National Right to Life clamps down
On April 5 the National Right to Life Committee’s board of directors passed this resolution in response to GA Right to Life’s endorsement of Mike Huckabee for president rather than NRLC’s choice, Fred Thompson, and Iowa RTL’s decision to go neutral:
BE IT RESOLVED that it is the policy and a goal and purpose of National Right to Life that no state affiliate, member or alternate of the National Right to Life Board of Directors endorse or support any candidate for President of the United States other than a candidate endorsed or supported by National Right to Life.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if National Right to Life supports or endorses a candidate for President of the United States, then it is the policy and a goal and purpose of National Right to Life that no state affiliate, member or alternate of the National Right to Life Board of Directors publicly oppose or voice neutrality or non-support for that candidate.
NRLC does good work, to be sure. But I’ve noted before the same leaders have been in position far too long – decades – which IMO has led to a Beltway rather than grassroots mentality and a DC power rush that leads them to make some decisions not for the good of the organization or the pro-life movement but for the good of the ones in control.
This was one of those decisions….
I travel the country and am aware of many fine state RTL affiliates doing fabulous work – that never gets shared or recognized. Why does NRLC conduct the very same workshops by the very same people – its own – year in and year out at the annual convention?
Between 10-15 years ago, state affiliate movers and shakers garnered almost enough support to overthrow the current leadership Democratically, through votes. What did NRLC leaders do? Added more “directors at large” to dilute the vote.
Since then, they have done all possible to demand complete compliance toward total and final consolidation of power.
The aforementioned resolution is another example of NRLC’s clamp-down on affiliates that disagree with the direction current leaders have taken NRLC for the past 15-20 years. It was not meant to simply address the “problem” of GA and IA RTL.
GA and IA had legitimate reasons to decide as they did on the presidential nominee. They risked alienating their base by endorsing Thompson. NRLC leaders would have understood this had they invested themselves in state and local groups and become sensitive to what is happening outside the Beltway in the grassroots. GA’s forced decision in particular might have been averted had NRLC done so.
Gone now is mutual respect between state groups and NRLC. Gone now is any measure of local autonomy and any sense that needs and concerns of state affiliates are heard and respected. One-way respect is demanded.
But dictatorships never endure.
Meanwhile, NRLC’s decisions are double-minded, and the movement suffers.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
I could not agree more Jill. Something has to change at NRLC, and pretty quickly in my opinion, especailly with groups like American Right to Life growing. NRLC has to keep the movement unified, and by doing this they are doing the opposite. We are a very powerful movement, but if we are divided, then we become less powerful.
I’ll not comment in regards to NRLC or any other specific group.
But there are many closely held pro-life organizations that are in dire need of need an independent board and regular elections for both board and executive positions.
Some people have built kingdoms for themselves out of the movement, consisting of financial control and influence
Ruben: you can find out all of the salaries from non-profit organizations if you run a profile check on them.
“Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
…I believe prayer is our only answer….
Nathan:
Guidestar.org has this information online, and not for profits are required to provide 990s upon request – so the information is out there, but most people are unaware…
Pray that you have the wisdom to research the issue of abortion with the dysfuntion that is our federal government to accomplish our goals.
Fred Thompson knew full well that Constitutional Amendments were not only wrongheaded to attempt but also were IMPOSSIBLE to pass ( or even repeal ) as directly evidenced by our previous attempt when we had the largest majority we’ve had in considerable time. Therefore, we will NEVER overturn Roe vs. Wade by constitutional amendment…lets put that behind us and move on already! Federalism is the correct and more importantly the effective path to take.
Therefore, the NRLC, apparently the only group or leadership who fully appreciates our situation, endorsed the only candidate who clearly understood what he was doing…what happened to everyone elses ability to get a clue??
Fred Thompson would explain this each time the subject came up so there are no excuses other than incapability of your own governance not to know what I’ve just explained again…OR is someone going to suggest the NRLC didn’t explain this also??
They know what their doing, it was Dobson and other well intentioned clowns who knew not what they did.
I’d like to know the average age of National Right to Life’s staff? Fifty-five? Sixty? You look at the faces of the staff on American Life League’s website and I see YOUNG, vibrant people. Where there are young people, the pro-life movement thrives. And aging pro-life groups like NRTL are becoming irrelevant.
Hey all, it’s that time again…novena anyone?
Sandy, I can’t find your email…will you send it to me?
Federalism has not been saving lives at the abortion clinics, and has not set up the thousands of pregnancy centers. Federalism has caused this pissing match between NRTL and the big abortion groups, while the pro-life grassroots have been making strides in their communities.
I’m a Huckabee fan, so I think my view of this issue is a little biased. I think they are wrong to not let other local branches decide who to endorse, or to not let them be neutral. But if they were endorsing Huckabee, it would be tempting to view it differently.
But really it is not good to force somebody to endorse something or someone when they might not really feel that way in their heart.
Perhaps, just perhaps, there is hope for our country:
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=6WOzF9ZGA7A
Chris, 5:15p: You totally missed the point of my post. In reality it wasn’t about Thompson or Huckabee. It was about the big picture, about NRLC disallowing state affiliates to respond to their base. They can only respond to NRLC, and that so as to keep current NRLC leaders in power. Very poor thinking.
Jill, Jill Jill… Why do you feel the need to attack? This kind of hate post does nothing to improve the effectiveness of the pro-life movement and only divides us even further than we already are…
First, NRLC is seeking to maintain unity within the pro-life community. This disunity is what led to the Thompson endorsement in the first place. And the disunity that continued after that is what led to the nomination of McCain (who is pro-life on abortion but was certainly at the bottom of the list of most pro-lifers this time last year or even a few months ago).
NRLC’s resolution was a plea for unity. Most pro-life people are going to support McCain and this resolution you’re blasting is a plea for pro-life groups to not trash him and pave the way for Barack Obama (or Hillary Clinton) to be elected. Sure you don’t want that, do you?
And as far as NRLC not representing the grassroots is concerned, the resolution was agreed to *unanimously* by all 50 state Right to Life groups who are representing over 3,000 local, grassroots chapters in cities and towns across the country. Not to disparage their work but I know none of the other ABC groups that are key pro-life organizations that can make that same claim. NRLC epitomizes grassroots activism moreso than virtually any pro-life group around. The people involved are the same ones at the March for Life, the LifeChain, the local pregnancy center dinner, etc.
As far as adding at large directors is concerned, they represent about 15 percent of the total number of board members. Hardly enough to constitute some sort of takeover as you intimate in your post. And most of them are folks who represent prominent communities — Hispanics, African-Americans, the disabled, etc. — who are typically underrepresented in the pro-life movement. Should we exclude them from having a seat at the table?
Next, there is not enmity between the state Right to Life groups and NRLC as you allege here. Neither of the two groups you mentioned in this post are upset with NRLC nor do they have any significant disagreements in terms of general election or legislative strategy. Both proudly display their decades-long standing as NRLC affiliate groups.
In fact, Dan Becker, the president of Georgia Right to Life (who you claim the resolution targeted) has been on this very blog singing NRLC’s praises in response to previous erroneous claims similar to this. Look it up.
Furthermore, I’m sorry but your characterization of the National Right to Life convention is completely off base. How do I know? Because, as you know, I’ve been there. For years and years.
I am not affiliated with National Right to Life itself (only with a state affiliate) and I am one of the speakers at the convention. As are:
Wesley J. Smith
Bobby Schinder
Suzanne Vitadamo
Father Frank Pavone
Phill Kline
Tim Goeglein
Rev. Joseph Naumann
Rev. Richard John Neuhaus
Joel Brind
Clenard Childress
Rich Doerflinger
Georgette Forney
Day Gardner
MIchael New
Brother Paul O’Donnell
David Prentice
and 30 other speakers at LAST YEAR’s convention. These are folks who regularly make their way onto your blog and they have absolutely no affiliation with National Right to Life. That number easily doubles if you include people involved in state or local pro-life groups but not NRLC directly.
Jill, I love you and you do great work for the pro-life cause. But this is an anomaly that has you knee-jerking so hard I’m surprised you didn’t pull something. This space could have much better been served by attacking Planned Parenthood or Obama or someone worthy of your righteous condemnation.
I’m sure everyone can find some fault with National Right to Life. If my name were on the letterhead as president, I’d change some things too. But enough is enough. The trashing of a venerable pro-life group that has dedicated itself to protecting babies and the elderly and disabled has got to come to an end.
Jill, as someone who I regard as a national pro-life leader, you could be instrumental in fostering a greater spirit of unity in the pro-life movement. Instead, we get a post that is beneath you. I think you owe NRLC an apology and I hope and pray this is the last attack post you’ll let grace the pages of your otherwise enormously effective blog.
Yours,,
Steven
Jill,
I agree with you 100%. NRLC was totally disconnected from the grassroots when they endorsed Thompson. Mike Huckabee is an openly Christian leader who moves and motivates pro-life and pro-family people to action. His record on life is long and impeccable. Fred Thompson is a divorced man who has bragged about his promiscuous adult years between marriages before he remarried a much younger woman. He was the “inside the beltway” choice and you are right on to say that reasonable affiliates deserve the autonomy to dissent.
Mr. Ertelt, you are a fine man as far as I know. I have read your “Life News” publication over the years and respect your opinion. But, please, do not disparage Jill over this issue.
For full disclosure, I was Huckabee 14th District Director in Illinois, but that was a fully volunteer position. I even paid 100% of my expenses on my own including a trip to Iowa.
Jill, keep speaking truth to power. I wish you were the nominee for the 11th District. What a great debate it would be seeing you against Halvorsen.
Jon, I’m not “disparaging” Jill. But when she posts an attack on a pro-life group that’s below the belt and filled with half-truths, I’m going to respond.
Thompson was not an “inside the beltway” pick.
At the time of the endorsement (very early November), most of the pro-life movement in the grassroots was split between Thompson and Romney.
NRLC made an endorsement for Thompson because of his 100% pro-life voting record and his position against both abortion as well as ESCR. (I noticed none of your criticisms of him had to do with pro-life issues).
At the time the thinking of many people both in and out of NRLC was that Giuliani was awful, Romney had flip-flopped and the best choice was Thompson. At that time, Huckabee wasn’t even in contention. He was at 2-3 percent in the polls, had very little money and little name ID and media attention.
No one could have seen that Thompson’s campaign would tank and Huckabee would be the most viable of the strongly pro-life candidates just weeks later. I’m sure had we known then what we know now, that Huckabee would have been the choice for the endorsement. Everyone at NRLC loved him (and I worked on his 1992 campaign for Lt. Governor and think the world of the man) but when the endorsement was made, it was a MUCH different scenario than at the same time in December.
So it’s easy to play armchair quarterback and say woulda coulda shoula, but at the time the Thompson endorsement made perfect sense.
Instead of griping at pro-life groups for old decisions that were in very good faith, we all need to move forward.
There is a major campaign for president underway and one side wants to give us 35 more years of 50 million more abortions. We need to wake up and work together!
In the Alcoholics Anonymous movement there are no “Self-Appointed Messiahs”, because “Anonymous” makes it impossible for individuals or groups to advance their Religion, their Politicians or any other outside venues using the movement as their secondary platform. Anonymity eliminates all claims for power, prestige, or money.
Believe it or not, if you walked into an AA meeting and donated 10 million dollars, they must vehemently refuse it. One of the co-founders of this spiritual organization was offered an honorary degree from Yale. He refused, saying that breaks the anonymity and the ideal that fuels the progress of its members.
Look, let’s be honest here, although they have all been a tremendous help to the pro-life movement: Priests for Life, American Life League, the National Right to Life, Pro-life America and Operation Rescue can not all be “our spokesmen” and “the largest pro-life organization in America” as their popularity and the news media often portrays them to be.
People in AA use the same multi-denominational Church halls and community buildings nationwide that pro-lifers do, only not in the same capacity or for the same purpose. When we relinquish the power, prestige, and money, in the movement we will then have the ideal it takes to flourish as “a brotherhood of man” and massively advance our cause.
When pro-family parents want to share and network with like-minded people, even one hour a month, where can they go locally to discuss the challenges that have inebriated their community without interference from religion, politics or “self appointed messiahs”?
Imagine there’s no Heaven
It’s easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today
Imagine there’s no countries
It isn’t hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace
You may say that I’m a dreamer
But I’m not the only one
I hope someday you’ll join us
And the world will be as one
Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world
You may say that I’m a dreamer
But I’m not the only one
I hope someday you’ll join us
And the world will live as one
Steven,
Thank you for the constructive dialogue, but I do want to correct the record.
Huckabee was surging in the polls, especially in Iowa, when the endorsement came out.
Thompson did legal work for a pro-abortion rights group, and admitted to it after initially denying it. His final excuse was that he had to because it was a client of the firm. A principled man would have quit before taking that assignment.
Thompson also refused to back the Constitutional Amendment to overturn Roe v. Wade. Plus he was a McCain/Feingold supporter. He was totally unworthy of pro-life support.
A pro-life group should endorse on principle not prognostication.
That all said, McCain is better than Clinton or Obama, but he had better select a pro-life conservative with unimpeachable credentials or a lot of conservatives will sit on their hands.
Huckabee, Pawlenty, Thune, and Sanford are all good candidates.
Irrelevance ALERT!!