The Latest

Blackwell: Corporate Clinton

by FRCA Media Office

June 28, 2016

Why are many big business leaders backing Hillary Clinton for president? See the piece by Ken Blackwell, Senior Fellow for Human Rights and Constitutional Governance at Family Research Council Action, recently published on Townhall.com.


Corporate Clinton

Many leaders of big business support Hillary Clinton. Last week she announced a list of 56 corporate backers. No wonder Bernie Sanders is still running against her.

Hillary Clinton always has attracted well-connected business supporters. Even before she ran for office. Remember the lucrative cattle trades when she was Arkansas first lady? That came from a local businessman who knew how important it was to have friends in the governor’s mansion.

Click here to read more.

Continue reading

Yes, it’s possible to defund Planned Parenthood with 51 votes

by David Christensen

November 12, 2015

Here is a terrific NRO piece from Marjorie Dannenfelser of the SBA List explaining the serious stakes before the U.S. Senate when it comes to defunding a significant portion of Planned Parenthood’s federal subsidies. Marjorie explains how this can be done on the budget “reconciliation” bill. This is a unique opportunity for Congress and for pro-life legislators. The House passed the bill overwhelmingly. Now it’s up to the Senate, and the opportunity to do so with 51 votes is within reach. Read Marjorie’s piece.

Continue reading

I Agree with Bernie Sanders

by Rob Schwarzwalder

November 4, 2015

In a June interview with the Christian Science Monitor, Democratic Socialist and presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) said the following:

A guy named Adolf Hitler won an election in 1932. He won an election, and 50 million people died as a result of that election in World War II, including 6 million Jews. So what I learned as a little kid is that politics is, in fact, very important.”

As a matter of history, Hitler did not win an election in 1932.  Hitler rose to power through deception and political manipulation, not the popular vote.  But the larger point of Sanders’ comments is that voting counts and elections have consequences.

He’s right, and last night proved it.  The conservative underdog won handsomely in KentuckyHoustonians resoundingly rejected a city ordinance to give transgendered persons access to the bathrooms of their opposite sex.  In Ohio, according to the Associated Press, “voters rejected a ballot proposal Tuesday that would have legalized both recreational and medical marijuana in a single stroke … About 65 percent of voters opposed the measure, compared to 35 percent in favor.”  In “Progressive” San Francisco, “Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi lost his re-election bid late Tuesday to challenger former Chief Deputy Vicki Hennessy after an uproar over his sanctuary city policy, which was blamed for the death of a woman in July at the hands of an illegal immigrant … Ms. Hennessy won with 74,522 ballots casts versus Sheriff Mirkarimi at 40,128.”

But not all the elections were so lopsided, and therein lies a reminder and a warning: Voting counts.  Consider the Commonwealth of Virginia, where the loss of a single Republican seat would have given liberal Gov. Terry McAuliffe a free hand in the state senate in order to enact what the Washington Post calls “an unabashedly liberal agenda.”

Conservatives should – must – take note.  Next year’s national election will be critical to the future of our country.  If America gets a liberal president and/or a liberal majority in the Senate, everything we cherish with respect to the sanctity of life, the definition of marriage, the nature of the family, and the religious liberty that undergirds all our other freedoms, not to mention myriad economic, military, and foreign policy matters, could well be adversely and profoundly affected such that it might take America decades, or longer, to recover.

This is probably the only time I will ever publicly commend Sen. Sanders for a political stance, but when a person’s right, he’s right. 

Citizenship is a trust.  Voting counts.  Elections matter.

Continue reading

Houston ERO Finally Goes to the Polls

by Travis Weber

November 2, 2015

On Tuesday, November 3, Houston voters will finally be able to go to the polls and decide — under Proposition 1 — if they want the city’s controversial “Equal Rights Ordinance” (ERO) to be law.

Hopefully the voters will get a fair shake at the polls this time around, and this event will mark the end of the saga of the ERO’s tortured history, exacerbated and prolonged by its supporters’ attempts to cram it down the throats of Houstonians who simply don’t want it.

After Mayor Parker imposed her sweeping, religious liberty-trumping ordinance on Houston last year (and interfered with private church affairs by issuing an expansive subpoena for some pastors’ writings and communications), Houston area residents pushed back and rightly demanded a vote on the matter.

Yet the mayor wasn’t about to let that happen, and tried to declare petition signatures invalid to keep the question off the ballot.

Thankfully, the Texas Supreme Court earlier this year vindicated Houstonians’ right to vote when it issued an opinion ruling that Mayor Parker’s administration had violated the law and the City Council must either repeal the ordinance within 30 days or put it on the ballot this coming November. The Council chose to put it on the ballot.

Yet the City Council still resisted the Texas Supreme Court, attempting to confuse the voters by asking them to vote “yes” to repeal the ordinance. The Council’s obstinacy again forced the Texas Supreme Court to get involved and reject this contorted language. The Court held that the Houston City Charter clearly requires the ordinance be put to an up or down vote — a “yes” for the ordinance and “no” against it.

Proposition 1 is infected with a host of problems. First, it suppresses religious liberty significantly. Should the ordinance become law, it will drastically increase the reach of government into private religious conduct and result in a less free society. Indeed, the tentacles of government will intrude into a variety of private conduct — religious and non-religious — under Proposition 1.

Moreover, the ordinance is a solution in search of a problem; there is no systematic pattern or record of the problems it claims to fix.

Finally, there are simply all sorts of privacy and other concerns on the question of who will be able to use what bathroom under the ordinance. The last thing anyone in a major city should want is to alter the law on such a matter before calm, cool, and objective consideration.

For all these reasons, the ERO contained in Proposition 1 is a bad idea. Houstonians should vote “No” on Proposition 1.

Continue reading

Oklahoma Supreme Court asked to protect child sex abuse

by Quena Gonzalez

October 30, 2015

One of the bad raps we pro-lifers get for opposing elective abortion is that we’re waging a “war” on women. Never mind that pro-lifers contribute millions of dollars in volunteer time and financial gifts annually, staffing and funding a vast network of crisis pregnancy providers to care for mothers grappling with unplanned pregnancies. Never mind that many of us were, ourselves, children from unplanned pregnancies. Never mind that we grew up with ultrasound pictures on the refrigerator, or that we believe that abortion is the taking of human life.

Pro-lifers denounce violence and march peacefully in the hundreds of thousands every January, and we’re accused of waging a war. Meanwhile, an ideologically pro-abortion outfit protects child sexual abuse on procedural grounds. Guess who gets the free pass?

The sterile-named Center for Reproductive Health, which has filed multiple lawsuits in Oklahoma and Kansas against a variety of pro-life bills, is charging that Oklahoma’s SB 642 violates the state’s requirement that bills deal with only a single subject. The bill includes four measures, all designed to catch and penalize child molesters who bring underage girls in for abortion to cover up their crime:

  1. It makes it a felony to procure or knowingly participate in an abortion on an unemancipated minor behind her parents’ backs.
  2. It provides accountability by requiring abortionists to preserve fetal tissue from abortions on minors as evidence for any investigation into child sex abuse, according to regulations to be written by the state’s Board of Health.
  3. It further provides accountability by giving the Health Board authority to regularly inspect abortion practices to ensure compliance with this and all other requirements for licensure.
  4. It provides penalties by making violations a felony punishable by up to $100,000/day, subject to a judge’s discretion.

Are such steep penalties necessary? Live Action’s undercover videos a few years ago demonstrated that abortionists are not above covering up child sex abuse:

The Center for Reproductive Rights claims the Oklahoma law is overly broad, but their simultaneous challenges to multiple, unrelated pro-life laws suggests an ideological motive. Still, it takes a certain amount of chutzpah to use a procedural challenge to protect the “reproductive rights” of child sex abusers.

Let’s hope and pray the Oklahoma Supreme Court promptly finds the law in order, and that protecting children from sexual abuse is a compelling state interest.

Continue reading

House Passes Budget Reconciliation Bill

by David Christensen

October 23, 2015

Great news!  Today, the House passed the “budget reconciliation” bill to defund a huge pot of Planned Parenthood’s federal funding and gut key elements of Obamacare. The roll call vote was 240 ayes to 189 nays, with five members not voting. One Democrat voted for it, while seven Republicans voted no.

See Tony’s statement calling for the Senate to pass this bill here.

Continue reading

FRC Action Blog blog_goto
Tell Your Senators to Extend the Child Tax Credit to Unborn Children
by FRC Action (Nov. 30, 2017)

...

Instagram ig_follow