Governor Skips Anti-Choice March


Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty always attends the March for Life. Indeed, he's done so every year since he was first elected. Well, until this year.

On Tuesday, the 35th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision that made abortion legal, Pawlenty was too busy to attend. He was in Chaska speaking at the monthly meeting of the Chanhassen Chamber of Commerce. Now, Chambers of Commerce are an important constituency of the Republican party, and it's understandable that Pawlenty would want to talk to them. But the March for Life is the largest annual event for the Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life, an organization certainly more important to the GOP than the Chanhassen Chamber of Commerce.

So why was Pawlenty missing from the event? Certainly, it wasn't because no accommodation could be made to ensure the governor could get to both events. After all, Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., was able to both speak to the March for Life in St. Paul and make it back to Washington to deliver a rambling anti-abortion address on the floor of the House of Representatives. Certainly, arrangements could have been made to get Pawlenty from Chaska to St. Paul. And yet only Pawlenty's disembodied voice was there to address the anti-abortion faithful, exhorting them to "Stay together, stay active, stay committed and stay hopeful," even as he was apart from them.

Pawlenty's absence might be more understandable when put into context. If conservative pundit Eleanor Clift is to be believed, Pawlenty is at the top of the list for the penultimate slot on the GOP ticket, "whoever gets the nomination." Granted, Clift identified Pawlenty as being from Wisconsin, and more than a few DFLers would be happy to send him there. But Clift's musings are not exactly novel. Pawlenty has long been identified as a potential running mate, especially should Arizona Sen. John McCain win the GOP's nomination. And Pawlenty has always had an eye on his political future.

Yet politicians with aspirations for national office simply do not mix with pro-life crazies. Not in public.

It sounds a bit blunt when put like that, but it's true. While Republicans are happy to take the votes, time and effort of anti-abortion activists, most would rather be anywhere but at a large pro-life demonstration. Since 1981, when President Reagan first made a telephone call to the national March for Life, to this Tuesday, when President Bush did, no Republican president has attended a March for Life event in person. This year, neither did any of the leading Republican candidates. Mike Huckabee campaigned in Georgia, John McCain sent a letter and Mitt Romney issued a press release, but none could be bothered to actually address his anti-abortion allies in person.

Kevin Drum, a liberal blogger for The Washington Monthly, asked the rhetorical question: "Why [has the anti-abortion movement] allowed so many presidents and presidential nominees since then to thumb their noses at them this way? They're a serious and well-established part of the GOP coalition, after all. Why allow politicians to get away with being evidently embarrassed to be photographed in their presence?"

It's a good question, one with no easy answer. They assume, I suppose, that it's better to have allies who are embarrassed by you than no allies at all. Still, it's remarkable how those with national aspirations bypass their events. And how candidates who develop national aspirations suddenly find themselves with unbreakable commitments a half-hour away.

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

To schedule an interview with Jeff Fecke please contact Communications Director Rachel Perrone at rachel@rhrealitycheck.org.

  • invalid-0

    Anti-choice? What about pro-choice, and they choose life? What about pro-choice, and they choose life; and they think it should be up to the states to decide, not the feds?

  • http://www.lifenews.com invalid-0

    Nice try in your political attempt to split Pawlenty from the pro-life movement. The fact of the matter is that Pawlenty, like most Americans, opposes abortion and favors common sense limits on it. Try as you might to divide the prolife community and put us against each other, it’s not going to work. This is much ado about nothing.

    • invalid-0

      We all know that most Americans fail maths when placed next to any of the other “developed” nations, but your post takes the cake!

      The Democratic Presidential candidates all show up to address their constituents, at Planned Parenthood functions, et. al. The Repubes are too chicken shit to stand up for their misguided fantasies by addressing their nutters in person and in public view.

  • invalid-0

    Pro-choice political/Pro-life personal is not a philosophy that includes thinking that somehow the choice should be taken out of the hands of women. When you start to advocate that someone other than the woman involved should make the decision, be it the feds, the state, or whomever, you cease to be Pro-choice. Choice is the operative word. Even someone who would ‘choose life’ for themselves can be pro-choice by realizing that neither they nor anyone else should get to take the decision away from other women. Otherwise, it’s just a definitional thing. Opposition to choice is anti-choice, period.

  • invalid-0

    Actually I shouldn’t call you prolifers for life if you were for life you would be for the BORN, EXISTING WOMAN not for the bundle of cells you all proclaim to love so much. Steven where are you getting your numbers from I don’t think most Americans outright oppose abortion. They may be uncomfortable with it but most would do not want to return to the dark days of illegal back alley abortions. Whether or not you antis like it abortion has been around forever and even if you ban it it will still be around. It will just kill women. But I guess as long as the woman gets her punishment it’s all good, right?

    • invalid-0

      I always wonder how many of those sanctimonious anti-abortion blatters thought $hrubbie was such a great heeeee-ro for vetoing the expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program. TWICE, no less.

    • invalid-0

      I always wonder how many of those sanctimonious anti-abortion blatters thought $hrubbie was such a great heeeee-ro for vetoing the expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program. TWICE, no less.

  • invalid-0

    throwing the abortion issue back to the states is: POLITICIANS are still deciding women’s reproductive futures. Far too often, these politicians are more interested in pandering to pro life groups and not trusting women to make our own decision on this matter.

  • invalid-0

    Mr. Ertelt is publisher of the online pro life mag Lifenews. I occasionally see articles from it forwarded to this one abortion group on yahoo.