Race for Minnesota governor: Candidates and stakes

Human lives will be at stake on Nov. 2 when voters elect the next governor of Minnesota. Of the three major candidates, only one defends the right to life of every human being, no matter how small, vulnerable and dependent; the other two do not.

Under Gov. Tim Pawlenty, we have enacted pro-life laws that have reduced abortions and saved lives. Abortions in our state have dropped more than 14 percent since Pawlenty took office; the 2009 total was the lowest in 35 years.

But this progress could be reversed under a new governor. Both Mark Dayton and Tom Horner support abortion on demand. Dayton cosponsored the Freedom of Choice Act in the U.S. Senate, which would have wiped out virtually all limits on abortion and made the grotesque partial-birth abortion procedure legal again. Horner says he opposes the Woman's Right to Know informed consent law, which provides basic factual information to pregnant women prior to abortion. Both Dayton and Horner support requiring that every taxpayer pay for elective abortions—a proven means of significantly increasing the number of unborn babies killed.

By contrast, Tom Emmer has a 100 percent pro-life voting record and supports protection for human beings at every stage of development. He coauthored the Positive Alternatives Act to provide help and alternatives to pregnant women in need. He will work to stop taxpayer funding of abortion, forced abortion, sex-selection abortion and other attacks on unborn children and their mothers.

Learn more about where the candidates stand on human life by visiting www.mccl.org.

'A lot is at stake,' and the choice is clear

From the Star Tribune:

A lot is at stake on social issues. The Legislature has been grappling with whether the state should fund embryonic stem cell research [and] ban state funding of abortions. ...

In terms of social issues, Independence Party candidate [for governor] Tom Horner and [DFLer Mark] Dayton agree on many points -- few of which align with [Republican Tom] Emmer, according to their records and statements from the candidates. ...

Dayton is an ardent advocate of abortion rights and is endorsed by Minnesota NARAL. Horner shies away from abortion labels, but said he has no plans to change the law that now allows state-funded abortions for very low-income women. "I would maintain the status quo on Minnesota [abortion] laws," Horner said in an interview, adding that his goal is reducing the number of abortions.

Emmer has voted to bar state money from funding abortion, and has a consistent record of opposing abortion.

Both Horner and Dayton support state funding for embryonic stem cell research, which Emmer opposes.

Tom Horner is no moderate

In the video below, Independence Party candidate for governor Tom Horner answers questions about abortion.



My response to his claims is here.

The bottom line is that Horner does not seem to support any limitations on abortion, and he wants to continue to make taxpayers fund elective abortions. He also opposes Minnesota's Woman's Right to Know law, which informs women about abortion risks, complications and alternatives, as well as fetal development and other facts, prior to an abortion.

These positions put Horner on the radical fringe.

In governor's race, who is the moderate?

"It's not time to go to the far left or the far right, but to reach the broad moderate middle," former Gov. Arne Carlson said recently. Which candidate in the race for Minnesota governor represents "the broad moderate middle" on abortion?

More than 12,000 unborn human beings are killed (for any reason) each year in Minnesota -- the leading cause of death in our state. They are butchered and treated in a way in which we would not contemplate treating animals. Thousands of pregnant women -- targeted by a wealthy abortion industry flush with taxpayer dollars -- face unexpected and difficult pregnancies and need support and alternatives to abortion.

Most Minnesotans know that this is bad stuff. Even many people who don't take the pro-life view acknowledge that abortion is a bad thing and think pregnant women in need should be supported. There's a lot of common ground on abortion -- a lot of common-sense measures that most Minnesotans agree with.

So it is remarkable that two of the three major candidates for governor -- Tom Horner and Mark Dayton -- are on the fringe of this issue, rejecting virtually all limitations on abortion.

For example, Woman's Right to Know ensures that pregnant women receive basic factual information prior to an abortion procedure and has helped reduce abortions in Minnesota. Horner says he opposes it (he considers this "driving a wedge," though the bill passed with large bipartisan majorities). Horner also supports requiring that every taxpayer help pay for other people's abortions (though when asked about it, he seemed pretty clueless).

Dayton is a faithful believer in unlimited abortion on demand, at every stage of pregnancy, funded with taxpayer dollars. He does not tolerate even the slightest limitations -- overwhelmingly supported by the public -- such as parental notification before a minor has an abortion, and the ban on partial-birth abortion.

Only Tom Emmer supports the kind of decent measures most Minnesotans support as a means of reducing abortions and helping women.

Tom Horner doesn't know what he's talking about

At a press conference, Independence Party candidate for governor Tom Horner said, "I don't believe that the kind of [pro-life] state laws that typically are passed are designed to reduce abortion. I think they are designed to drive political wedges."

I have three thoughts about this. First, Horner is implying something about the intentions of those who draft and advocate pro-life legislation. But I can say with certainty that he's wrong. If he was at all familiar with those of us involved in this effort, he would know that our only goal is to save lives.

Second, studies show that "the kind of state laws that typically are passed" reduce abortions and save lives. Horner obviously doesn't know this, but it seems to me that he should have at least bothered to look into the issue before basing his abortion position on a false claim.

According to Dr. Michael New (who studies the effect of abortion laws -- see here and here, for example), among the types of pro-life laws that have been passed in the post-Roe v. Wade era, bans on public funding of abortion are the most effective in reducing abortions. Ironically, in the same press conference, Horner specifically said he would not support such a ban. (Horner apparently did not know that we have taxpayer funding of abortion in Minnesota until reporters at the press conference told him.)

Informed consent laws also have a clear record of reducing abortions. Minnesota's informed consent law -- called Woman's Right to Know -- was passed in 2003; since then, when provided with basic factual information prior to an abortion procedure, more than 10,000 women have chosen life for their unborn children. Yet Horner also specifically came out against Woman's Right to Know.

Third, it seems a bit odd that Horner says he wants to reduce the number of abortions (in the press conference he said this repeatedly). Presumably one wants to reduce abortions because there's something wrong with abortion, and presumably what's wrong with abortion is that it takes the life of an innocent human being. And that seems as good a reason as any for government involvement, for it seems that, as a matter of basic justice, the state ought to protect its people from being unjustly killed. Yet Horner does not support such protection against abortion -- on the contrary, he wants the government to fund elective abortions, as if abortion is a public good.

What's clear is that Tom Horner doesn't know what he's talking about.

Tom Horner's stance on abortion, the right to life

Tom Horner is the Independence Party candidate for governor. Where does he stand on human life?

Because he has never held public office, Horner has no record on abortion and other right-to-life issues. But he addressed abortion earlier this year in his campaign for governor.

He said abortion is a federal issue, not one for the states to decide. According to ECM Capitol Reporter T.W. Budig, Horner claimed that "state laws pertaining to abortion have less to do with abortion than driving political wedges."

Horner said he does not want to overturn Roe v. Wade, the court decision that legalized abortion on demand nationwide. He also said he supports continuing state funding of abortion, and that he would not have signed the Woman's Right to Know informed consent law.

Tom Horner supports abortion on demand.

(Woman's Right to Know was passed in 2003 to ensure that women considering abortion receive basic factual information about the risks and alternatives. More than 10,000 women who have received this vital information have decided against abortion.)

Horner hopes to draw votes away from pro-life candidate Tom Emmer by positioning himself as a "centrist." In response to pro-life criticism of his abortion stance, a May 12 statement by Horner's campaign manager claimed the following:

Horner has offered a clear position. He opposes abortion and would reduce abortions through more effective sex education with an emphasis on abstinence, access to health services including contraception and dealing with the underlying issues such as poverty.

But it is unclear in what sense Horner "opposes abortion," since by defending Roe v. Wade, he wants to prevent Minnesotans from being able to enact any significant restrictions on the practice. He even opposes commonsense, bipartisan measures such as Woman's Right to Know, and he favors using taxpayer dollars to pay for elective abortions—a proven means of increasing the number of abortions.

"If a candidate opposes Woman's Right to Know and wants to force taxpayers to buy other people's abortions, he is clearly not 'in the middle' on the abortion issue—he is pro-abortion," said Scott Fischbach, MCCL executive director.

In the general election on Nov. 2, Horner faces pro-abortion DFL candidate Mark Dayton and pro-life Republican Tom Emmer, who has a long record in support of the right to life.

Does Tom Horner support rationing of your health care?

The following MCCL news release was issued today, May 19.

MINNEAPOLIS — In the January 3, 1997, edition of Minneapolis-St. Paul City Business, Tom Horner made the following statements regarding the health care issue and managed care:

"What they (MCCL) set out to do could have a dramatic impact in 1997," said Tom Horner, of the Bloomington-based public policy firm Himle Horner Inc. "The involvement of the pro-life community makes the end-of-life decisions much more of a political debate than an individual issue or medical concern."

"What will start to emerge is the recognition that there has to be a move away from the fee-for-service," Horner said. "And more and more people will have to be moved into managed care with some limitations, and that is going to be a pretty difficult task."

The voters of Minnesota need to know whether Independence Party candidate for governor Tom Horner still wants to take away their right to use their own money to save their own lives by eliminating fee-for-service medical care. Horner's position in favor of "moving away" from fee-for-service and into "managed care with some limitations" simply means health care rationing—the denial of care to those who need it. Even Pres. Obama's health care overhaul doesn't go that far!

Last week, Horner solidified his pro-abortion stance by announcing his support for taxpayer funded abortions and opposition to Woman's Right to Know, which provides women with factual information about abortion risks, complications and alternatives. But denying lifesaving medical care to vulnerable people takes his anti-life convictions to a deeper level.

MCCL has long held a position in favor of fee-for-service medical care as an option for individuals to secure the medical care that they want and need—using their own money.

It's time for Tom Horner and his campaign to stop tweeting and spinning around the issues. His radical support for abortion and health care rationing makes Horner's candidacy unacceptable to the people of Minnesota.

Horner claims to 'oppose' abortion

In response to yesterday's discussion of gubernatorial candidate Tom Horner's pro-abortion position, Horner's campaign manager, Stephen Imholte, posted this a few hours ago:

Horner has offered a clear position. He opposes abortion and would reduce abortions through more effective sex education with an emphasis on abstinence, access to health services including contraception and dealing with the underlying issues such as poverty.

So he "opposes abortion," but presumably would oppose any kind of limitation on the practice -- even common-sense legislation like Woman's Right to Know, which provides basic informed consent information prior to an abortion procedure. He wants to "reduce abortions," but plans to maintain taxpayer funding of them, which studies show leads to significantly more abortions.

In what possible sense does Horner "oppose" abortion? Most people who oppose abortion do so because they believe it unjustly takes the life of an innocent human being. Does Horner agree? (A "clear position" would be nice here.) If so, it seems to follow (given our common understanding that government should protect its people from being killed) that abortion should not be allowed -- that unborn human beings, like the rest of us, deserve the protection of the law as a matter of basic justice.

But clearly Horner doesn't agree with that. So it seems fair to conclude that Horner doesn't "oppose" abortion in any meaningful sense at all -- on the contrary, he wants to fund it with public dollars, as if abortion is a societal "good."

Horner's credibility is on the line

In response to MCCL's news release highlighting his pro-abortion position, Minnesota gubernatorial candidate Tom Horner said this via Twitter:

"MCCL misstates my positons [sic], then attacks me. An organization sacrificing its credibility doesn't reduce abortions, it just reduces trust." (Horner2010, May 11, 2010)

But according to news reports, here's what Horner said yesterday (emphases added):

"While saying that others could affix the labels of 'pro-choice' or 'pro-life,' Horner spoke of reducing the number of abortions -- comprehensive sex education, including abstinence-based -- and said as governor he would not have signed the Woman's Right to Know abortion provision." (T.W. Budig, ECM Capitol reporter)

"He [Horner] said it's up to the U.S. Supreme Court or Congress, not a governor, to decide whether abortion is legal." (Bill Salisbury, Pioneer Press)

"Horner also said he ... would continue to allow public funding of abortions." (Tom Scheck, MPR News Q)

And that's exactly what we reported in our press release. The facts are what they are. As MCCL Executive Director Scott Fischbach put it, "If a candidate opposes Woman's Right to Know and wants to force taxpayers to buy other people's abortions, he is clearly not 'in the middle' on the abortion issue—he is pro-abortion."

(HT: Minnesota Democrats Exposed)

Tom Horner, candidate for governor, is pro-abortion

The following MCCL news release was issued today, May 11.

MINNEAPOLIS—Independence Party gubernatorial candidate Tom Horner spent yesterday attempting with all his might to spin a position on abortion that could not be labeled pro-life or pro-choice. He was successful: his real position is 100 percent pro-abortion.

Horner stated that he would not have signed Minnesota's Woman's Right to Know law providing basic informed consent information prior to an abortion procedure; that he supports taxpayer funded abortions; that he does not believe the office of governor should have anything to do with protecting unborn human beings; and that the abortion issue should be handled exclusively on the federal level.

"As a political spin doctor, you would think that Tom Horner could have come up with a better abortion position than 'I won't be labeled,'" stated Scott Fischbach, Executive Director of MCCL. "If a candidate opposes Woman's Right to Know and wants to force taxpayers to buy other people's abortions, he is clearly not 'in the middle' on the abortion issue—he is pro-abortion."

At his press conference Horner was joined by former Congressman Tim Penny, a notorious abortion flip-flopper, and former U.S. Sen. David Durenberger, whose politics could best be described as erratic since leaving the U.S. Senate in scandal. Horner also announced the support of longtime abortion supporter Sally Pillsbury.

Horner joins the other pro-abortion candidates—DFL'ers Margaret Anderson Kelliher, Matt Entenza and Mark Dayton—in seeking to replace pro-life Gov. Tim Pawlenty. It is only Republican candidate for governor Tom Emmer who has a 100 percent pro-life record.

"Tom Emmer is the only major candidate for governor who understands the importance of supporting unborn children and their mothers in our state," Fischbach added. "All of the other candidates support a radical pro-abortion agenda, including forcing taxpayers to pay for abortions."