Isakson's pro-abortion votes in Congress tell the real story

Collins for Senate website ^ | 1-28-04 | Collins for Senate

[legacy]

Opponent's Voting Record Out-of-Step With Georgia

01.29.2004--Today, the Collins for U.S. Senate campaign will release, an ad highlighting a series of 13 votes cast in the House of Representatives by Rep. Johnny Isakson for pro-abortion legislation. Isakson has been running as a pro-life candidate for U.S. Senate, however, his voting record in Washington proves otherwise.

Isakson is telling Georgia voters: “I have a deep respect for life, and a voting record that reflects that respect.” http://isakson.net/isakson_contents/issues/life.shtml However, the Congressional Record tells a different story.

Isakson voted 13 times in favor of pro-abortion legislation. He voted 5 times to require tax-payer funded military hospitals to perform abortions overseas. He voted to allow the research and distribution of the French abortion pill RU-486. He ran twice before as a pro-choice candidate—once in 1990 for Governor and in 1996 for the U.S. Senate—both times he lost those elections. This record has consistently earned Isakson the highest ratings of any Republican in the Georgia Congressional Delegation by Planned Parenthood and the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL).

“I have a 100% voting record to protect innocent life,” commented Collins. He continued, “My opponent has a lot of explaining to do to the people of Georgia. His inconsistent position on abortion just doesn’t measure up to the standards we’ve come to expect from our elected officials here in Georgia.”

The ad will be distributed to over 20,000 conservative grassroots activists in Georgia before the Republican candidates meet for the first forum hosted by the Georgia Christian Coalition on Saturday, January 31, 2004.

1. H.R. 1906, Vote # 173, June 8, 1999. Passed 217 to 214. Chambliss voted yes. Collins voted yes. Isakson voted no. McKinney voted no.

2. H.R. 4811, Vote #396, July 13, 2000. Passed 206 to 221. Chambliss voted no. Collins voted no. Isakson voted yes. McKinney voted yes.

3. H.R. 2415, Vote #312, July 20, 1999. Passed 221-198. Chambliss voted no. Collins voted no. Isakson voted yes. McKinney voted yes.

4. H.R. 2606, Vote #349, July 29, 1999. Passed 228-200. Chambliss voted yes. Collins voted yes. Isakson voted no. McKinney voted no.

5. H.R. 2606, Vote #350, July 29, 1999. Passed 221-208. Chambliss voted no. Collins voted no. Isakson voted yes. McKinney voted yes.

6. H.R. 2606, Vote #360, August 3, 1999. Passed 145-272. Chambliss voted yes. Collins voted yes. Isakson voted no. McKinney voted no.

7. H.R. 1646, Vote #115, May 15, 2001. Passed 218-210. Chambliss voted yes. Collins voted yes. Isakson voted no. McKinney voted no.

8. H.R. 2606, Vote #353, July 29, 1999. Failed 187-237. Chambliss voted yes. Collins voted yes. Isakson voted no. McKinney voted no.

9. H.R. 1401, Vote #184, June 9, 1999. Failed 203 to 225. Chambliss voted no. Collins voted no. Isakson voted yes. McKinney voted yes.

10. H.R. 4205, Vote # 203, May 18, 2000. Failed 195 to 221. Chambliss voted no. Collins voted no. Isakson voted yes. McKinney voted yes.

11. H.R. 2586, Vote #357, September 25, 2001. Failed 199-217. Chambliss voted no. Collins voted no. Isakson voted yes. McKinney voted yes.

12. H.R.4546,Vote #153, May 10, 2002. Failed 202-215. Chambliss voted no. Collins voted no. Isakson voted yes. McKinney voted yes.

13. H.R. 1588, Vote #215, May 22, 2003. Failed 201-227. Chambliss voted no. Collins voted no. Isakson voted yes. McKinney didn’t vote.

[legacy]

While Johnny Isakson is trying to cast himself as a pro-life conservative, his votes in Congress tell a different story. Though supporting some legislation to limit or discourage abortions, he has also voted to allow and encourage abortions by voting to allow distribution of RU-486 and to allow women in the military overseas to get abortions at federally-funded hospitals. He defends these positions by saying military women should be able to get abortions just like women in America. That's like saying that if women in the US are allowed to kill their unborn children, why shouldn't military women overseas. It's hard to see how that is a pro-life position. Also, by allowing RU-486, he helped bring about yet another method to destroy unborn life. That hardly seems a pro-life position. Pro-life conservative voters don't be taken in by Isakson's current rhetoric. His record and past rhetoric show what he truly believes and how he would vote in the Senate if elected. We need a candidate who will be consistent in his support for life and who will give us straight talk.

[Kuksool]

The GA Senate primary threads are turning into the NC-05 primary threads.

[JohnnyZ]

While Johnny Isakson is trying to cast himself as a pro-life conservative, his votes in Congress tell a different story.

This is unfortunately true.

[AuH2ORepublican]

"While Johnny Isakson is trying to cast himself as a pro-life conservative, his votes in Congress tell a different story."

---

We can't let Isakson get away with such lies. We need for conservatives to support either Cain or Collins so that we keep Isakson below 50%+1 in the primary and thus force a run-off. At that point, whoever of Cain or Collins who makes the run-off must endorse the other and we can ensure that a conservative Republican becomes the next Senator from Georgia.

[ibackmac]

Exactly! How dare Isakson attend a Christian Coalition forum and pretend he's pro-life. Mac is the only candidate with a proven 100% voting record to defend innocent life.

[legacy]

"Mac Collins looked very unsenatorial". I've met Mac and spoken with him at length about the issues, and he's definitely capable to serve as Senator. He may be more folksy or down-to-earth than other candidates, but he is definitely well prepared and informed to accomplish what Georgians need in a Senator. We conservatives don't need to bash each other, but focus on presenting the conservative message and make sure Isakson doesn't get over the 50% mark. "That piece on Isakson made him look really bad." The piece on Isakson was the truth, and Mac and Herman need to keep up the pressure so that voters know what Isakson really stands for. You're right about Isakson's wordplay - hopefully the Cain and Collins campaign will be able to make distinctions with Isakson without appearing to be going negative. So many voters just hate negative campaigning, but when you are trying to show voters the difference in two or more candidates, you have to not only talk about what you stand for, but what the other candidate does or doesn't stand for. It's hard to do that in a positive way all the time, but hopefully they can find a way.

[votelife]

bttt

[Meldrim]

The problem is that Cain and Collins will be splitting the Reagan-Republican vote, leaving the election to the moderate. I hope that between the two of them they both have the spine to endorse the stronger candidate as the election winds down.

[Meldrim]

Ohoh, that is good. The "Wyche Fowler" effect. How much does ole' Johnny boy have to get beat the runoff?