Home Page
Articles of Interest
Blogs & Links
Candidate Survey/Voter Guide
Events
Marriage Protection Amendment House Vote
Marriage Protection Amendment Senate Vote
Principles & Vision
What is PPCC?

Dennis O'Brien Speaks

Dennis M. O'Brien, International Man of Mystery?

Not quite, but people want to know who this guy is. After spending 30 years as a member of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives, O'Brien was plucked from relative obscurity Jan. 2 to lead the 203 members of the most expensive and least effective legislative body in the country.

O'Brien has granted interviews with many of the largest newspapers in the state, but he's keeping his plans close to the vest. And he's not saying much when it comes to the most pertinent question — how much influence will Gov. Ed Rendell and Democratic Leader Bill DeWeese have over O'Brien and the issues that come before the House?

To his credit, O'Brien found time to sit down with his hometown newspaper, The News Gleaner, a community newspaper that covers Northeast Philadelphia, where O'Brien's home district is located. The New Gleaner is a sister paper of The Mercury. Both are owned by Journal Register Co. Inc., based in Yardley, Bucks County.

News Gleaner Executive Editor Patrick McNally and staff writer William Rice met with O'Brien last week. Below is a transcript of their far-ranging interview with the new Speaker, including what O'Brien had to say about his sudden rise to power, his relationship to the Republican Party and his plans for Pennsylvania.

Warning: As you read the answers to the questions, you'll probably say to yourself that O'Brien sounds too good to be true, especially after the four-year reign of John Perzel, who ruled over the Legislature with an iron grip. Time will tell if O'Brien is the savior of the troubled Pennsylvania Legislature or a puppet for Rendell/DeWeese.

Q: If you drive past Our Lady of Calvary parish on Knights Road, the sign proclaims "God Bless Speaker O'Brien." Have the events of the past few days begun to sink in?

Dennis O'Brien: No. I don't recognize myself in the publications. Driving down Knights Road and seeing my parish put up a sign recognizing me, it's just great. The reality hasn't sunk in from a historical perspective, because it happened so fast. This hasn't happened anywhere, where a majority party has nominated somebody from the minority to be speaker. As challenging as that will be, the opportunity to build dialogue and press people into a solution mode is so opportunistic. People are now so optimistic for change, and we can't compromise or limit that. I know that people on the Senate are moving, the House is committed to it, and the governor certainly is. If people believe that we are just focused on doing what's right ... it just uplifts everybody.

Q: Your son was with you when this all happened. How has your family and friends reacted to the news?

O'Brien: It's amazing how many new friends I have. I always have kept my oldest and dearest friends close to me, and they couldn't be happier. In Montgomery County, a man came up to me today. He knocked on my window and said. "I never knew who you were. My brother works with Josh Shapiro, and two of my nephews are autistic." So many wonderful responses, and it's my responsibility not to diminish those expectations. What I have to reassure people in my district is that it's not that they have a Speaker, what I've been impressed by is to hear people say "Our Denny O'Brien is Speaker." That's overwhelming, and it's my duty to tell the district that since they've been so supportive over the years, I hopefully I won't change, that I can do a lot more.

Q: We hear so much about the differences between the two parties. What are some of the areas where the cooperation can occur?

O'Brien: Pennsylvania is the most diverse state demographically in the U.S. What we have to do is to recognize and understand the differences, and see why they have to be melded into the budget. The budget is the main thing that we do. It is so huge, and we want to bring people into the conversation. People hear about the budget when 99 percent of it is done and 1 percent is being argued about. There's other ways of recognizing and embracing the hopes and dreams of the commonwealth. There are criminal justice challenges. I'm going to have talks with the top policy people, and we'll build consensus. That means infrastructure, legislative weapons and reorganization and deployment of resources. You're going to have multiple levels of government in the conversation, and include them for problem solving. There are transportation issues, health care. We have to expand the conversation, and give the best effort to move the ball forward.

Q: Gov. Rendell was an important part of the reason that you decided to pursue this post. What is your relationship like with him?

O'Brien: When were at the Governor's Mansion, we were in the basement where meetings are held. To the side, he has this table where you shoot basketballs. He took my son over. It was remarkable at how personal the level this was all handled. The governor is shooting baskets with my son, then comes over and discusses who the next Speaker of the House will be. Later he took my son to the yard, and he's playing with his two golden retrievers and my son, on a day that changes the Commonwealth. That type of conversation and relationship, I hope, will serve the Commonwealth well. There's no reason for confrontations. We'll have discussions, but it starts with respect for each other as individuals.

Q: Recently, you've been described as either a moderate or conservative Republican. Others have said that you’re not really a Republican. How do you see yourself?

O'Brien: I don't know what my labels are, but everybody knows who I am, whether it's gun issues, pro-life, criminal justice or kids with disabilities. I don't know where you put a label on that. I am serious about issues, and take them as they come, with a willingness to solve the issue.

Q: Your election as Speaker makes you a major player not only in Harrisburg, but also in Philadelphia. Have you spoken to (City Republican Chairman) Mike Meehan, and how much more involved will you get involved in city-wide issues politically, specifically with the choosing of an eventual mayoral candidate?

O'Brien: I think that it’s critical. I'm looking for a great relationship with Michael, and other leaders of the party in finding a (mayoral) candidate and party-build. I want a great relationship.

Q: In an interview before the general election, you quickly stated that you would not change parties, and reiterated that statement after being named speaker. Has anything changed, and will you remain a Republican?

O'Brien: Yes. That was clear through this entire process. A reporter told the governor that there were reports that he tried to get me to switch, and Rendell replied "No, I did not, and I didn't now." Those rumors are always out there. I am who I am, and don't believe that you can be successful if you jump off for personal gain. Of course, a benefit instantly accrues to me and my issues, and I would be squandering an opportunity in a big way. But you balance that and make sure that it's a good thing beyond that. This is uncharted territory, because it's never happened before. But if we keep the dialogue going, this can be a magical ride.

Q: Can you be specific on any reforms that you'd like to pursue?

O'Brien: They are unspecified, because you can't just have reform that looks good on paper. The house has to have functionality. It also has to be meaningful reform, and also be transparent. We have to have a legislative schedule that people can plan around. I'd like to possibly have Monday as a day for caucuses, and Tuesday as a heavy-lifting day. Wednesday would be used to clean up business from Tuesday. If you drive a system that forces others to be serious about how it works, then you have more accountability, from an individual and collective standpoint. It gives the transparency that I think most people want.

Q: The Senate will debate the lobbying bill during this session. What do you want to see as the ultimate result?

O'Brien: We need to hopefully vest legislators with more power and responsibility. I'm troubled that outside sources perceive that (lobbyists) disproportionately control the process. If you send somebody to Harrisburg, they should be in power to make decisions. But lobbyists are not always a bad thing, because they bring information that is necessary to solve the issue. You can't go in thinking that you know the whole story. But we're going to do all that we can to empower the legislator's part of the process.

Q: What is your opinion concerning some people calling to reduce the size of legislature?

O'Brien: There's two ways of looking at this issue. Today people say that the legislature is large and out of control and unwieldy, and because of that, it's difficult to get things done. But years ago, they looked and said that it was too small, and only a handful of people are making the decisions? I don’t know which way is best. Term limits, the size of the legislature — we need to have a real conversation about it. But we also have to look historically at why we looked to expand and now shrink the legislature. You might be surprised that the arguments may be the same, because the problems are the same. When you change the mechanism, it takes time for those in control to get control again. You have to look at the core issues, which are representation, openness of government and problem solving. But I'm not dismissing this or pre-judging it.

Q: Some other publications have been speculating about a possible rift between you and former Speaker John Perzel. What sort of relationship do you have with him?

O'Brien: John (Perzel) and I have a lot of common interests. They've always been shared, and that's not going to change. There are some issues that I'm going to have a stronger focus on than he did. That's just the nature of the beast. I don't see any dramatic changes. We represent the same constituency, Northeast Philadelphia. Anytime change occurs, you're going to feel threatened, and that requires a commitment of conversation and trying to understand.

Q: Regarding criminal justice issues, how do you see using your position as a bully pulpit for change?

O'Brien: The issue that I brought up is to make sure that anybody sentenced to more than two years must go to a state correctional institution. Then, local short-term facilities can go back to that function. You have people sentenced to five years in county prisons. Talk about putting the lions with the lambs. Time is tougher in state facilities, it's a different way of doing time. By shifting that, the responsibility will shift to the state, so cities and counties can hire more cops, give raises and hire DAs, and have a talent pool that can respond to the increasing level of challenge. It will require building a couple more facilities. The culture has to change, and the level of crime will change.

Q: Archbishop Ryan High School now counts among their alumni a congressman (Patrick Murphy), an astronaut (Chris Ferguson), a player responsible for one of the biggest plays in NFL history (Frank Wychek) and now Speaker of the House. How did your alma mater shape you?

O'Brien: All of the people you just talked about will say that it was a great place to go to school. It's required of us who have attained our 15 minutes of fame, because of we are who we are because of our Ryan experience to celebrate that, and encourage other people, that they can be successful, because of the environment at Archbishop Ryan.

Q: You've said in interviews that if you had plans on New Year's Eve, this might never have happened. Are you still pinching yourself, to see if it's real?

O'Brien: You could not write a movie script about this, at least that anybody would believe. Jim Murray, who was GM of the Eagles under Leonard Tose once said that God puts 20 people in your life at a certain time, because he wants something to happen. One of my new best friends is Josh Shapiro, because he a gifted guy and shares my passion for kids with disabilities. It made him comfortable to call me at home on New Year's Eve and say, "I have an idea." My neighbors asked, "Is that really true? You didn't say anything (on New Year's Eve)." I said, "Who would have believed me?" Everything is about seconds and inches, relationships, and the ability to reach out.

John Perzel is a plague on Pennsylvania

 

Are members of the Pennsylvania Legislature subject to random drug testing? Is there some sort of mental health screening available in the General Assembly?

How else can you explain the absurdity of bestowing the title of "Speaker Emeritus" on ousted Speaker John M. Perzel, who lost his post Jan. 2 when 99 Democrats and 6 Republicans voted for Dennis M. O'Brien as the Speaker for the next two years.

The repudiation of Perzel sent the Philadelphia Republican on a week-long downward spiral from the most powerful leadership post in the House to rank-and-file member, one of 203 representatives in the most bloated, under-worked and overpaid legislature in the United States.

One week after Perzel's demotion, the Republican Caucus, which is now in the minority in the House thanks largely to Perzel, voted to make Perzel the "Speaker Emeritus" of the House. Or at least half the House. There's no indication that the 102 Democrats in the House -- or Speaker O'Brien -- recognize Perzel's honorary title.

Let's review what John Perzel has done in the past four years as Speaker of the House.

* Perzel pushed through the massive increase in the state income tax proposed by Gov. Ed Rendell in 2003 through the House.

* Perzel ushered in the flawed casino slots bill proposed by Gov. Ed Rendell in July 2004.

* Perzel orchestrated the July 2005 pay raise along with Gov. Rendell and Ralph Cappy, chief justice of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

* Perzel helped Gov. Rendell increase state spending by billions of dollars over the past four years, setting the state up for financial disaster.

* Because of Perzel's miscalculation of the public backlash to the pay raise and his steadfast refusal to consider repealing the payjacking, 50 House members were voted out of office or forced to retire in 2006.

So what do the remaining Republicans do? They reward Perzel for his ignorance and arrogance. They refused to dump Perzel despite losing their 13-seat majority in the House. Republicans could have pushed Perzel overboard after the primary election or after the general election or at any point up to the Jan. 2 Speaker vote.

It finally took 99 Democrats to toss Perzel out of office on Jan. 2 when they found a moderate Republican they can live with in Dennis O'Brien. But how do you explain the fact that 94 Republicans voted to put Perzel back in the Speaker's office after all the damage he has done to the party and the House?

I'm beginning to question the mental stability of the 101 members of the Republican Caucus in the House of Representatives.

Pollster and political analyst Lowman Henry, writing today in his Lincoln Blog, gets it: "The first step to dealing with a problem is admitting you have one. Some members of the Pennsylvania House Republican Caucus are urgently in need of a 12-step program, with step one being how to deal with denial. While the position will carry with it no increase in pay, and only a few additional staff members, the very creation of it signals the continued unwillingness of certain House Republicans to face up to the fact that John Perzel has been an unmitigated disaster for their diminished caucus and for the Republican Party as a whole."

John Perzel is the reason the Republican Party lost the majority in the House. Perzel is the reason 55 lawmakers, mostly Republicans, are no longer serving in Harrisburg. Perzel is a walking, talking disaster area.

Perzel is a malignancy on the Pennsylvania Legislature. He will continue to infect lawmakers as long as they keep him in power. And the people of Pennsylvania are the losers. Again.

By creating the post of "Speaker Emeritus" and allowing Perzel to influence the business of the House, by turning their backs on reform and allowing lobbyists to continue running state government, Republicans guaranteed they will remain the minority party in the House in 2008 and beyond.

That's why the 101 House Republicans need to have their heads examined.
Incrementalism - A Lie from the Pit of Hell!

By Flip Benham

There is a lie that has infected the pro-life movement for the past 29 years. It has paralyzed the Church of Jesus Christ. It has moved us from standing upon the Word of God to end child killing, to relying upon our own ability to make compromises with the enemy of God in order to stop abortion. This lie, more than anything else, has rendered us defenseless and ineffective in the battle for life. It is the primary reason that we still have abortion in our land today. It has caused us to believe that we can legislate this evil out of our culture slowly but surely by education, sound reasoning, and political maneuvering. It is called incrementalism. It gives the appearance of accomplishing a desired end but, in reality, it only enables the enemy to continue killing.

You've heard it from well-meaning Christians time and again, "Can't we just get together with those in the pro-choice community and find some common ground so that we can educate them and win them over?" As if education were some great panacea or light that, once revealed, would convert people to the truth. The only problem is that education does little good to those who refuse to see the truth, just as light does little good to those who are blind. Whether or not one can see, according to the Scripture, is a spiritual choice. If one is born again, he will be given eyes that see (John 3:3). If he is not, he will remain blind (John 3:19).

Attempting to share light with those who are blind is a futile endeavor. Attempting to educate those who already have their own "truth" is just as futile. Have you noticed how the pro-choice crowd has admitted that the child in the womb is a human being? We believed that if they were educated to that fact, the killing would cease. Not a chance! The battle for the lives of children will never be won by educating and seeking common ground with those who refuse to see the truth. It will be won only when they are enabled to see.

Again, whether or not one can see the truth is a spiritual choice. Just ask Norma McCorvey, the Jane Roe of Roe v. Wade, or Bernard Nathanson, the founder of NARAL . They were both pro-abortion and instrumental in ushering us into the culture of death. But today they are both Christians. Their eyes are opened to see the truth and they are fighting for life. Jesus is the one who changed their worldview.

You've seen the lie of incrementalism in the "all or something" legislation proposed by many in the pro-life movement to end Roe v. Wade under the auspices of parental notification, parental consent, and the partial birth abortion ban. The idea is that we can slowly but surely win a few here and win a few there and ultimately end legal abortion. In doing so, however, we've compromised some biblical principles along the way. We have been led to believe by the political icons of the pro-life movement that standing on God's Word alone will never make legislative muster. It won't work. Politics is the art of compromise. One can't go for the whole enchilada all at once. We will save some babies now, even though we can't save them all at this time, with the sincere desire that slowly but surely the ultimate "victory" will be won. Again, the idea is that we win one little "victory" at a time and one day the battle will be won. Sounds right, doesn't it?

After all, isn't this the way God was expelled from school and banished from the schoolyard? Satan slowly but surely removed God from our public schools over the years. First, prayer was removed from school (Engle v. Vitale, 1962). Then bible reading was removed from school (Abbington v. Schemp, 1963). Then the Ten Commandments were removed from the walls of school classrooms and hallways (Stone v. Graham, 1980). Now Satan is attempting to remove student-led prayer from high school football games and graduation ceremonies (Santa Fe School District v. Doe, 2000). Yes, Satan does accomplish his murderous purposes slowly but surely. It is called incrementalism!

A case in point would be Satan's first appearance in the Bible. The murderous serpent made his serpentine way to Eve and called God's Word into question, "… Did God really say, 'You must not eat from any tree in the garden'?" (Gen 3:1) Of course the serpent knew exactly what God had said and so did Eve, but he began his temptation by calling God's Word into question. He did not outright deny it -- not at first. That would never have worked. This incremental slithering of the serpent ultimately did end in his outright denial of God's Word to Adam and Eve, "You will not surely die … For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil." (Gen 3:4-5)

What we see here, and what is repeated throughout the pages of the Bible and history, is the incremental way of the serpent. It works! It sucks us into sin slowly until we find ourselves blind and dead to God. It is pragmatic and willing to compromise principle for a "higher" end. Satan is the ultimate incrementalist!

Common in today's Pro-Life thinking is that if it works for the devil, then it ought to work for us. Attempting to use Satan's means to achieve God's ends, however, is always a huge mistake. The ends never justify the means in God's economy. When we convince ourselves that we can outsmart the devil at his own game, he has outsmarted us. God's ways are not our ways!

Incrementalism is a devastating lie that prevents Christians from standing upon God's Word and God's Word alone. It causes us to make compromises with "the seed of the serpent" that God would never have us make. Case in point, Parental Notification and Parental Consent: it is not all right to kill children when their parents have been notified. Neither is it all right to kill children whose mothers have been given parental consent. A Christian cannot sign on to legislation like this, no matter how well intentioned the motive, for it is contrary to God's Word. Unfortunately, incrementalism, has caused us to be ashamed of God's Word (Mark 8:38).

But you may say, "At least it is a step in the right direction and think of the thousands of lives that will be saved." This is the lie of incrementalism at its finest. It causes one to make bargains with the enemy by compromising the Word of God. Babies may or may not be saved but, in signing or sponsoring legislation like this, you have just put yourself in the place of Almighty God. He never gave you the moral authority (the bargaining chip) to make this kind of a decision. Your duty is to stand on His Word and His Word alone. All children are precious in His sight and all human life is sacred.

Partial Birth Abortion Ban is another example of incrementalism. It is not right to kill children in the womb at any point from conception and beyond. What happens here is that we begin to place higher value on the children that are further along in gestation (third trimester) than the ones in first and second trimester. When did God ever say that a child in the third trimester is of any greater value than a child in the first trimester? Recall Luke 1:41, when third trimester John leaped for joy in the womb of his mother Elizabeth upon meeting first trimester Jesus. All human life is sacred to God, and He calls us to speak for all of those who cannot speak for themselves, from third trimester to one second old in the womb. We are not called to make deals for their lives.

But you may say, "You don't understand. We are not trying to make distinctions here as to who is more valuable - first or second trimester. We agree that all human life is sacred. We are trying to save as many as we can until ultimately child killing in the United States of America is finished." I do not question the sincerity of your motive to serve God and end all abortion, but you have been sucked into the lie of incrementalism.

Instead of relying upon the power of Almighty God to watch over His Word to perform it, you end up relying on your own wiles to out-negotiate the enemy. Of course this always involves the need to compromise God's Word. The devil demands this of you, for the Word of God is intolerant of him and absolutely unacceptable in the art of politics. To try to end child killing in America by outwitting the devil will end in utter futility. It causes us to rely upon our own ingenuity to accomplish God's purposes in our culture. Incrementalism is not God's way!

What is God's way? Look at the instrument Jesus used to defeat the devil during his wilderness temptations. It was the Word of God and the Word of God alone that brought Satan to his knees. There was no attempt at negotiation with this liar. Standing upon God's Word without apology, without exception, and without compromise is God's way.

The lie of incrementalism is that we become as God trying to negotiate with the enemy the terms of peace. This is not our job. The terms of peace have already been negotiated at the cross. The victory has been won through Christ. Jesus has made a public spectacle of the devil's defeat. Our sworn duty is to represent our risen Lord's commands to an already defeated foe. There is no need for negotiation. We win when we stand uncompromisingly on God's Word. It is the only offensive weapon we have and the only one we need.

This is a Benham paraphrase of a G. K. Chesterton thought: Modern philosophy and old seek to find common ground between the seed of the serpent and the seed of the woman. Christianity does not. There is hatred between the two seeds and absolutely no common ground. Christianity says red is red (enjoy it in all of its character and beauty). It says white is white (appreciate it and enjoy it too). But Christianity has enmity toward the color pink (red and white together). Pink, however, is the color that the devil and the philosophers of our day demand. Everyone should be of the same color (multi-cultural, multi-racial, gender neutral, etc.) - robbing the particular individualism of God. The world looks for mixture while God looks for distinction. He is seeking a peculiar people who will represent Him to a lost world.

Source: http://www.operationsaveamerica.org/articles/articles/incrementalism.html

BUSH ADMINISTRATION GRANTS BIG VICTORY TO ABORTION INDUSTRY
FaxNotes - September 1, 2006

OTC Sale of "Plan B" A Windfall for Planned Parenthood

The July-August edition of The Caleb Report, a publication of Life Decisions International (http://www.fightpp.org/index.cfm), an organization that
produces a boycott list of corporations that fund Planned Parenthood, reveals data on the actual number of customers who were given "care" in Planned Parenthood clinics nationwide as reported in the 2003-2004 Planned
Parenthood Federation of America Annual Report.

In 2003, 774,645 customers received "Emergency Birth Control" AKA "Plan B."  In 2004, nearly one million (983,537) customers availed themselves of that "service."  Barr Laboratories, the maker of "Plan B," sells its one-or-two pill kits to Planned Parenthood for the "special" price of $4.25 apiece, 25 cents lower than the discount rate Barr offered to public agencies, reports Diedtra Henderson, a staff reporter for The Boston Globe. ("Agency takes in
millions in morning-after pill sales," 9/3/05)  The kits are usually sold to consumers for about $30.  

In the same year (2003-2004), income from PP clinics generated $306.2 million.  On top of that, Planned Parenthood received $265 million of taxpayer's money through various government grants.  Much of that funding
came through Title X, the Family Planning Services and Population Research Act of 1970, a bill co-authored by then Texas Congressman George Herbert Walker Bush and signed into law in 1970 by President Richard Nixon.  Title X
created clinics that offered comprehensive "family planning" services to low-income women and adolescents.  The record shows that Mr. Bush was a passionate advocate of population control, stating in 1969, "We need to make population and family planning household words.  We need to take the sensationalism out of this topic so that it can no longer be used by militants who have no real knowledge of the voluntary nature of the program
but rather are using it as a political steppingstone.  If family planning is anything, it is a public health matter." In 1970, President Nixon said, "No American woman should be denied access to family planning assistance because
of her economic condition.  I believe, therefore, that we should establish as a national goal the provision of family planning services . . . to all who want, but cannot afford them." (Planned Parenthood Federation of America, October 2003)  

President Ronald Reagan, in carrying out the pro-life, conservative agenda he campaigned on, attempted to dismantle the whole Title X behemoth and did succeed in placing some significant obstacles in its path.  George H.W. Bush, whose constituency expected him to carry on the Reagan legacy, did support measures that restricted funding for and limited access to population control activities in foreign countries as well as here at home,
and incurred the wrath of his former friends by doing so.  But the monster had already been created-Congress refused to de-fund it-and the wealthy and powerful pro-abortion interests in both parties enabled the "family
planning" industry to continue its enormous growth.

Over the years, manufacturers of chemical birth control products have developed more and more powerful drugs.  No longer is the term "contraceptive" applicable.  To contra-cept is to prevent conception from taking place in the fallopian tube.  The issue at hand is the so-called
"morning after" pill or "Plan B," a drug that, while it can act as a contraceptive, was developed to intercept a developing human embryo by preventing his or her implantation in the mother's uterine wall, causing an
early abortion.  

"Plan B" is one of those powerful hormonal drugs, described on Planned Parenthood's own website as equivalent to taking as many as 40 progesterone birth control pills, which are only available by prescription.   Why then, has the Bush administration backed the decision by FDA acting director Dr. Andrew Von Eschenbach to allow it to be sold over-the-counter to anyone over 18 who wants to buy it?  Does it matter that customers under 18 still need a prescription?  Anyone who has followed the activities of Planned Parenthood, school-based clinics, and other taxpayer-funded "family planning' agencies over the years would find that laughable.

There is absolutely nothing to prevent an older male, intent on committing statutory rape, from purchasing the drug and giving it to an under-age girl with the promise that if she submits to him she won't get pregnant and no
one will ever know.  

The effects of this drug on the physical well-being of teenage girls whose bodies are still developing are unknown.   Who at the FDA or in the White House cares about that?

What Congressman Bush and President Nixon put into motion 26 years ago forced the American taxpayer into complicity with personal behavior many believe to be morally wrong and with population control policies to which
they object.  Today, because of the Bush administration's decision on "Plan B," millions of Americans who believe that each and every human life is deserving of respect and protection are being forced to subsidize chemical abortion.

Just how does that help to build a "culture of life" in America?

Source: Republican National Coalition for Life FaxNotes - September 1, 2006
CRISIS IN STATE GOVERNMENT
A Story of Emerging Tyranny
by William Depner, 8/31/06

   A judge on the U.S. Supreme Court wrote that the Ten
Commandments could not be posted in public schools because students might read them, think about and ultimately obey them.  Thus judicial tyrants in black robes ruled that it would be an impermissible religious purpose to teach public school students the commandment “You shall not murder”.  The bitter fruit is that today, instead of the Ten Commandments, there are metal detectors, security guards in the schools and an epidemic of murders paraded across the news every day, a growing danger to everyone.

   As Christians shrink back from moral law and civic duty, state government and courts are also becoming populated with unprincipled tyrants.  We are increasingly experiencing their havoc and the demise of the justice and morals that are necessary for personal and societal stability.

   During the Industrial Revolution following the Civil War,
growth in the corporate form of business organization led to concentrations of wealth and the corruption of legislators for special laws, log rolling and favoritism.  The PA Constitutional Convention of 1872-73 convened to reform such corrupt legislative behavior.  The state constitution was amended by Article III, para. 3 to state: “No bill shall be passed containing more than one subject, which shall be clearly expressed in its title.”

     The original bill that became Gov. Rendell’s massive slots bill, Act 71, was only one page long and entitled: “An Act Providing for the Duties of the Pennsylvania State Police Regarding Criminal History Background Reports for Persons Participating in Harness Horse Racing.”  Without public hearings or input, a comprehensive slot machine bill (Act 71) emerged from this 1-page bill with wide ranging topics and far reaching consequences.  Act 71 created a
Pennsylvania (Gambling) Control Board, the issuance of gambling licenses authorizing the creation of a variety of slot machine casinos, the generation and distribution of revenues from the licenses, the creation of numerous funds including the (Gambling) Fund, the Pennsylvania Horse Race Fund, the Gambling and Economic and
Tourism Fund, the Property Tax Relief Fund and even a Compulsive and Problem Gambling Treatment Fund for the people they would make sick by gambling!  Act 71 also replaced government investigative and police powers with a independent “gambling commission” that controls all investigations of itself and of gambling, thus giving gambling interests exactly what they want.  Organized
crime cannot be faraway.  Without public hearings or debate, the bill authorized 61,000 highly addictive slot machines, more than any state except Nevada, which will profoundly corrupt public morals and let gambling interests and organized crime control state government.

PA SUPREME COURT:  RUBBER STAMP FOR TYRANNY
   In 2005, the PA Supreme Court ruled on a legal challenge that the slots bill had violated the single purpose provision of Art. III  of the Pennsylvania Constitution.  The Court ignored both the intent and the letter of Article III, whose purpose was to prevent special interests from ramming their projects through the legislature, and upheld the gambling bill that Gov.Rendell and the gambling interests had just rammed through the legislature!  Some things never change.

   Act 72 was a plan of Gov. Rendell to use gambling revenues to lower property taxes in local school districts, deepening the state’s dependence on gambling.  However, in an unforeseen development, an overwhelming majority of the local school boards rejected the gambling revenue from the state which would diminish their control.  

   Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.  Like a king or supreme court justice, Gov. Rendell threatened to call for a special session of the legislature and demanded that legislators force local school districts to accept the gambling lucre.  He said it was a flawed concept in the first place to allow school districts to vote on accepting gambling money.  He threatened to call special sessions of the legislature until the legislators enacted property tax relief.  In contempt for both government by the People and for the rule of law, Gov. Rendell said that neither the local school boards nor the People should be permitted to vote on it.

   All of the foregoing should be no wonder.  The founding fathers said it was impossible to govern without God and the bible, but Gov. Rendell manifestly despises the Ten Commandments.  He is unashamedly pro-abortion of the unborn.  In a Sunday Harrisburg Patriot-News article, Rendell spokesman Chuck Ardo indicated that the governor believes that the courts should define marriage.
Abortion Images Incite Opinion
BY JEFF SONDERMAN
08/23/2006

The Rev. Kathryn Simmons instinctively glanced up as two trucks rumbled past her Tuesday morning on Washington Avenue.

"What is that?" asked the Rev. Simmons, a minister at Bethel AME church.

Her curiosity gave way to shock as her brain registered the 8-by-22-feet images painted on the sides of the trucks: bloody, aborted fetuses.

"That is disgusting."

Others will probably share her opinion as the four trucks patrol downtown Scranton and Wilkes-Barre for about three weeks, occasionally supported by an airplane towing a 35-by-100-feet banner.

It is part of a campaign intended to shock unsuspecting people with the up-close reality of abortion, said organizer Mark Harrington, the executive director of the midwest office of the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform, an anti-abortion rights group based in Lake Forest, Calif.

Mr. Harrington said he doesn't understand how those who support abortion rights "get angry at the pictures, but they don't get angry at abortion."

The Rev. Simmons, who believes abortion is an issue "between a woman and God," said pictures won't change her mind.

"Basically, that just scares you to death," she said.

Down the street, 44-year-old Scranton resident Barbara Panetti said she didn't like that people are being publicly confronted with these images with no warning.

"It is too graphic, especially with children around," said Ms. Panetti, grateful that her 9-year-old son was not with her. "To show that on the streets, I don't think that is appropriate."

The Center for Bio-Ethical Reform's campaign has been in other parts of the U.S. since 2001, Mr. Harrington said, but came newly to Pennsylvania this year to raise the abortion issue among voters in key November elections for
the state's governorship and a U.S. Senate seat.

Since June, the images have rolled through Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Harrisburg, Allentown, State College, Altoona and Erie.

In every city, they have drawn controversy, which is precisely their goal.

Mr. Harrington compares his aborted fetus pictures to other gripping images that shifted social conscience toward civil rights or away from the Vietnam
War.

The power of such images is "indispensable in social reform," he said.

"People may initially have an angry response, but they are never going to be able to get these pictures out of their heads," Mr. Harrington said.

Displaying bloody reality is the main trade of the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform.

The group's Web site, www.abortionno.org, calls abortion "genocide," and features "extremely graphic" videos of abortions in progress and of aborted fetal tissue.

The extremist approach may go too far even for some religious leaders who oppose abortion rights, but also believe in compassion.

"They make the assumption that they know what God is thinking, and I never make that assumption," said the Rev. Donald Anderson, pastor of Clarks Summit United Methodist Church.

"What we try to do is live out the wholeness of the gospel, which is compassion and understanding for people caught in unwanted pregnancies," he said.

Gruesome images, though, can serve a purpose, said the Rev. Mark Schmitz, pastor of Summit Baptist Bible Church in Clarks Summit.

He recalled his childhood affinity for motorcycles that was tempered when he saw photos of a horrible motorcycle accident that claimed a rider without a
helmet.

The Rev. Schmitz still rode motorcycles later in his life, but less often and always with a helmet.

The abortion photos could have the same effect, he said.

"What they are trying to do is help people to face a reality that, unless they go into an operating room, they will never be able to understand," said the Rev. Schmitz, who opposes abortion rights.

"It is not a very culturally comfortable thing," the Rev. Schmitz said. "We live in an age where seeing reality happen is too much for our taste."

Contact the writer: jsonderman@timesshamrock.com  

CThe Times-Tribune 2006

Source: http://tinyurl.com/s822b
Priests for Life Urges Partial-Birth Abortion Educational Activity
WASHINGTON, Aug. 18 /Christian Newswire/ -- Now that the Supreme Court has set the date (Wednesday, November 8) for oral arguments in Gonzales v. Carhart and Gonzales v. Planned Parenthood, the two cases related to the federal ban on partial-birth abortion, Fr. Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life, has called for increased public education about this procedure.

“Despite the fact that this procedure, by which a child is partially delivered and then killed with scissors in the back of the neck, has gotten national attention for over a decade, there still aren’t enough Americans who know about it. As people do learn what it is, they re-evaluate the whole idea of ‘pro- choice’ and ‘Roe v. Wade,’ because they never imagined either of those terms connected with such a brutal and repulsive procedure,” Fr. Pavone explained. “In the months to come we will intensify our efforts to reveal the ugly face of ‘pro-choice’ by exposing this procedure, and we call on pastors and other organizations to do the same.”

Priests for Life is the nation's largest Catholic pro-life organization dedicated to ending abortion and euthanasia. For more information, visit www.priestsforlife.org.
Pennsylvania Court Backs Rendell Veto on Family Planning-Abortion Funds
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
August 14, 2006

Harrisburg, PA (LifeNews.com) -- A Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court panel ruled 5-0 in favor of a line-item veto by Gov. Ed Rendell of language in the state budget saying that the $8.8 million allocated to family planning cannot go to any agency that does abortions or refers women to abortion businesses. Rendell, a pro-abortion Democrat removed the pro-life provision from the budget.  The state legislature approved the budget and the family planning provision last year to make sure no federal family planning monies were funneled through the state Department of Public Welfare to fund abortions.

The legislature has subjected state family planning funds to the provision since 1996, when it adopted a law saying the state money "shall not be used to promote, perform or refer for abortions, or engage in abortion counseling."  

But Rendell claimed putting the provision on federal family planning funds the state receives would have violated the state constitution and federal law. He also said he thought the provision would end up costing the state between $18 million and $27 million in federal funds.

In September 2005, State House Speaker John Perzel and State Senate President Pro Tempore Robert Jubelirer, both Republicans, filed a lawsuit to uphold the legislature's provision.

However, the judicial panel dismissed the case on Thursday, thus upholding Rendell's line-item veto.

"The governor's powers of disapproval are no less extensive than, and are entirely coexistent with, the General Assembly's power to enact legislation in the first place," President Judge James Gardner Colins wrote, according to an AP report.

"In other words, if the General Assembly can put it in, the governor can take it out," Colins added.

The decision said the state legislature should attempt to override the veto if it disagrees with Rendell's decision rather than challenging his right to line-item veto the family planning-abortion provision.

Source: http://www.lifenews.com/state1788.html
Abortion Center Director Admits Out-of-State Teens Go There to Avoid Parents
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor

July 30, 2006

Hagerstown, MD (LifeNews.com) -- When the Senate approved a bill last week prohibiting taking a teenager to another state for an abortion without her parents' knowledge or consent, abortion advocates claimed the practice rarely occurs. However, the director of a Maryland abortion business says it routinely gets calls from teens wanting to avoid parental involvement laws.  Teenagers in Pennsylvania's York County are apparently heading to the Hagerstown Reproductive Health Services abortion business in neighboring Maryland.  

They appear to be wanting to avoid a Pennsylvania state law that requires parental consent for a minor girl to have an abortion and requires all women to wait 24 hours to have an abortion after getting information on fetal development and abortion's medical risks and alternatives.

The HRHS abortion facility sits just 8-10 miles away from the Pennsylvania-Maryland border and it regularly advertises in York County's Yellow Pages.

"It's clear to us that we receive calls from young women in Pennsylvania who already called a clinic in Pennsylvania, and they want to circumvent the state laws," the HRHS abortion center administrator told the York Daily
Record.

Maryland has a parental notification requirement, but the abortion practitioner is allowed to waive it in most cases. And, unlike Pennsylvania, Maryland has no mandatory reporting of abortion figures, so no information is known on how many times Pennsylvania teens go to Maryland for an
abortion.

Pennsylvania teens are also going to another abortion facility.

Sheryl Wolf, spokeswoman for Hillcrest Clinic, another Maryland abortion business, said 70 young women came there from Pennsylvania.

Other parts of the country are experiencing the same problems of teenagers going out of state for abortions.

Missouri teens frequently are taken to the Hope Clinic abortion facility in Granite City, Illinois, which neighbors St. Louis, Missouri. Though Missouri requires parental involvement before an abortion, Illinois does not.  

Last year, Shawn Reagan told Missouri state lawmakers about her problems with the Illinois abortion center.

Reagan said she wept as she talked with staff at Hope Clinic who refused to let her talk to her 14 year-old daughter who was inside the facility preparing for an abortion. She was eventually arrested trying to find her
daughter in the abortion facility.

The girl was reportedly taken to Hope Clinic by the mother of the man who allegedly impregnated the 14-year-old. The woman, posing as the girl's grandmother, had the girl called off from school.

When the girl left the abortion facility after having an abortion, employees told her, "No one will ever know you were here, we'll bury your records."

Meanwhile, the woman who had taken the girl for the abortion was slipped out the back door of the abortion facility.

Hope Clinic executive director Sally Burgess told the News-Leader newspaper that the abortion center does not require parents of Missouri teens to accompany them to the abortion facility to ensure it has their consent to
perform the abortion.

According to the National Right to Life Committee, 22 states have parental consent laws in effect that require a parent to sign off on a teen's abortion before it can be done. Another seven states have notification laws
in place that require abortion facilities to notify a parent of a potential abortion beforehand.

Source: http://www.lifenews.com/nat2461.html
Abortion foes cruise city with graphic signs
Graphic signs shout anti-abortion message
Thursday, July 13, 2006
BY MARY KLAUS

Of The Patriot-News

Whether he gets a thumbs-up, thumbs-down or other gestures, Kurt Meckes says he makes people think about abortion as he drives through Harrisburg.

For three weeks, Meckes is driving a truck displaying 8-by-22-foot images of an aborted fetus.

Four trucks with similar pictures are in downtown Harrisburg and in nearby municipalities from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. through July 31. They are part of a campaign by the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform, an anti-abortion group based in California.  Click here for entire article

Capitolwire: Conference report approved after family-planning funding impasse resolved.  
HARRISBURG (June 30) - Lawmakers determined not to have a repeat of last year on a family-planning funding fight spent most of Saturday negotiating budget language to avoid that fate this year.

Last year, the General Assembly approved budget language that had been used since former Gov. Tom Ridge's administration. That language limits which organizations could get state family-planning funding. The language had the effect of banning Planned Parenthood and other groups that performed abortions from getting the funding.  

Rendell line-item vetoed the language and Sen. Robert Jubelirer, R-Blair, and others took him to court. Jubelirer said Rendell had agreed to the language and then reneged by vetoing the language.

Rendell chief of staff John Estey, a former trial lawyer, disputed that Rendell made any such agreement. He said he looked forward to being able to interview legislative leaders under oath about that issue.  

The budget conference committee of legislative leaders was supposed to meet at 9:30 a.m. Saturday to send the un-amendable budget draft to the House or Senate.

The hang-up over the family-planning funding was a major factor in the eight-and-a-half hour delay to that meeting, said House Appropriations Chairman Brett Feese, R-Lycoming. That meeting took place just after 6 p.m.
The conference committee unanimously approved the budget document.

Speaking of the alleged agreement in last year's budget and Rendell's veto, Feese said, "Nobody wants to go through that again. So they are working out compromise language."  

At 5:10 p.m., Feese joked "just a few words to go and they'll have an agreement" on the family-planning language.

Once that snag was erased, Feese said, "we hope the budget will roll."

The ultimate compromise was expected to ensure Planned Parenthood would get state funding, but Feese said he did not know how that would be done.

Source: Copyright 2006 GovNetPA, Inc.
Planned Parenthood Does Most US Abortions, Sells 1M Morning After Pills  
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
June 9, 2006


Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- More information is coming forward from examinations of the annual reports for the Planned Parenthood Federation of America. The reports show Planned Parenthood continues to be the leading abortion business in the country -- doing more abortions than any other company.  

As LifeNews.com previously reported, Planned Parenthood <nat2327.html>, a supposedly nonprofit organization, brought in $882 million in FY 2004-2005 a whopping increase of 8.9 percent over the previous reporting period. The abortion business made $63 million in profit last year.

New information shows Planned Parenthood, as of June 2005, had net assets valued at $784.1 million, of which $302.1 million is unrestricted. PPFA has another $107.6 million that is temporarily restricted.

"This is essentially a savings account," Douglas Scott of Life Decisions International, a watchdog group for corporations that contribute to Planned Parenthood, explained. "It is money that Planned Parenthood could choose to spend at any time. But for now it is sitting drawing interest."

Despite sitting on a huge nest egg of hundreds of millions, the abortion business is still working overtime to get state and federal tax dollars.  Nearly one-third of its income ($272.7 million) comes from American taxpayers.

"Despite these huge sums that Planned Parenthood cannot seem to find a use for, the corporation's hierarchy incessantly claims to need more tax dollars," Scott said.

The annual report shows Planned Parenthood did 255,015 abortions in 2004 alone (up 4.3% from 2003), generating an estimated $95 million. A scant 1,414 customers were referred to adoption agencies; down more than 20% from
2003.

The figures show Planned Parenthood continues to be the largest abortion business in the United States. In 1984, it did about 5.5 percent of all abortions nationwide, but the figure has increased to nearly 20 percent as of 2004.

Meanwhile, Planned Parenthood says it has sold 983,537 "emergency" birth control kits in 2004 (nearly 21.3% more than in 2003). The kits contain the morning after pill drug, also known as Plan B, which can sometimes cause an
abortion.

Scott pointed out that the release of the latest annual report was delayed for six months, compared to the normal release date.

"This is probably because it took a long time for Planned Parenthood to count so much money," Scott said.

Related web sites: Life Decisions International - <http://www.fightpp.org>

Source: <http://www.lifenews.com/nat2337.html>
 
Let's Be Honest
6/22/2006
National Catholic Register (www.ncregister.com/)
 

Language is another casualty of abortion.

Two letter writers to the print edition of the National Catholic Register this week ask questions about the Register’s treatment of abortion in recent reports. In both cases, the confusion arises because of our culture’s strange way of speaking about abortion. Click here for entire article

 

Articles of Interest

12/06/06-Incrementalism - A Lie from the Pit of Hell

09/01/2006-Bush Administration Grants Big Victory to Abortion Industry

08/31/2006-Crisis in State Government

08/23/2006-Abortion Images Incite Opinion

08/18/2006-Priest for Life Urges Partial-Birth Abortion Educational Activity

08/14/2006-Pennsylvania Court Backs Rendell Veto on Family Planning-Abortion Funds

07/30/2006-Abortion Center Director Admits Out-of-State Teens Go There To Avoid Parents

07/13/2006-Abortion Foes Cruise City with Graphic Signs

06/30/2006-Capitolwire: Conference Report Approved After Family-Planning Funding Impasse Resolved

06/9/2006-Planned Parenthood Does Most US Abortions, Sells 1M Morning After Pills

6/22/2006-Let's Be Honest

©2006 Pennsylvania Pro-life & Conservative Coalition