|
Illinois Federation for Right to Life Political Action Committee |
|
2008 General Election |
|
Candidate Surveys Federal Offices |
|
IFRL 2008 VOTER INFORMATION QUESTIONNAIRE FEDERAL CANDIDATE SURVEY
~ABORTION QUESTIONS~
The Illinois Federation for Right to Life (IFRL) believes that unborn children should be protected by law, and that abortion should be permitted only when necessary to prevent the death of the mother. Under what circumstances, if any, do you believe that abortion should be legal?
A. Only to prevent the death of the mother (the IFRL position)
B. To prevent the mother’s death, in cases of incest, and in reported cases of forcible rape.
~ROE V. WADE QUESTIONS~
In its 1973 rulings in Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton, the U.S. Supreme Court created a constitutional “right to abortion” for any reason until “viability” (into the sixth month), and for any “health” reasons – including “emotional” health – even during the final three months of pregnancy.
1. Do you support the complete reversal of the Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton decisions, thereby allowing the state legislatures and Congress to once again protect unborn children?
~THE PAIN OF UNBORN BABIES QUESTIONS~
There is now overwhelming scientific evidence that abortion methods used by the fifth month (and perhaps earlier) such as the “dilation and evacuation” (dismemberment) method, and partial-birth abortion method, cause excruciating pain to an unborn child.
2. Would you support legislation to require that any mother considering an abortion first must be provided with clear and accurate information about the capacity of an unborn child to feel pain?
3. Would you support legislation to require that any mother considering an abortion first must be provided with clear and accurate information about possible alternatives to lessen or avoid pain?
~SEX SELECTION QUESTIONS~
4. Would you support federal legislation to prohibit anyone from advertising abortions or performing abortions for the purpose of sex selection?
~PLAN B EMERGENCY CONTRACEPTIVES QUESTIONS~
The Plan B Emergency Contraceptives commonly referred to as the “Morning After Pill” is a multiple dose of oral contraceptive. The Morning After Pill may prevent ovulation or the implantation of a newly conceived human being thus acting as an abortifacient.
5. Would you support legislation that prohibits the dispensing of Plan B Emergency Contraceptives to women without a prescription ?
6. Would you support legislation that prohibits the dispensing of Plan B Emergency Contraceptives to minor girls without a prescription?
~PROTECTION OF HUMAN EMBRYOS QUESTIONS~
The right to life of human beings must be respected at every stage of their biological development. Human individuals who are at the embryonic stage of development should not be used for harmful experimentation. This must apply equally regardless of whether the human lives were begun by in vitro fertilization, by somatic cell nuclear transfer (human cloning), or by some other laboratory technique. IFRL opposes harvesting “stem cells” from living human embryos, since this kills the embryos. Note: IFRL is NOT opposed to other research on “stem cells” that are obtained without killing embryos – for example, stem cells harvested from umbilical cord blood and adult tissue.
7. Will you vote for measures to protect living human embryos from being used for medical experiments that would harm or kill them, including so-called “embryonic stem cell research” that would require the killing of human embryos, regardless of the method used to create these human embryos?
8. Would you oppose any legislation that would authorize federal funding of research for which the killing of human embryos would be a predicate step or necessary part?
~HUMAN CLONING QUESTIONS~
Human cloning is a process (technically known as “somatic cell nuclear transfer”) in which genetic material from one person is artificially transferred into a human or animal egg cell, thereby beginning the life of a new human individual who has only one parent and who is genetically nearly identical to that parent. IFRL believes that human life at every stage of biological development is deserving of respect and protection regardless of the circumstances under which the human life was created. It has been proposed to create human life through cloning for the purpose of destructive experiments on those humans, resulting in their deaths, a process sometimes referred to as “therapeutic cloning.”
9. Would you support a legal prohibition on all human cloning, including the creation of human embryos by cloning?
As an alternative to a genuine ban on all human cloning, some legislation has been proposed that allows the creation of human embryos to be used in medical research (so-called “therapeutic cloning”), but allegedly prevents the implantation of the embryo in the uterus of a female. These bills are sometimes misleadingly referred to as “bans on reproductive cloning,” but they really do not ban human cloning at all – rather, they ban the survival of human clones. Such a bill would impose a legal mandate that every clone must be killed or allowed to die. IFRL strongly opposes such “clone and kill” legislation.
10. Would you oppose legislation that would permit the creation of human embryos by cloning but in effect require the death of each such embryo (that is, legislation to “ban reproductive cloning” but simultaneously permit so-called “therapeutic cloning”)?
11. Would you support legislation to require that any recipient of federal National Institutes of Health funds must not engage in the creation or use of cloned human embryos?
Using cloned mammals, cloning researchers are actively developing techniques for “fetus farming.” This means that they create a cloned embryo of a given species, implant that cloned embryo into the uterus of an adult female of that same species, allow the cloned animal to grow into various stages of fetal development, and then abort the fetus in order to harvest the desired tissues or organs. For example, in one study published in 2005, researchers reported implanting cow clones and then aborting the cow fetuses at four months into the pregnancy, in order to harvest their living tissue; this was reported as an advance for “therapeutic cloning.”
12. Would you support federal legislation that would prevent “fetus farming” in humans, by prohibiting establishing a human pregnancy for any purpose other than intending a live birth?
~ABORTION FUNDING QUESTIONS~
Congress votes from time to time on the “Hyde Amendment,” a law that prohibits federal Medicaid money from being used to pay for abortions or for managed-care plans that include abortion, except to save the life of the mother, or in cases of rape or incest.
13. Would you vote for the Hyde Amendment policy without weakening amendments?
14. Besides Medicaid, would you vote against weakening the existing bans on the use of any congressionally appropriated funds for abortion in bills covering the military, federal employees, the District of Columbia, etc., with the same exceptions as the Hyde Amendment?
15. Would you vote against legislation that would allow the performance of abortions at U.S. Military facilities, even if privately funded (except to save the life of the mother, or in the case of rape and incest)?
Title X (“Title 10”) of the Public Health Service Act provides about $286 million annually for grants to state and private entities for “family planning” programs. Although federal law does not permit such funds to be used for abortions, large amounts of Title X funds go to organizations (such as Planned Parenthood) that own and operate abortion clinics.
16. Would you support legislation to make organizations that operate abortion clinics (not bona fide hospitals) ineligible for Title 10 funding?
~FOREIGN AID FOR ABORTIONS QUESTIONS~
The U.S. spends nearly a half-billion dollars annually on family planning/population-control programs in other nations.
17. Would you vote for legislation the requires that in order to be eligible for U. S. Population-control funds, a private overseas organization must agree not to perform abortions (except to save the life of the mother, or in cases of rape or incest) or to “actively promote abortion as a method of family planning?
The United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) participates in China’s population-control program, which relies heavily on coerced abortion. The UNFPA also promotes expanded access to abortion in developing nations, and has promoted the abortion pill, RU-486.
18. Will you vote against U.S. funding of the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA)?
~PARENTAL NOTIFICATION/CONSENT FOR MINORS’ ABORTIONS QUESTIONS~
Laws are already in effect in about half the states that require notification or consent of at least one parent (or authorization by a judge) before an abortion can be performed on a minor. However, these laws are often circumvented by minors who cross state lines in order to evade parental involvement requirements (often with the aid of older boyfriends, abortion clinic staff, or other adults lacking parental authority).
19. Would you vote for legislation that makes it an offense to transport a minor across state lines to evade a parental involvement requirement?
~EUTHANASIA QUESTIONS~
The pro-life movement has always sought to protect not only the unborn from abortion, but also vulnerable born, especially older or disabled people, from euthanasia. We consider rationing of health care, resulting in the denial of life-saving medical treatment against the will of the patient, to be unacceptable involuntary euthanasia.
The Controlled Substances Act generally prohibits the use of dangerous drugs and narcotics. An exception to this prohibition is the legal ability of physicians to prescribe them for what the Drug Enforcement Administration regulations define as a “legitimate medical purpose.”
20. Would you vote for legislation to clarify that drugs whose use is generally prohibited under the Controlled Substances Act shall not legally be prescribed or dispensed to assist suicide or for euthanasia?
21. Will you vote against any bill that imposes price controls or otherwise limits the right of older Americans who choose to do so to add their own funds on top of the government contribution in order to obtain Medicare health insurance that is less likely to ration medical treatment and prescription drugs?
Medical and ethical journals now frequently carry articles advocating denial of life-saving medical treatment against the will of a patient or the patient’s family if health care providers or an ethics committee think the patient’s quality of life is unacceptable, even though the patient and family disagree.
22. Will you vote to prevent involuntary denial of lifesaving medical treatment by amending the Patient Self-Determination Act to provide that in cases in which a health care provider is unwilling to provide treatment, food or fluids that is desired by the patient or the patient’s surrogate and that in reasonable medical judgment is necessary to prevent the patient’s death, the provider must allow the patient to be transferred to a willing provider and provide the treatment pending transfer?
~POLITICAL SPEECH QUESTIONS~
The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) (McCain – Feingold) prohibits most incorporated citizens groups from stating the name of a federal candidate, including a sitting member of Congress, in broadcast advertising (radio and TV) 30 days before a primary election and 60 days before a general election. This includes messages discussing pending legislation.
23. Would you vote to repeal that portion of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act that prohibits most citizen groups from stating the name of a federal candidate in radio and TV advertising 30 days before a primary election and 60 days before a general election?
24. Would you vote against expanding the 30/60 day ban on mentioning the name of a federal candidate to forms of communication other than radio or TV, and against any other effort to further restrict the freedom of speech of a citizen group or political action committee (PAC)?
The BCRA also directed the Federal Election Commission to promulgate new rules that specifically do not require that there be a “formal agreement or collaboration” with a member of Congress or other candidate in order for an expenditure by a citizen group or political action committee (PAC) to be a “coordinated expenditure” and thus a campaign “contribution.” Under this new loose definition of “coordination,” citizen groups and PACs that communicate with Congress on legislative matters and also conduct independent expenditures are at risk of being unintentionally “coordinated.” Thereby making their independent expenditures illegal campaign “contributions.”
25. Would you vote to reestablish that “coordination” means only a formal agreement or collaboration on a specific project between a candidate and a citizen group or PAC?
|