Michele Bachmann Bashes Romney for Not Signing Pro-Life Pledge

Michele Bachmann Bashes Romney for Not Signing Pro-Life Pledge
by Steven Ertelt | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com |
6/19/11 3:36 PM

Congresswoman Michele Bachmann today bashed Mitt Romney in what could be the first of many Republican presidential clashes over the issue of abortion. Bachmann cicatrized the former Massachusetts governor for not signing a pro-life presidential pledge. As LifeNews.com reported, the Susan B. Anthony List unveiled the pledge on Friday and indicated Bachmann, Tim Pawlenty, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul signed it. The pledge has the candidates promising to support only judicial nominees who won’t interpret the Constitution in a way that supports Roe v. Wade, select pro-life Cabinet members on positions affecting abortion policy, supporting legislation to stop taxpayer funding of abortions and Planned Parenthood, and to support a fetal pain bill that would ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy.

Romney did not sign the pledge and his officials said it was because he worried the de-funding legislation would also revoke funding for hospitals, though the legislation currently pending in Congress does not do so.

Romney also released a pro-life statement of position at National Review, though that didn’t stop officials from the Susan B. Anthony List from hitting him over his decision against signing the pledge.

Now, Bachmann, a fellow Republican presidential candidate seeking to unseat pro-abortion President Barack Obama, is going after Romney, according to a press statement LifeNews.com received.

“It is distressing that Governor Romney refuses to sign the SBA Pledge, even while claiming to be pro-life. The excuses for not signing clearly continue the doubts about his leadership and commitment to ending the practice of abortion – particularly for a candidate who ran as pro-choice for the Senate and Governorship of Massachusetts,” Bachmann said.

She continued, “Any Presidential candidate seeking our party’s nomination should sign the SBA Pledge and vow to protect life from conception to natural death. Governor Romney should reconsider his decision not to sign the Pledge just as he reconsidered his position on the life issue during the last campaign.”

Bachmann is the second Republican presidential hopeful to tag Romney. Rick Santorum, the former Pennsylvania senator, also bashed him.

“This past Monday night at the Republican Presidential Debate, I was asked about Governor Romney’s pro-life conversion, and I gave him the benefit of the doubt,” Santorum said. “I apparently spoke too soon.”

“It is incredibly disappointing that Governor Romney chose not to defend those who cannot defend themselves,” he told LifeNews in a statement.

The SBA List indicated pro-life businessman Herman Cain and pro-abortion former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson did not sign the pledge. Cain has released his own statement on why not, saying he can’t advance the pro-life bills de-funding Planned Parenthood as a member of Congress, though he could certainly employ the bully pulpit of the presidency to do so.

That's a very interesting statement. I note that even Bachmann doesn't mention the fourth item of that pledge. That's the part Herman Cain had a problem with, and I also see a serious problem with it, especially in light of the first item, appointing judges who will follow the original intent of the Constitution.

Perhaps someone on this thread can provide an answer to a question I've been asking since this pledge came to the forefront of "news."

The first item in the pledge is "to nominate to the U.S. federal bench judges who are committed to restraint and applying the original meaning of the Constitution, not legislating from the bench;" and the fourth item is to "advance and sign into law a Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act to protect unborn children who are capable of feeling pain from abortion."

Let's assume a president Bachmann (or any president for that matter) signing this pledge and following through on all the items. So we have federal courts with judges who respect the original intent of the Constitution and are "strict constructionists." Among other things, this means that the "General Welfare clause" will convey no power or authority for the Congress to act, as Madison outlined in Federalist #41. And for grins, let's also assume that "Interstate commerce" authority is interpreted to mean only transactions where someone in one state is actually purchasing goods or services from someone in another state, or purchasing transportation for goods or passengers traveling from one state to another. All thiings are as they should always have been. The United States of America is on it's way back to being a great country again.

Now, the "Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act" is challenged in the courts. Exactly which power enumerated in Article 1 Section 8 of the United States Constitution, interpreted with the original intent of the founders, allows the Congress to pass such an act and the President to sign it into law? Wouldn't the judges the SBA list pledge is wanting in place find the law they are proposing to be unconstitutional?

I am pleased that Bachmann has, quite correctly, called Romney on this. I am feeling a little better about her now. There is still the matter of her employment of Rollins, which is a major red flag in my copybook, and her refusal to distance herself from his comments regarding Palin.

Bachmann is a candidate I could, and would, support if she is nominated. She is still not my first choice.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.