Anthony List’s Pro-Life Pledge

Susan B. Anthony List announced today that Michele Bachmann, Newt Gingrich, Tim Pawlenty, Rick Santorum and Ron Paul had signed their pro-life pledge.

The List also reported that Mitt Romney and Herman Cain refused to sign the pledge.

“Governor Romney pledged in the last campaign that he would be a pro-life president and of course he pledges it today,” Romney spokesman Andrea Saul told National Review Online in a statement. “However, this well intentioned effort has some potentially unforeseen consequences and he does not feel he could in good conscience sign it. Gov. Romney has been a strong supporter of the SBA List in the past and he looks forward to continue working with them to promote a culture of life.”

The terms of the pledge:

Only nominate to the U.S. Supreme Court and federal bench judges who are committed to restraint and applying the original meaning of the Constitution, not legislating from the bench;

Select pro-life appointees for relevant Cabinet and Executive Branch positions, in particular the head of National Institutes of Health, the Department of Health & Human Services, and the Department of Justice;

Advance pro-life legislation to permanently end all taxpayer funding of abortion in all domestic and international spending programs, and defund Planned Parenthood and all other contractors and recipients of federal funds with affiliates that perform or fund abortions;

Advance and sign into law a Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act to protect unborn children who are capable of feeling pain from abortion.

UPDATE: Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul e-mails NRO the details about the unintended consequences Romney is concerned about: “This pledge would require cutting off funding to thousands of healthcare facilities, including VA hospitals, that currently receive funding . It would also place severe restrictions on federal appointments to a broad variety of agencies.

Tags: Herman Cain, Michele Bachmann, Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, Ron Paul, Tim Pawlenty

New on The Primary Event. . .


COMMENTS   16

EXPAND  

   06/17/11 17:44

Typical Romney, supports it but doesn't commit to it. Too cute by half.

Meanwhile, it's a matter of life or death.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   06/17/11 18:06

Good for Mitt Romney, I'm getting tired of all this abortion nonsense.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   06/17/11 18:13

Speaking as a pro-life conservative, I'm not sure I'd sign this. Why would my attorney general have to be pro-life? Anyone I'd pick would agree with my position as to how the federal government should operate. Also, how can you pledge to sign something into law? What if congress won't pass it?

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Bart
   06/17/11 18:25

I don't like any of these pledges and I don't appreciate candidates who sign them - even if I agree with what those pledges say.

I have a specific concern about the last part of what is quoted, however: "Advance and sign into law a Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act to protect unborn children who are capable of feeling pain from abortion."

I don't think the Federal Government has the power to enact such a law and even if it did - and even if the law is a Good Idea- it's not a law that the Federal Government ought to make for the entire nation.

I'll assume for the sake of argument that the law does not violate any individual right. Accordingly, it it's a law that could be enacted by each state and I don't see why the decision about whether to do so shouldn't be left to each state.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   06/17/11 18:27

the pledge to "Advance and sign into law a Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act to protect unborn children who are capable of feeling pain from abortion." is a bit vague unless there is such a bill that one can point to concretely and say "that is what you should sign." If that is Mitt's objection, though, he should say so.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   06/17/11 18:44

I can't really see what would be objectionable about the pledge for a pro-life candidate. It would help, of course, if the Romney and Cain campaigns were specific about the reason(s) why their candidates have declined to sign on.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Josh
   06/17/11 19:18

Forget Romney, I want to know why Cain didn't sign it.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   06/17/11 19:28

Here in Georgia, the Right to Life folks asked the candidates for governor to sign a pledge. All Repubs but one signed it - then when someone pointed out what it really meant, most said - "I thought I was signing something pro-life - not all that." I'm tired of contests as to who is most pro-life. I can't pass strict pro-life tests any more.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Kevin Long
   06/17/11 20:49

Would we have had Colin Powell as Secretary of State under this pledge? No. There is a time and place for pro-life views. I am pro-life and a social conservative and I could not sign this heavy handed proclomation. And, even if I could, should I if I were running for President? It would be an effective opposition tool for any pro-life - states rights judge that I nominated to any court. Interesting that the two non-politicians, Romney "Politician for 4 years but I didn't inhale" and Cain are the non signers.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   06/18/11 07:44

Romney is going to nuance himself right out of nomination. We really need someone who will stand and defend the issues SHE believes in.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   06/18/11 09:09

"It would also place severe restrictions on federal appointments to a broad variety of agencies."

Isn't that the point?

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   06/18/11 13:15

Signing pledges, any pledge. is so junior high.

And for the foaming-at-the-mouth "conservatives" who torn into Romney over this: not pandering and grandstanding does not mean Romney is pro-abortion. To spout that is simple-minded or intentionally dishonest.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
wpa38
   06/19/11 08:58

"...judges who are committed to restraint and applying the original meaning of the Constitution"

Contradiction in terms. "Committed to restraint" is exactly what we DON'T need. Current case law is violently anti-Consitutional in most areas. Judicial restraint means holding onto the anti-Constitutional status quo. What we need is highly active judges who will constantly push to restore the Constitution and remove bad laws.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   06/20/11 12:49

The way Romney reinvents himself for every election, I wouldn't put much confidence in any of his pledges anyway.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
jonathanp
   06/20/11 17:50

RuPaul advocates for some Pro-Abortion positions in his latest book.

RuPaul also has a history of voting in favor of NARAL's position on issues like Child transport across state lines for abortions.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   06/23/11 17:01

Good for Mitt Romney in not signing the pledge! I find what Conservative Samizdat stated about the situation about Romney not signing the pledge to be correct. I agree with this article on the matter...

External Link 

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse

Add a Comment

Already Registered? Log In Here.


The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.


* Designates a required field.
© National Review Online 2012
All Rights Reserved.
Subscriptions
NR / Print
NR / Digital

Gift Subscriptions
NR / Print
NR / Digital
NR Apps
iPhone/iPad
Android

NRO Apps
iPhone
Support Us
Donate
Media Kit
Contact