I don’t follow Cecile Richards on Twitter; life’s too short. I do follow David Daleiden, though, ever since his Center for Medical Progress videos documented the baby-parts business in some Planned Parenthood affiliates. Daleiden recently re-tweeted something from Richards.
In case the embedded tweet doesn’t show up for you, @CecileRichards on March 6 said, “Planned Parenthood is proud to provide abortion – a necessary service that’s as vital to our mission as birth control or cancer screenings.”
@DavidDaleiden’s re-tweet: “Today @CecileRichards admitted that abortion is equally important to @PPact as cancer screenings. So much for ‘only 3%’ #PPSellsBabyParts”
Save this. The next time a PP contract comes before the Executive Council, every Councilor needs to see Richards’ tweet, preferably about 500 times over.
If you understand that abortion is not health care, save this.
If you understand that PP’s business model depends on using its patients as human shields (give-us-a-contract-or-else-we’ll-deny-cancer-screenings-to-women), save this.
If you understand that PP uses its supposedly non-abortion contract funds for “infrastructure” at facilities where abortion is performed, save this. Don’t take my word for it; New Hampshire’s HHS commissioner is the one who let that slip during a public Executive Council meeting last year. Infrastructure is just a four-syllable way of saying “overhead.”
Cecile Richards says that abortion is “vital” (ironic use of a word whose Latin root means “life”) to PP’s mission.
As enrollment season for 2017 health insurance coverage is underway, the Charlotte Lozier Institute in conjunction with the Family Research Council has updated its Abortion in Obamacare web site with a state-by-state list of health insurance plans that do not cover most abortions.
I have not independently verified their New Hampshire information, but I offer it as something to consider when you make your health insurance choices for next year. It’s not easy to keep our insurance premium dollars from being used to underwrite abortion, and I welcome the Lozier Institute’s efforts to shed light on the subject.
If readers have corrections to this information, send them to email@example.com.
On a related note, I’d like to hear from readers who have opted out of conventional health insurance in favor of medical cost-sharing programs like Medi-Share or CMF-Curo. How have these programs worked out for you?
I got an email yesterday that would have gone straight into the trash file if not for the name of the sender. The subject line: “Why conservatives should vote for Chris Sununu for Governor.” I’m a pro-life voter, not necessarily a conservative or a party’s member. Then I saw the name of the sender: Ovide Lamontagne.
I have the utmost respect for Ovide. He’s a New Hampshire neighbor and a longtime pro-life advocate. He’s also a high-profile Republican. He is not a fan of the recent ad by GOP gubernatorial candidate Chris Sununu. He had a conversation with Sununu about it, resulting in the correspondence below, which as you will see was meant to be made public.
Here are two messages which must be read together for full effect. Make of them what you will. They might not change your view of candidate Sununu – I remain unmoved – but I think enough of Ovide to share his message. I also think Sununu’s reply should be kept handy for future reference.
I’m trying hard not to editorialize here, but the following points drown out my best intentions.
Sununu’s reassurances are preceded by his claim that he has always opposed taxpayer funding of abortion. He apparently thinks funding abortion providers is something different. Again, make of that what you will.
The gubernatorial campaign of underdog Max Abramson goes unmentioned in this correspondence save for one oblique reference in Chris Sununu’s statement.
I’m a firm believer in defensive elections. I’ve voted for candidates just because they’re less awful than their opponents. It riles me, though, when a candidate hands my money to abortion providers and then basically tells me that he’s my only logical choice at the polls.
The GOP/Dem and conservative/liberal frame of reference does not resonate with this pro-life voter. I’ve spent too much time at the State House watching “conservatives” kill pro-life legislation and grant contracts to abortion providers.
But enough commentary. The following correspondence is unedited.
Email from Ovide Lamontagne, November 4, 2016
I hope this email finds you well.
Like many of you, I approach the next few days leading into the November 8th general election with great anticipation and energy. It is fair to say that our Primary process has led to the nomination of an interesting slate of federal and state candidates. I firmly believe that, on balance, the Republican ticket holds the best chance of advancing an agenda which more closely reflects our values and the best interests of New Hampshire and the Nation.
Regarding the campaign for Governor, I encourage New Hampshire conservatives to vote for Chris Sununu. Like many of my conservative friends, I was angry and disillusioned when Chris changed his position and voted to fund Planned Parenthood this past Summer. There is simply no justification in my mind for allowing one cent of taxpayer money to be contributed to an abortion provider, especially one as notorious and as sinister as Planned Parenthood.
Even though he knew how I felt about his vote and his stated position on Life, shortly after winning his Primary, Chris called me to discuss his views on a host of conservative issues and specifically asked me to help him understand what pro-life initiatives I thought he could support. As we discussed a number of these issues, he explained his opposition to late term and partial birth abortion; his support of conscience rights for health care workers; his view that the buffer zone law should be repealed; and his belief that abortion providers should be held to the same health and safety standards applicable to healthcare facilities such as ambulatory surgical centers and providers. While he supports a women’s ability to have an abortion during the earlier stages of pregnancy, he said he strongly disagrees with the extremist views of Colin Van Ostern who has the full-throated endorsement of Planned Parenthood’s New Hampshire Action Fund. Among other things, Van Ostern supports abortion through all 9 months of pregnancy for any reason; opposes common sense health and safety standards for abortion clinics; and given the chance, I believe he would support taxpayer funding of abortion, the official position of Planned Parenthood nationally (i.e., they want to repeal the Hyde Amendment).
I asked Chris to memorialize his support for some of the common sense measures we discussed since the Primary. Please find attached a copy of a letter he recently sent me setting forth the pro-life initiatives he would support as Governor. While I strongly disagree with Chris on his vote to fund Planned Parenthood and his pro-choice position, I do believe that if elected Chris will indeed advance a constitutional and common-sense pro-life agenda, something that hasn’t happened in NH from the Corner Office in years.
On other issues, Chris is where we need the next Governor to be: he supports Right to Work and designing a NH solution regarding expanding healthcare coverage, not a Washington-mandated “permanent” Medicaid expansion program; he opposes Common Core and the federal government’s overreach in elementary and secondary education; and he opposes the establishment of a job-killing state minimum wage and rejects the false promise of taxpayer-funded commuter rail. He’ll bring conservative leaders into his administration and I believe he will create an environment for robust economic development, reversing almost 20 years of liberal Governors presiding over economic stagnation in the Granite State.
When I consider what is at stake in this election — and despite my disagreements with Chris Sununu on some issues which are very important to me, and I know are important to you — I believe that conservatives and all NH citizens will still be much better served with Chris in the Corner Office than Colin Van Ostern. This is not even a close call.
Please let me know if you have any questions or observations about supporting Chris Sununu for Governor. I hope you will join me in voting for Chris so that together we can begin to set New Hampshire on the right track.
If you are inclined to do so, I would also ask you to forward this email and the attached letter to your email lists and/or to publish both through social media.
All the best,
From Chris Sununu, attached to Lamontagne email as a PDF on campaign letterhead, undated
Thank you for your support and assistance in trying to get New Hampshire back on the right track. I appreciate our recent conversations discussing my ad response to the Democrats’ multimillion dollar media campaign accusing me of being against Medicaid funding of cancer screenings for women and pre-natal care. Their ads are blatantly dishonest.
As you know, I have always opposed taxpayer funding of abortions. It is important for conservative voters to know that I too support many of the common sense platform initiatives that they want to see passed including:
1. Fetal Homicide Bill
2. Women’s Health Protection Act
3. Healthcare Freedom of Conscience Act
4. Late Term Abortion Ban
5. NH Buffer Zone Repeal
I know that my winning the race for Governor will be our best chance to get this important work done.
It is important to remind people that there are only two real choices in this race. By voting for me the voters can undo the liberal left-wing agenda that Democrats have imposed on New Hampshire over the past twenty years. Thank you again for your advice, your guidance and your support.
The Hyde Amendment, a restriction on taxpayer funding of Medicaid abortions, turns 40 later this week. If you haven’t already discovered the #HelloHyde web site, please check it out. On the home page, you’ll meet some of the Medicaid kids who may owe their lives to the amendment.
Something else you’ll see on the site are the goals of the #HelloHyde coalition: celebrate the lives saved by the Hyde Amendment, and strengthen the amendment so it protects children conceived in violence. (Currently, Medicaid will fund abortions of children conceived through rape or incest.)
The Hyde Amendment is under attack. It has always had its detractors, who now sense a vulnerable moment in this election year. This is just one more thing at stake in November: the politically-connected abortion industry wants more of your money. The people who win seats in Congress will determine whether the industry will get it.
I wrote this today at DaTechGuy Blog, about the anniversary of the Hyde Amendment and what the presidential candidates are saying.
Abortion providers have tried to torpedo the Hyde Amendment since the day it was proposed. Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is a determined foe of Hyde.Slate quotes her as saying that it “mak[es] it harder for low-income women to exercise their full rights.” Clinton and candidates in step with her are prepared to coerce all taxpayers into subsidizing abortion.
[Quoting hellohyde.org] The Hyde Amendment’s life-saving impact is hard to overstate. Both supporters and opponents agree that the Hyde Amendment has prevented over a million abortions. The disagreement, sad to say, is over whether that’s a good thing.