J. D. Vance is touting an endorsement from a pro-life group loathed by other pro-lifers, who are backing his rivals.
J. D. Vance is touting an endorsement from a pro-life group loathed by other pro-lifers, who are backing his rivals.
I n this year’s fiercely contested Ohio Republican Senate primary, the top candidates have tried hard to stand out. Early voting for the May 3 contest began this month. The campaigns of former state treasurer Josh Mandel, Hillbilly Elegy author J. D. Vance, investment banker and co-chairman of the 2016 Trump campaign’s Ohio fundraising Mike Gibbons, and former Ohio state Republican Party chairwoman Jane Timken have spent millions, as well as divided Trump World (with each campaign having recruited various former staff in the hope of earning Donald Trump’s favor, something only state senator Matt Dolan has declined to do) and the Republican Party (with sitting politicians torn among the candidates).
So when Vance secured the endorsement of Ohio Right to Life Society, the political arm of the Columbus-based pro-life organization Ohio Right to Life, earlier this month, his campaign treated it as a big deal. “I’m so honored to have Ohio Right to Life’s endorsement and support in this race,” Vance said in a campaign statement. “For many years, Ohio Right to Life has been an incredible advocate for the unborn, for the elderly and for those who love the most vulnerable members of our community here in Ohio.” Before Trump’s endorsement of Vance became official, Mike Gonidakis, president of Ohio Right to Life, even claimed that Trump would be “following Ohio Right to Life’s lead” in supporting Vance.
But just as this Senate race has divided Republicans nationally, this endorsement has served to magnify rivalries within Ohio’s fractured pro-life movement. A closer look at that context and history — and at the language of the endorsement itself — leaves the impression that it wasn’t quite the campaign coup it seemed. For one, Ohio Right to Life’s statement recognized that the top four candidates (excluding Dolan) seemed equal in their commitment to the pro-life cause. The statement reads, in part:
The US Senate primary consists of four leading candidates all of which scored 100% on their Ohio Right to Life Survey. During this campaign each of these four candidates have demonstrated tremendous pro-life leadership during their respective outreach at various townhalls, debates and church gatherings. The state of Ohio is fortunate to have four strong pro-life candidates to choose from to serve as our next United States Senator.
The statement adds that the group is grateful “for each candidate’s commitment to Life and statements of support for the unborn if elected,” singling out for praise Mandel’s “steadfast pro-life leadership.”
From this, one might conclude that the organization was set to endorse Mandel, or perhaps decline to endorse any specific candidate. However, based on “many factors,” the organization endorsed Vance as “the best candidate to continue the exemplary pro-life service and statesmanship currently demonstrated by Senator Rob Portman,” asserting that he will be “100% pro-life,” “advance the cause of life,” and “defend the unborn from Planned Parenthood and their allies in our nation’s capital.”
Gonidakis stressed that Vance, Mandel, Gibbons, and Timken are all “100 percent pro-life” and that “our endorsement of J.D. does not mean the others aren’t pro-life.” He said, however, that “J.D. gives Ohio the best pro-life voice of all the candidates” as a “sophisticated” and “young, dynamic statesman” with the best shot at winning in the general election. The organization believes “he would do a great job representing Ohio, similarly in the ways that our current U.S. senator Rob Portman does.” Gonidakis was not surprised, however, about subsequent disagreement in the state over the endorsement, calling such discontent one of many “certainties” of his work. “The voters of Ohio can accept it, reject, brush it off, do whatever they want with it,” he said. “It’s just our recommendation.”
Despite its claim to be the “flagship” of pro-life advocacy in Ohio, Ohio Right to Life is not the state’s only pro-life organization. In recent years, grassroots frustration from across the state with the Columbus-based organization has led many right-to-life groups to disaffiliate from Ohio Right to Life, in favor of forming a new group in 2017 called Right to Life Action Coalition of Ohio, which has endorsed Josh Mandel. The Right to Life organizations of all the state’s largest cities except Columbus and Akron — Cincinnati, Cleveland, Toledo, and Dayton — are now under its umbrella, in addition to many organizations in smaller jurisdictions statewide. Ed Sitter, executive director of Toledo Right to Life, said they formed the group to ensure that “the voice that our elected officials were hearing on Columbus was the voice they were hearing from the grassroots back home, that they were one and the same, that they weren’t two different voices.” Multiple representatives of these disaffiliated organizations expressed frustration with Ohio Right to Life. “Dissatisfaction is a very charitable world,” said Laura Strietmann, executive director of Right to Life of Greater Cincinnati.
They dispute that Ohio Right to Life remains the state’s major pro-life group. “Ohio Right to Life putting out constantly that they are the largest Right to Life group is not true,” said Molly Smith, president of Cleveland Right to Life. Margie Christie, executive director of Dayton Right to Life and president of the Right to Life Action Coalition of Ohio, was similarly dismissive. “I don’t know how you have four out of the five largest metropolitan areas in the state not in your organization and you think you’re still the largest.” Likewise, Sitter noted that the group has been claiming since 2009 to have 45 affiliates in the state, whereas he knows of multiple local affiliates that have disaffiliated from Ohio Right to Life since then. Gonidakis maintains that the departures haven’t affected the weight of the group’s endorsement, which remains coveted throughout the state. “I don’t say that with any degree of bragging, it’s just a matter of fact,” he said. “The brand of Ohio Right to Life has been and continues to be strong.”
The disaffiliated chapters have had various fallings-out with Ohio Right to Life over the years. Christie recalls being irked that the group was not forthcoming with her on how its endorsement process worked, especially after some of the candidates it had endorsed would not support pro-life legislation once elected. Confused as to why Ohio Right to Life just called four candidates pro-life but only endorsed one, she explained the logic of her group’s endorsement of Mandel. “We can explain to our supporters and our people how we got to Josh Mandel,” she said. “It’s simple. He surveys well. He understands the topic. And he actually puts actions behind his words. Done.” Asked about Ohio Right to Life’s endorsement, Strietmann said that, while she liked Vance, she didn’t “know what their reasoning is.” (Separately from the Right to Life Action Coalition of Ohio, Cincinnati Right to Life PAC endorsed both Mandel and Gibbons.) But she did question how Ohio Right to Life could have endorsed incumbent governor Mike DeWine, who in her view — one shared by pro-life activists throughout the state who have withdrawn support for him — has failed to deliver on the cause of life.
A common denominator of annoyance with Ohio Right to Life is its approach to advancing legislation. “Their strategy comes from top-down, Columbus, and you take it or leave it, don’t mess with their bills, don’t try to change their language,” Christie said. Sitter similarly complained that Ohio Right to Life sets “its own legislative agenda, fails to support any other pro-life legislation that’s been brought forth . . . the only bills they support are their bills.” Gonidakis disputed this characterization. “There is no sign on the door that says Ohio Right to Life is the only organization allowed in the statehouse,” he said. “Obviously I’m being a little tongue-in-cheek here and facetious, but the point I’m making here is: If there’s another right-to-life group out there that thinks they can do it better, or has a different idea, we encourage them to go to the statehouse. We encourage them to go find a legislator and introduce a bill. Why not? But they’re not doing it. Why aren’t they doing that?”
Pro-life activists throughout the state have nonetheless found Ohio Right to Life’s efforts wanting. “None of these laws are being enforced because they can’t be enforced because of the loopholes in them,” Smith said. “That was the major reason for the breakaway” of the various groups from Ohio Right to Life. “I don’t know what happens in Columbus, but they just do not want to work with anyone else. They are unto themselves,” Christie said. “I mean, it’s really incredible. Unfortunate, really. Because it’s not saving babies anywhere.” Sitter went so far as to call the bills Ohio Right to Life endorses “window-dressing only” with “holes you can drive a Mack truck through.” Gonidakis, however, emphasized the need to be practical when advancing pro-life legislation and to ensure that bills can pass and survive court challenges. “While of course we could introduce a bill every day of the week that bans abortion, no exception, we also know what would happen to that,” he said. “So what we try to do is take a unique incremental approach in passing legislation,” one he believes has achieved real results.
The debate over heartbeat bills is an instructive example of the differences in approach. When bills — popular among grassroots pro-lifers — banning abortion at the first detection of fetal heartbeat were being considered in the state legislature, Ohio Right to Life opposed them in 2011 and in 2016, only to switch position later. (In 2011, John C. Willke, the organization’s founder, criticized it for being out of step with pro-lifers in the state on this issue.) Gonidakis attributes the shift in support to tactics. “What I said at that time, and I stand by it today, is it’s the right idea at the wrong time. Because timing and strategy is everything,” he said. “Why would we invite a hostile court to rule on our case when we know the outcome? That’s all we said. We didn’t oppose it. We said we oppose the United States Supreme Court.” In 2011, the Court had a composition unfavorable to the pro-life cause, whereas in 2018, when Ohio Right to Life supported the bill (and Governor DeWine signed it into law), the Court was more favorable. The heartbeat bill is currently held up in a lower court despite the efforts to challenge-proof it, something that has rankled other pro-life activists not sold on Ohio Right to Life’s approach. “We have to make these bills this way so that they can pass or survive a court challenge,” Sitter said, describing their strategy. “Well, they’re gonna be challenged regardless of how perfect the bill is.”
Activists cited frustration not only with the bills the group opposed but also with those it did want passed, claiming they were riddled with exceptions that do not ultimately advance their cause. Christie also attributed her disillusionment with the group back to its unwillingness to help her thwart the activities of an abortion clinic in Kettering. “It almost feels like they’re abortion regulators,” she said. “They want to nibble around the edges, just do enough to fundraise on, pat themselves on the back.” Gonidakis, however, again stressed the need to be pragmatic. “For those that don’t like the legislative approach of Ohio Right to Life, which by the way has been our approach for over 45–50 years, they certainly, any of these other right-to-life groups, they can do exactly what we do, which is walk across the street to the statehouse, sit down with a friendly legislator in the house or senate, pitch an idea to them, and have the bill introduced, have sponsor-proponent/opponent-interested-party testimony, and try to get it passed,” he said.
Indeed, one thing that distinguishes the organization from others in the state is its attitude toward the state party establishment. Ohio Right to Life’s first round of Ohio primary endorsements all backed incumbents in statewide offices, including DeWine. Right to Life Action Coalition of Ohio and Cincinnati Right to Life PAC have backed DeWine challenger Jim Renacci, out of disappointment over DeWine’s record on the pro-life issue. “Ohio Right to Life basically endorses and supports incumbent candidates,” Sitter said. “We wanted to select candidates . . . that supported a pro-life agenda.” Strietmann concurred, claiming that Ohio Right to Life has become “this middle-of-the-road political organization.” Gonidakis took a more realpolitik attitude toward such endorsements. “How could we get an officeholder to work with us if we don’t endorse them after they do everything we ask them to do from a pro-life perspective? So of course incumbency is very important,” he said. “If that incumbent has a 100 percent pro-life voting record or pro-life action in his or her four years.” But Sitter and others disagreed that the candidates Ohio Right to Life endorses always pass this test.
Ohio Right to Life’s ties to the state establishment run deep. In addition to being president of Ohio Right to Life, Gonidakis is a lobbyist (for, among other things, marijuana), was appointed by former GOP governor John Kasich to the State Medical Board of Ohio in 2012 (his current term expires this July unless renewed by the sitting governor), and in 2016 was a Kasich delegate at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland — though he makes no apologies for doing “my job” and working with elected officials. (“My job isn’t to send out nasty press releases complaining about the establishment,” he noted.) Ohio Right to Life and Mike Gonidakis also played ball with Ohio’s political establishment when it came to the state’s controversial expansion of Medicaid, spearheaded by Kasich — who ran against Trump in the 2016 Republican primary, is currently a CNN contributor, endorsed Joe Biden (earning Ohio Right to Life’s disfavor), and spoke at the 2020 Democratic National Convention.
Kasich’s effort was very unpopular with grassroots conservative groups, who disputed the governor’s insistence that it was compassionate to put able-bodied, working-age, childless adults on a welfare program created for the elderly, blind, and disabled. But during the Medicaid-expansion debate, Gonidakis and Ohio Right to Life supported the incumbent governor, justifying his efforts as pro-life. “By opposing this extension of Medicaid to fellow Ohioans, you put our state at serious financial risk,” Gonidakis wrote in a 2013 Columbus Dispatch op-ed excoriating conservative lawmakers and praising Kasich’s inclusion of Medicaid expansion in his proposed budget. Gonidakis still stands by his support. “I would respectfully say I don’t see a pro-life reason to oppose Medicaid expansion,” he said. “If you give women an opportunity to go to get the same health care that everyone does regardless of their income level, we believe that less and less would go to Planned Parenthood. And that’s the pro-life reason we supported Medicaid expansion.” Smith, of Cleveland Right to Life, contested this argument. “Women of childbearing age were already covered prior to Medicaid expansion, so there was absolutely no need to move to this socialist system that pushes more people into poverty,” she said. “And as evidenced from similar systems around the world, these types of approaches set up the health-care system for failure, thus pushing more women who are in need of pregnancy support into a state of despair. No pro-life organization should have supported this expansion.” At one point, moreover, Kasich actually proposed cutting Medicaid funding dedicated to, among other groups, pregnant women.
At any rate, the approach of Kasich and Gonidakis did not persuade the state legislature, which repeatedly stymied their efforts. So, having vetoed a legislative ban on Medicaid expansion and expanded the program unilaterally, Kasich turned to a previously obscure state agency called the Controlling Board to fund it. Breaking from Ohio Right to Life, Cleveland Right to Life and Right to Life of Greater Cincinnati joined six state Republican legislators in an unsuccessful attempt to stop Kasich’s circumvention of the legislature at the Ohio Supreme Court.
So for the Ohio pro-life movement, Ohio Right to Life’s deviation from the grassroots is a familiar story. Indeed, there are some recurring elements to this chapter that might make Ohioans uncomfortable. Like Kasich, Vance — whom I once admired and met with in 2018 hoping to assist his supposed efforts to help the state of Ohio, but on whom I have since soured — supported Medicaid expansion in Ohio. Like Kasich, Vance lobbied against Republican efforts to repeal Obamacare, out of concern that Medicaid funding might take a hit. (Vance made this case in, among other places, the New York Times.) And since he moved back to Ohio, as a sought-after political commodity thanks to the fame of Hillbilly Elegy, one of Vance’s chief advisers has been old Kasich hand Jai Chabria.
Despite their differences, Gonidakis repeatedly emphasized that he did not wish to speak ill of other groups. “We welcome everyone. We don’t have a friend list and foe list in the pro-life movement. Our enemies are Planned Parenthood, the ACLU, NARAL, rabidly pro-abortion officeholders, whether they be Democrat or Republican,” he said. “We’re not saying anything negative about any [pro-life] group in Ohio. We should just all be working together when we can to save lives.”
But if Ohio’s grassroots pro-life activists elsewhere are to be believed, then voters might not want to treat the populist’s endorsement by a controversial, establishment-friendly organization as a game-changer in this hard-fought primary.