adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Politics

Strategy Questions Divide Pro-Life Politics After ‘Dobbs’ | News & Reporting – ChristianityToday.com

Published

 on


What comes next?

The pro-life movement has focused on the fight in the Supreme Court for so long that when the Dobbs v. Jackson decision finally came—overturning Roe v. Wade and ruling that abortion can be regulated—it wasn’t clear what the plan was after that. The hoped-for, prayed-for, and worked-for victory didn’t end abortion, after all. Ending Roe was just one political battle in the process, even if took 50 years.

“When the decision first came out and shortly after that, there was a lot of jubilation in the pro-life community,” Timothy Head, executive director of the Faith and Freedom Coalition, told CT. “But there wasn’t a second clause to that sentence, ‘Roe has been overturned, ______.’”

300x250x1

After a bit of a scramble over the summer, the largest pro-life groups have emerged to embrace a national plan, calling for a federal ban on abortion. They don’t see it as state’s rights issue. They want to deal with abortion at the level of national politics.

They were ready to support Republican Senator Lindsey Graham when he came out on September 13 with a proposal for a ban on abortions after the 15th week of pregnancy, a few weeks after the first trimester. While top pro-life leaders may disagree with some details of the draft legislation, they focused on using it to frame the choice voters will face in the upcoming midterm elections.

“The Protecting Pain-Capable Unborn Children from Late-Term Abortions Act would prevent cruel and painful abortions from being performed on innocent children,” Carol Tobias, president of the National Right to Life Committee, said in a statement. “The only thing the Democrats are offering the American people in this campaign is an opportunity to kill more and more children by abortion.”

Tobias joined Graham at his press conference, along with Americans United for Life president Catherine Glenn Foster, Concerned Women for America president Penny Young Nance, and March for Life Education and Defense Fund president Jeanne Mancini.

Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, stood at Graham’s right. She has pushed Republican candidates to see a national abortion ban as a winning issue. They should make it a top priority to motivate conservative Christians to vote on on election day.

According to a Morning Consult poll done in July, 41 percent of evangelicals support an abortion ban with no exceptions, though for most, it is not a top priority.

“If Republicans want to win elections and save lives, it is imperative they learn from past mistakes,” Tobias wrote in an op-ed in TheWashington Post. “With just two months left in this pivotal election cycle, they must learn very quickly, lest the only ‘red wave’ come from the bloodshed of countless innocents.”

But not everyone in the pro-life movement agrees with this strategy. The Faith and Freedom Coalition, which was founded by Ralph Reed as the Christian Coalition for the 21st century, is pushing for a state-by-state approach.

There are no big theological differences between the two sides. Both agree on the moral question of abortion. But they disagree about what to do now, after Dobbs.

There are philosophical reasons for the difference. While some on the Religious Right, such as those who call themselves “national conservatives,” have been arguing state power should be used to defend traditional ways of life and American values, many still identify with the small government politics of 20th century Republicans. They believe most issues impacting the general welfare should be dealt with at the state and local level—including moral issues, such as prayer in schools and bans on abortion.

There are also strategic reasons. Speaking to CT before Graham proposed his national ban, Head said he thought that kind of approach would be “playing into liberals’ hands.” Pro-life activists, he said, are more likely to win state by state than they are in a big, national confrontation.

“Most groups on the Left don’t have chapters in places like Topeka, Kansas. We’re better organized across the country and have 50 times more staff in the states than we have in Washington, DC,” he said. “Conservatives are more engaged in local politics. … Conservatives are better equipped to fight a multifront battle than liberals are.”

The state-by-state approach also allows the pro-life groups to advocate for different policies in different places, pushing for the legislation most likely to be successful in a specific context. A novel civil enforcement mechanism might be politically feasible in Texas but stand no chance in Illinois. Missouri voters might support a parental consent law, while in North Carolina, parental notification might be more palatable.

In states like Colorado and New Jersey, where there are currently no limits on abortion, pro-life legislators could find common cause with progressive colleagues on policies that have the practical effect of reducing the number of abortions. The Faith and Freedom Coalition is talking to conservatives at the state level, for example, about legislation that rewards corporations that offer more parental leave. They also have draft legislation for programs that help mothers afford diapers, car seats, formula, and other basic necessities for caring for a newborn.

“I think that’s correct, constitutionally, but also the states are the best laboratory for figuring out the right approach,” Head said. “As the states start tackling these issues, you start to see the proliferation of ideas.”

A number of pro-life groups have prepared a menu of options for state legislatures. Americans United for Life, for example, has a proposed draft of legislation to completely ban abortion.

“The [Legislature] of the State of [Insert name of State],” it says, “finds that (a) The life of each human being begins at conception; (b) Unborn children have protectable interests in life, health, and well-being; and (c) The natural parents of unborn children have protectable interests in the life, health, and well-being of their unborn children.”

But the group also offers model legislation with more limited aims, proposing laws that would require pregnant women be informed of all their options or banning abortions done on the basis of the unborn child’s sex. Americans United for Life only had one similarly creative policy proposal aimed specifically at the national level: a draft of an executive order that a president could sign that would recognize fetuses as legal persons, entitled to due process and equal protection under the Constitution.

The strategic disagreements may resolve themselves quickly, as activists and operatives respond to the political situation on the ground. And pro-life voters may well choose an all-of-the-above approach and not worry about national versus federalist political philosophy questions.

Graham’s bill, however, may force candidates in the midterm election to take a stance on a national abortion ban. And it’s possible the different approaches, after Dobbs, will be an issue in 2023, as the contenders for the Republican presidential primary start to jostle for position.

A similar strategic question divided pro-life activists in the days after Roe was handed down by the Supreme Court in 1973. Some urged support for targeted programs helping mothers and reducing the number of abortions, historian Daniel K. Williams writes in his book Defenders of the Unborn. But most embraced a bolder plan that was simpler to explain and backed a constitutional amendment saying life begins at conception. That decision connected the pro-life movement to the Republican Party, shaping evangelical engagement with politics and the broader political landscape for the next 50 years.

There are also a few pro-life political operatives who are holding out hope for an alternative. Rather than fighting state by state or backing some kind of national ban that will become a contentious election issue for the foreseeable future, they’d like to see a creative compromise that effectively depoliticizes the issue.

Perhaps Democrats could agree to ban late-term abortions if Republicans would allow a range of exceptions; maybe Republicans could accept abortion in the first trimester if Democrats would agree that no federal funding could be used. It wouldn’t be perfect and no one would be really happy, but there could be a way of reaching a national settlement that would be broadly popular with voters and lower the temperature on debates about the issue, said Democratic political strategist Michael Wear.

He believes a deal—whatever the details looked like—might open up new possibilities for ways to reduce abortion and help women and children.

“Now is when a cultural of life is more imaginable,” Wear told CT. “One of the things Dobbs did was it actually widened the range of options the country could go in.”

Still, he’s not especially optimistic about a compromise. Connecticut congressman Jim Himes, a Democrat, proposed something similar to what Wear has suggested in a closed-door caucus meeting in July. None of his colleagues seemed to think it was a good idea. No one on the Republican side has floated anything similar.

“Congress can step in and let some of that steam out, or abortion politics could be worse in the next 50 years in terms of the effects it has on voters, on our politics, and on the legal regime for abortions,” Wear said. “There is a side of me that thinks, maybe this is the best it ever gets.”

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Politics

Politics Briefing: Labour leader targets Poilievre, calls him 'anti-worker politician' – The Globe and Mail

Published

 on


Hello,

Pierre Poilievre is a fraud when it comes to empowering workers, says the president of Canada’s largest labour organization.

Bea Bruske, president of the Canadian Labour Congress, targeted the federal Conservative Leader in a speech in Ottawa today as members of the labour movement met to develop a strategic approach to the next federal election, scheduled for October, 2025.

300x250x1

“Whatever he claims today, Mr. Poilievre has a consistent 20-year record as an anti-worker politician,” said Bruske, whose congress represents more than three million workers.

She rhetorically asked whether the former federal cabinet minister has ever walked a picket line, or supported laws to strengthen workers’ voices.

“Mr. Poilievre sure is fighting hard to get himself power, but he’s never fought for worker power,” she said.

“We must do everything in our power to expose Pierre Poilievre as the fraud that he is.”

The Conservative Leader, whose party is running ahead of its rivals in public-opinion polls, has declared himself a champion of “the common people,” and been courting the working class as he works to build support.

Mr. Poilievre’s office today pushed back on the arguments against him.

Sebastian Skamski, media-operations director, said Mr. Poilievre, unlike other federal leaders, is connecting with workers.

In a statement, Skamski said NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh has sold out working Canadians by co-operating with the federal Liberal government, whose policies have created challenges for Canadian workers with punishing taxes and inflation.

“Pierre Poilievre is the one listening and speaking to workers on shop floors and in union halls from coast to coast to coast,” said Mr. Skamski.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Mr. Singh are scheduled to speak to the gathering today. Mr. Poilievre was not invited to speak.

Asked during a post-speech news conference about the Conservative Leader’s absence, Bruske said the gathering is focused on worker issues, and Poilievre’s record as an MP and in government shows he has voted against rights, benefits and wage increases for workers.

“We want to make inroads with politicians that will consistently stand up for workers, and consistently engage with us,” she said.

This is the daily Politics Briefing newsletter, written by Ian Bailey. It is available exclusively to our digital subscribers. If you’re reading this on the web, subscribers can sign up for the Politics newsletter and more than 20 others on our newsletter signup page. Have any feedback? Let us know what you think.

TODAY’S HEADLINES

Pierre Poilievre’s top adviser not yet contacted in Lobbying Commissioner probe: The federal Lobbying Commissioner has yet to be in touch with Jenni Byrne as the watchdog probes allegations of inappropriate lobbying by staff working both in Byrne’s firm and a second one operating out of her office.

Métis groups will trudge on toward self-government as bill faces another setback: Métis organizations in Ontario and Alberta say they’ll stay on the path toward self-government, despite the uncertain future of a contentious bill meant to do just that.

Liberals buck global trend in ‘doubling down’ on foreign aid, as sector urges G7 push: The federal government pledged in its budget this week to increase humanitarian aid by $150-million in the current fiscal year and $200-million the following year.

Former B.C. finance minister running for the federal Conservatives: Mike de Jong says he will look to represent the Conservatives in Abbotsford-South Langley, which is being created out of part of the Abbotsford riding now held by departing Tory MP Ed Fast.

Ottawa’s new EV tax credit raises hope of big new Honda investment: The proposed measure would provide companies with a 10-per-cent rebate on the costs of constructing new buildings to be used in the electric-vehicle supply chain. Story here.

Sophie Grégoire Trudeau embraces uncertainty in new memoir, Closer Together: “I’m a continuous, curious, emotional adventurer and explorer of life and relationships,” Grégoire Trudeau told The Globe and Mail during a recent interview. “I’ve always been curious and interested and fascinated by human contact.”

TODAY’S POLITICAL QUOTES

“Sometimes you’re in a situation. You just can’t win. You say one thing. You get one community upset. You say another. You get another community upset.” – Ontario Premier Doug Ford, at a news conference in Oakville today, commenting on the Ontario legislature Speaker banning the wearing in the House of the traditional keffiyeh scarf. Ford opposes the ban, but it was upheld after the news conference in the provincial legislature.

“No, I plan to be a candidate in the next election under Prime Minister Trudeau’s leadership. I’m very happy. I’m excited about that. I’m focused on the responsibilities he gave me. It’s a big job. I’m enjoying it and I’m optimistic that our team and the Prime Minister will make the case to Canadians as to why we should be re-elected.” – Public Safety Minister Dominic LeBlanc, before Question Period today, on whether he is interested in the federal Liberal leadership, and succeeding Justin Trudeau as prime minister.

THIS AND THAT

Today in the Commons: Projected Order of Business at the House of Commons, April. 18, accessible here.

Deputy Prime Minister’s Day: Private meetings in Burlington, Ont., then Chrystia Freeland toured a manufacturing facility, discussed the federal budget and took media questions. Freeland then travelled to Washington, D.C., for spring meetings of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank Group. Freeland also attended a meeting of the Five Eyes Finance Ministers hosted by U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, and held a Canada-Ukraine working dinner on mobilizing Russian assets in support of Ukraine.

Ministers on the Road: Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly is on the Italian island of Capri for the G7 foreign ministers’ meeting. Heritage Minister Pascale St-Onge, in the Quebec town of Farnham, made an economic announcement, then held a brief discussion with agricultural workers and took media questions. Privy Council President Harjit Sajjan made a federal budget announcement in the Ontario city of Welland. Families Minister Jenna Sudds made an economic announcement in the Ontario city of Belleville.

Commons Committee Highlights: Treasury Board President Anita Anand appeared before the public-accounts committee on the auditor-general’s report on the ArriveCan app, and Karen Hogan, Auditor-General of Canada, later appeared on government spending. Crown-Indigenous Relations Minister Gary Anandasangaree appears before the status-of-women committee on the Red Dress Alert. Competition Bureau Commissioner Matthew Boswell and Yves Giroux, the Parliamentary Budget Officer, appeared before the finance committee on Bill C-59. Former Prince Edward Island premier Robert Ghiz, now the president and chief executive officer of the Canadian Telecommunications Association, is among the witnesses appearing before the human-resources committee on Bill C-58, An act to amend the Canada Labour Code. Caroline Maynard, Canada’s Information Commissioner, appears before the access-to-information committee on government spending. Michel Patenaude, chief inspector at the Sûreté du Québec, appeared before the public-safety committee on car thefts in Canada.

In Ottawa: Governor-General Mary Simon presented the Governor-General’s Literary Awards during a ceremony at Rideau Hall, and, in the evening, was scheduled to speak at the 2024 Indspire Awards to honour Indigenous professionals and youth.

PRIME MINISTER’S DAY

Justin Trudeau met with Ottawa Mayor Mark Sutcliffe at city hall. Sutcliffe later said it was the first time a sitting prime minister has visited city hall for a meeting with the mayor. Later, Trudeau delivered remarks to a Canada council meeting of the Canadian Labour Congress.

LEADERS

Bloc Québécois Leader Yves-François Blanchet held a media scrum at the House of Commons ahead of Question Period.

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre attends a party fundraising event at a private residence in Mississauga.

Green Party Leader Elizabeth May attended the House of Commons.

NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh, in Ottawa, met with Saskatchewan’s NDP Leader, Carla Beck, and, later, Ken Price, the chief of the K’ómoks First Nation,. In the afternoon, he delivered a speech to a Canadian Labour Congress Canadian council meeting.

THE DECIBEL

On today’s edition of The Globe and Mail podcast, Sanjay Ruparelia, an associate professor at Toronto Metropolitan University and Jarislowsky Democracy Chair, explains why India’s elections matter for democracy – and the balance of power for the rest of the world. The Decibel is here.

PUBLIC OPINION

Declining trust in federal and provincial governments: A new survey finds a growing proportion of Canadians do not trust the federal or provincial governments to make decisions on health care, climate change, the economy and immigration.

OPINION

On Haida Gwaii, an island of change for Indigenous land talks

“For more than a century, the Haida Nation has disputed the Crown’s dominion over the land, air and waters of Haida Gwaii, a lush archipelago roughly 150 kilometres off the coast of British Columbia. More than 20 years ago, the First Nation went to the Supreme Court of Canada with a lawsuit that says the islands belong to the Haida, part of a wider legal and political effort to resolve scores of land claims in the province. That case has been grinding toward a conclusion that the B.C. government was increasingly convinced would end in a Haida victory.” – The Globe and Mail Editorial Board.

The RCMP raid the home of ArriveCan contractor as Parliament scolds

“The last time someone was called before the bar of the House of Commons to answer MPs’ inquiries, it was to demand that a man named R.C. Miller explain how his company got government contracts to supply lights, burners and bristle brushes for lighthouses. That was 1913. On Wednesday, Kristian Firth, the managing partner of GCStrategies, one of the key contractors on the federal government’s ArriveCan app, was called to answer MPs’ queries. Inside the Commons, it felt like something from another century.” – Campbell Clark

First Nations peoples have lost confidence in Thunder Bay’s police force

“Thunder Bay has become ground zero for human-rights violations against Indigenous Peoples in Canada. Too many sudden and suspicious deaths of Indigenous Peoples have not been investigated properly. There have been too many reports on what is wrong with policing in the city – including ones by former chair of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission Murray Sinclair and former Toronto Police board chair Alok Mukherjee, and another one called “Broken Trust,” in which the Office of the Independent Police Review Director said the Thunder Bay Police Service (TBPS) was guilty of “systemic racism” in 2018. – Tanya Talaga.

The failure of Canada’s health care system is a disgrace – and a deadly one

“What can be said about Canada’s health care system that hasn’t been said countless times over, as we watch more and more people suffer and die as they wait for baseline standards of care? Despite our delusions, we don’t have “world-class” health care, as our Prime Minister has said; we don’t even have universal health care. What we have is health care if you’re lucky, or well connected, or if you happen to have a heart attack on a day when your closest ER is merely overcapacity as usual, and not stuffed to the point of incapacitation.” – Robyn Urback.

Got a news tip that you’d like us to look into? E-mail us at tips@globeandmail.com. Need to share documents securely? Reach out via SecureDrop.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

GOP strategist reacts to Trump’s ‘unconventional’ request – CNN

Published

 on


GOP strategist reacts to Trump’s ‘unconventional’ request

Donald Trump’s campaign is asking Republican candidates and committees using the former president’s name and likeness to fundraise to give at least 5% of what they raise to the campaign, according to a letter obtained by CNN. CNN’s Steve Contorno and Republican strategist Rina Shah weigh in.


03:00

– Source:
CNN

Adblock test (Why?)

300x250x1

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Anger toward federal government at 6-year high: Nanos survey – CTV News

Published

 on


Most Canadians in March reported feeling angry or pessimistic towards the federal government than at any point in the last six years, according to a survey by Nanos Research.

Nanos has been measuring Canadians’ feelings of optimism, satisfaction, disinterest, anger, pessimism and uncertainty toward the federal government since November 2018.

The latest survey found that optimism had crept up slightly to 10 per cent since hitting an all-time low of eight per cent in September 2023.

300x250x1

However, 62 per cent of Canadians said they feel either pessimistic or angry, with respondents equally split between the two sentiments.

(Nanos Research)

“What we’ve seen is the anger quotient has hit a new record,” Nik Nanos, CTV’s official pollster and Nanos Research founder, said in an interview with CTV News’ Trend Line on Wednesday.

Only 11 per cent of Canadians felt satisfied, while another 11 per cent said they were disinterested.

Past survey results show anger toward the federal government has increased or held steady across the country since March 2023, while satisfaction has gradually declined.

Will the budget move the needle?

Since the survey was conducted before the federal government released its 2024 budget, there’s a chance the anger and pessimism of March could subside a little by the time Nanos takes the public’s temperature again. They could also stick.

The five most important issues to Canadians right now that would influence votes, according to another recent Nanos survey conducted for Bloomberg, include inflation and the cost of living, health care, climate change and the environment, housing affordability and taxes.

(Nanos Research)

With this year’s budget, the federal government pledged $52.9 billion in new spending while promising to maintain the 2023-24 federal deficit at $40.1 billion. The federal deficit is projected to be $39.8 billion in 2024-25.

The budget includes plans to boost new housing stock, roll out a national disability benefit, introduce carbon rebates for small businesses and increase taxes on Canada’s top-earners.

However, advocacy groups have complained it doesn’t do enough to address climate change, or support First Nations communities and Canadians with disabilities.

“Canada is poised for another disastrous wildfire season, but this budget fails to give the climate crisis the attention it urgently deserves,” Keith Brooks, program director for Environmental Defence, wrote in a statement on the organization’s website.

Meanwhile, when it comes to a promise to close what the Assembly of First Nations says is a sprawling Indigenous infrastructure gap, the budget falls short by more than $420 billion. And while advocacy groups have praised the impending roll-out of the Canada Disability Benefit, organizations like March of Dimes Canada and Daily Bread Food Bank say the estimated maximum benefit of $200 per month per recipient won’t be enough to lift Canadians with disabilities out of poverty.

According to Nanos, if Wednesday’s budget announcement isn’t enough to restore the federal government’s favour, no amount of spending will do the trick.

“If the Liberal numbers don’t move up after this, perhaps the listening lesson for the Liberals will be (that) spending is not the political solution for them to break this trend line,” Nanos said. “It’ll have to be something else.”

Conservatives in ‘majority territory’

While the Liberal party waits to see what kind of effect its budget will have on voters, the Conservatives are enjoying a clear lead when it comes to ballot tracking.

(Nanos Research)

“Any way you cut it right now, the Conservatives are in the driver’s seat,” Nanos said. “They’re in majority territory.”

According to Nanos Research ballot tracking from the week ending April 12, the Conservatives are the top choice for 40 per cent of respondents, the Liberals for 23.7 per cent and the NDP for 20.6 per cent.

Whether the Liberals or the Conservatives form the next government will come down, partly, to whether voters believe more government spending is, or isn’t, the key to helping working Canadians, Nanos said.

“Both of the parties are fighting for working Canadians … and we have two competing visions for that. For the Liberals, it’s about putting government support into their hands and creating social programs to support Canadians,” he said.

“For the Conservatives, it’s very different. It’s about reducing the size of government (and) reducing taxes.”

Watch the full episode of Trend Line in our video player at the top of this article. You can also listen in our audio player below, or wherever you get your podcasts. The next episode comes out Wednesday, May 1.

Methodology

Nanos conducted an RDD dual frame (land- and cell-lines) hybrid telephone and online random survey of 1,069 Canadians, 18 years of age or older, between March 31 and April 1, 2024, as part of an omnibus survey. Participants were randomly recruited by telephone using live agents and administered a survey online. The sample included both land- and cell-lines across Canada. The results were statistically checked and weighted by age and gender using the latest census information and the sample is geographically stratified to be representative of Canada. The margin of error for this survey is ±3.0 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.

With files from The Canadian Press, CTV News Senior Digital Parliamentary Reporter Rachel Aiello and CTV News Parliamentary Bureau Writer, Producer Spencer Van Dyke

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending