A Woman’s Choice – The Road to the White House

by Nicole Carcel, NWPC LA Westside Board Member

President Barack Obama released a statement on Sunday, January 22, 2012, reaffirming his commitment to protect a woman's right to choose.

His moving statement was delivered on the 39th anniversary of the landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court on the issue of abortion, Roe v. Wade.

“As we mark the 39th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, we must remember that this Supreme Court decision not only protects a woman’s health and reproductive freedom, but also affirms a broader principle: that government should not intrude on private family matters. I remain committed to protecting a woman’s right to choose and this fundamental constitutional right. While this is a sensitive and often divisive issue -- no matter what our views, we must stay united in our determination to prevent unintended pregnancies, support pregnant woman and mothers, reduce the need for abortion, encourage healthy relationships, and promote adoption. And as we remember this historic anniversary, we must also continue our efforts to ensure that our daughters have the same rights, freedoms, and opportunities as our sons to fulfill their dreams” 

    –President Barack Obama

2012 will undoubtedly be one of the most watched political years in our nation’s history.  As we look to the future it is imperative that we choose a leader who believes in equality, period.

In my opinion there is a clear champion in the 2012 Presidential Election.  Here are a few facts and statements about two of our Presidential hopefuls:

Current President and Democratic candidate, Barack Obama, has proven time and again he stands with NWPC on a woman's right to choose.  

Within the first ninety days in Office, President Barack Obama released a statement restating support for Roe v. Wade decision that allowed virtually unlimited abortions and has resulted in at least 50 million abortions since 1973.  He also implemented funding for pro-abortion groups that either promote or perform abortions in other nations. As a result a decision to overturn Mexico City Policy sends part of $457 million to pro-abortion organizations.  Additionally he nominated pro-abortion Kathleen Sebelius to become Secretary of Health and Human Services.  Kathleen Sebelius has been instrumental on health care reform and protecting a woman's right to choose.  Watch YouTube Clip.

Barack Obama has demonstrated that a woman’s right to choose is a freedom that every woman should be granted.  During his first year he appointed appeals court judge Sonia Sonotmayor as a Supreme Court nominee. Sotomayor agrees that the courts should make policy, such as the Roe v. Wade case. Sotomayor was later opposed by pro-life groups and supported by pro-abortion groups and those who know her say she will support abortion on the high court.  He also signed a bill that overturned the 13-year-long ban on funding abortions with tax dollars in the nation’s capital.

In 2010 he signed the pro-abortion health care bill into law that contains massive abortion funding, no conscience protections and rationing.  In the same year, Obama named pro-abortion activist Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court; she is strongly opposed by pro-life groups.

In 2011 he refused Speaker John Boehner’s request to cut taxpayer funding to the Planned Parenthood abortion business.  Most recently, Barack Obama forced insurance companies to pay for abortion drugs under Obamacare.

While Barack Obama supports pro-choice, his Presidential opponents support pro-life. Rick Santorum, a 2012 Republican Presidential candidate, caused quite a stir on Piers Morgan Tonight when he inferred that rape victims should accept their babies as gifts from God.  During the interview, the most socially conservative hopeful remained steadfast in his opposition to abortion, even in cases where rape is involved.

Morgan pressed Santorum on the issue and asked how the right-wing candidate would feel if his daughter came to him begging for an abortion after being raped. Santorum said, “I think the right approach is to accept this horribly created — in the sense of rape — but nevertheless a gift in a very broken way, the gift of human life, and accept what God has given to you.” He added that rape victims ought to “make the best of a bad situation.”

I don’t know about you but this is not what I want in the White House.

A Century of Influence

By Nicole Carcel, NWPC LA Westside Board Member

On October 10, 1911, California became the 6th state in the United States where women could vote.  It doesn’t surprise me that our remarkable state saw the importance of equality nine years before the passage of the 19th Amendment to the Constitution.  

A century later, California is still considered to be one of the nation’s most forward thinking states.  As we get ready for 2012 it is important to think of the women in 1911 who knew their voice was essential to shaping the California we know and love.  

Today, our voice matters more than ever. Women represent over 51% of the population, but only a little more than a quarter of elected positions at the county, state and federal levels. There is still much work to be done to inspire and empower women to run for office in our great state.

There are a number of great projects and organizations that are taking on the challenge of electing, educating, and empowering women to be more engaged. 

The 2012 Project is a national, non-partisan campaign to increase the number of women in Congress and state legislatures by taking advantage of the once-in-a-decade opportunities of 2012.  For more information check out http://www.cawp.rutgers.edu/education_training/2012Project/about2012.php.

California Women Lead is a nonprofit, nonpartisan association of women holding or interested in holding elected or appointed office. Their mission is to give California's women the tools they need to be successful in both their political and professional lives. For more information on California Women Lead check out http://www.cawomenlead.org.

If you or an extraordinary woman in your life is ready to take action, we want to hear from you!  

Being part of NWPC LA Westside has shown me that when surrounded by a group of remarkable women anything is possible. 

The Hillary Moment

By PATRICK H. CADDELL 
AND DOUGLAS E. SCHOEN
Wall Street Journal, Original Article

Clinton/Associated Press

President Obama can't win by running a constructive campaign, and he won't be able to govern if he does win a second term.

When Harry Truman and Lyndon Johnson accepted the reality that they could not effectively govern the nation if they sought re-election to the White House, both men took the moral high ground and decided against running for a new term as president. President Obama is facing a similar reality—and he must reach the same conclusion.

He should abandon his candidacy for re-election in favor of a clear alternative, one capable not only of saving the Democratic Party, but more important, of governing effectively and in a way that preserves the most important of the president's accomplishments. He should step aside for the one candidate who would become, by acclamation, the nominee of the Democratic Party: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Never before has there been such an obvious potential successor—one who has been a loyal and effective member of the president's administration, who has the stature to take on the office, and who is the only leader capable of uniting the country around a bipartisan economic and foreign policy.
Certainly, Mr. Obama could still win re-election in 2012. Even with his all-time low job approval ratings (and even worse ratings on handling the economy) the president could eke out a victory in November.

But the kind of campaign required for the president's political survival would make it almost impossible for him to govern—not only during the campaign, but throughout a second term.
Put simply, it seems that the White House has concluded that if the president cannot run on his record, he will need to wage the most negative campaign in history to stand any chance. With his job approval ratings below 45% overall and below 40% on the economy, the president cannot affirmatively make the case that voters are better off now than they were four years ago. He—like everyone else—knows that they are worse off.

President Obama is now neck and neck with a generic Republican challenger in the latest Real Clear Politics 2012 General Election Average (43.8%-43.%). Meanwhile, voters disapprove of the president's performance 49%-41% in the most recent Gallup survey, and 63% of voters disapprove of his handling of the economy, according to the most recent CNN/ORC poll.

Consequently, he has to make the case that the Republicans, who have garnered even lower ratings in the polls for their unwillingness to compromise and settle for gridlock, represent a more risky and dangerous choice than the current administration—an argument he's clearly begun to articulate.

One year ago in these pages, we warned that if President Obama continued down his overly partisan road, the nation would be "guaranteed two years of political gridlock at a time when we can ill afford it." The result has been exactly as we predicted: stalemate in Washington, fights over the debt ceiling, an inability to tackle the debt and deficit, and paralysis exacerbating market turmoil and economic decline.

If President Obama were to withdraw, he would put great pressure on the Republicans to come to the table and negotiate—especially if the president singularly focused in the way we have suggested on the economy, job creation, and debt and deficit reduction. By taking himself out of the campaign, he would change the dynamic from who is more to blame—George W. Bush or Barack Obama?—to a more constructive dialogue about our nation's future.

Even though Mrs. Clinton has expressed no interest in running, and we have no information to suggest that she is running any sort of stealth campaign, it is clear that she commands majority support throughout the country. A CNN/ORC poll released in late September had Mrs. Clinton's approval rating at an all-time high of 69%—even better than when she was the nation's first lady. Meanwhile, a Time Magazine poll shows that Mrs. Clinton is favored over former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney by 17 points (55%-38%), and Texas Gov. Rick Perry by 26 points (58%-32%).

But this is about more than electoral politics. Not only is Mrs. Clinton better positioned to win in 2012 than Mr. Obama, but she is better positioned to govern if she does. Given her strong public support, she has the ability to step above partisan politics, reach out to Republicans, change the dialogue, and break the gridlock in Washington.

President Bill Clinton reached a historic agreement with the Republicans in 1997 that led to a balanced budget. Were Mrs. Clinton to become the Democratic nominee, her argument would almost certainly have to be about reconciliation and about an overarching deal to rein in the federal deficit. She will understand implicitly the need to draw up a bipartisan plan with elements similar to her husband's in the mid-to-late '90s—entitlement reform, reform of the Defense Department, reining in spending, all the while working to preserve the country's social safety net.

Having unique experience in government as first lady, senator and now as Secretary of State, Mrs. Clinton is more qualified than any presidential candidate in recent memory, including her husband. Her election would arguably be as historic an event as the election of President Obama in 2008.
By going down the re-election road and into partisan mode, the president has effectively guaranteed that the remainder of his term will be marred by the resentment and division that have eroded our national identity, common purpose, and most of all, our economic strength. If he continues on this course it is certain that the 2012 campaign will exacerbate the divisions in our country and weaken our national identity to such a degree that the scorched-earth campaign that President George W. Bush ran in the 2002 midterms and the 2004 presidential election will pale in comparison.

We write as patriots and Democrats—concerned about the fate of our party and, most of all, our country. We do not write as people who have been in contact with Mrs. Clinton or her political operation. Nor would we expect to be directly involved in any Clinton campaign.

If President Obama is not willing to seize the moral high ground and step aside, then the two Democratic leaders in Congress, Sen. Harry Reid and Rep. Nancy Pelosi, must urge the president not to seek re-election—for the good of the party and most of all for the good of the country. And they must present the only clear alternative—Hillary Clinton.

--
Mr. Caddell served as a pollster for President Jimmy Carter. Mr. Schoen, who served as a pollster for President Bill Clinton, is author of "Hopelessly Divided: The New Crisis in American Politics and What It Means for 2012 and Beyond," forthcoming from Rowman and Littlefield. LINK TO ARTICLE