Thursday, May 29, 2008

CRTL Candidate Questionnaires Released!

Colorado Right to Life has published the responses it has received so far from Congressional and Legislative candidates in Colorado!

They will continue to publish more, as they receive them, and so will we here.

The most disappointing result, so far, is that US Senate candidate Bob Schaffer has not only refused to meet with Colorado Right to Life (early on), but since then has refused to agree to support the Personhood Ballot Initiative, which is now approved to be on the 2008 November ballot!

Schaffer has said he is a pro-life candidate in past races, and maintains a 100% rating from National Right to Life (but so do some pro-aborts!) and has made statements in the past to the effect of believing life begins at conception. Therefore, he cannot have anything to gain by not supporting this -- he's already on record claiming the position. But there is also no reason whatsoever why he would not, could not, or should not support it, especially now that it's approved to be on the ballot. There have been exchanges with American Right to Life in the media about his position on Personhood, as well as his conduct during an investigation in the Marianas Islands, but all that came after he had already refused to support Personhood, and had also refused to speak to American or Colorado Right to Life.

Schaffer believes his past record should speak for itself, even while he is refusing to meet with pro-life groups and actively refusing to support Personhood.

Conversations continue with Schaffer, but for now he remains steadfast in not intending to support Personhood 2008! Pro lifers should urge him to agree to support it.

To not support Personhood is to deny the very Right to Life in the first place. If Life is not a right recognized under law at any age or time, then it's not a right. Life, under the law, would remain a privilege, granted or taken away from innocent Persons by the government, in direct opposition to God's Law.

A chart, listing all the candidates' answers, and a graphic image of the original documents (including notes) can be seen at:
CRTL Candidate Responses.

(more posted in later posts, as we get them)


Bob Schaffer (R) - No response (has said he does not support the Personhood Initiative, and repeatedly has refused to meet with us)


5th District
Cong. Doug Lamborn (R) - 100% (7 of 7)
Jeff Crank (R) - 100% (7 of 7)
Bentley Rayburn (R) - 100% (7 of 7) (see notes at the link above for his detailed explanation)

6th District
Mike Coffman (R) - 100% (7 of 7)
Ted Harvey (R) - 100% (6 of 7 *see note) EDITOR'S NOTE (8/11): From conversations we have had with Sen. Harvey, it appears he was being intentionally deceptive in his response to question #7 about supporting compromised legislation that undermines the Personhood of the unborn child. Ted answered that he would not support such legislation, but has now confirmed to CRTL board members that he will support compromised child-killing regulations in the future! Therefore, he can only be considered to have responded correctly on 6 of the 7 questions, and we are deeply disturbed by his deception and continued adherence to a regulator mindset.
Wil Armstrong (R) - No response (there is no mention of life issues on his website as of today except for "support for traditional values")
Steve Ward (R) - No response (Steve Ward wrote and passed a bill that would limit or take away certain rights CRTL has exercised to protest abortion, abortionists, or those who build abortion centers -- i.e. the Collaborators Project).

No responses yet from any other Congressional Districts, though some candidates in those districts are just getting started.


SD 12 - Keith King (R) - Responded, saying he does not answer questionnaires. Noted his pro-life record.

SD 17 - Katie Witt (R) - Responded, saying she is pro-life but cannot take the survey.

No other State Senate candidates have responded. Only half of the Senate offices are up for election this year, so not all verified pro-life Senators are listed. Also, not every district has a candidate from both parties.


HD 5 - JJ Swiontek (R) - 100% (7 of 7) (see notes at link above)

HD 7 - Josh Raines (R) - 100% (7 of 7)

HD 9 - James Landauer (R) - 100% (7 of 7)
HD 9 - Paul Rosenthal (D) - 0% (0 of 7) - Responded that he disagrees with us, but thanks for asking!

HD 17 - Catherine Jarrett (R) - 100% (7 of 7)

HD 34 - Tom Bopp (R) - 100% (7 of 7)

HD 42 - George Carouthers (R) - 100% (7 of 7)

HD 53 - Donna R. Gallup (R) - 100% (7 of 7)

HD 56 - Muhammad Ali Hasan (R) - 29% (2 of 7) (Respects our organization, sounds open to dialogue, but also somewhat firm in opposition to some of our positions)

HD 65 - Jerry Sonnenberg (R) - 100% (7 of 7)

No other candidates for the State House responded. Every effort has been made to reach them by either mail or e-mail.

Keep in mind that it's very promising to have this many very positive responses! The Republican Party's "typical" candidate even just 5 or 10 years ago would likely have scored only 3 or 4 out of 7. Sadly, many Republican candidates today would score only 3 or 4 still, and some Republican candidates would score a pro-abortion "0". Almost all Democrat candidates would score a "0".

No responses were received from third party candidates, even though a number of them were approached. It may be that they are just starting to get organized.

If your candidate for public office is not on this list, please encourage them to send their responses to the survey questions to the CRTL office, so we can publicize their answers! Please make sure to do this before you commit to support them -- otherwise, pro-lifers will continue to support candidates who are not really pro-life.

Also, two candidates for Delegate to the Republican National Convention replied (NOTE: these candidates were not approached for the questionnaire, so there may be other candidates running for Delegate who did not have the opportunity to answer).

Bill Howerton - 100% (7 of 7) (see notes)
Catherine Jarrett - 100% (7 of 7) (is also a candidate for office, listed above)

No comments: