Political Punch
Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper

« Previous | Main | Next »

NARAL Chooses Obama -- Why Now?

May 14, 2008 3:38 PM

FROM GUEST-BLOGGER RICK KLEIN, OF ABC'S THE NOTE

One of the nation's leading abortion-rights groups endorsed Sen. Barack Obama on  Wednesday -- in an announcement that's raising eyebrows as much for its timing as for its substance.

NARAL Pro-Choice America's political action committee has decided to drop its neutral stance in the Democratic primary  -- in large part to send a signal that it's ready to get behind the candidate board members view as the likely  nominee, according to the group's political director, Elizabeth Shipp.

"A political organization always looks at viability -- who has the most delegates, the most votes, and the most cash  on hand," Shipp told ABC News. "As a political organization, we're not going to say it's an easy decision, but it's  the right one."

NARAL has been consistently supportive of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton in her previous runs, for the Senate, and Shipp said the group supports her decision to stay in the race as long as she wants. Both Democratic candidate are "100  percent pro-choice," she said, and NARAL will not run any anti-Clinton advertisements, as it saves its resources for the general election.

Shipp said the PAC's nine-member board made the unanimous decision to endorse Obama on Friday, after Clinton lost the North Carolina primary and won only narrowly in Indiana, leaving her with a steeper mathematical hurdle in her effort to catch Obama.

Shipp said the board wanted to send a signal that female voters are  ready to work for Obama -- and said NARAL sees the value in having the Democratic nomination settled, to help make the case against Republican candidate John McCain.

"There was this growing perceived rift -- 'Are women going to be there for Barack Obama?' " she said. "We know that at  the end of the day, we're going to have to go after John McCain. We want people to know, 'It's OK, we trust [Obama.]'  "

While NARAL does not make public the names of its board members, Shipp said the board includes both Democrats and  Republicans, as well as supporters of both Clinton and Obama -- including one Clinton superdelegate.

The decision brought a sharp rebuke from a regular NARAL ally, EMILY's List, a Clinton-backing group that's dedicated to electing "pro-choice" Democratic women.

"I think it is tremendously disrespectful to Sen. Clinton -- who held up the nomination of a FDA commissioner in order to force approval of Plan B and who spoke so eloquently during the Supreme Court nomination about the importance of  protecting Roe vs. Wade -- to not give her the courtesy to finish the final three weeks of the primary process,"  EMILY's List president Ellen R. Malcolm said in a statement. "It certainly must be disconcerting for elected leaders who stand up for reproductive rights and expect the choice community will stand with them."

In its endorsement announcement, NARAL was careful not to denigrate Clinton.

"Pro-choice Americans have been fortunate to have two strong pro-choice candidates in Sen. Obama and Sen. Clinton,  both of whom have inspired millions of new voters to participate in this historic presidential race," NARAL president  Nancy Keenan said in a statement. "Today, we are proud to put our organization's grass-roots and political support  behind the pro-choice candidate whom we believe will secure the Democratic nomination and advance to the general  election. That candidate is Sen. Obama."

-- Rick Klein

May 14, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (123)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Actually NARAL is different on the national level than each individual state. The Missouri chapter is trying to distance itself from the Obama endorsement and this is a swing state where he is trying to beat MCCAIN. Texas chapter is denying endorsing ANY national candidate, ONLY state races. This is just ammunition for the Republicans to paint Obama as a TRUE Liberal.

Posted by: Darla | May 15, 2008 9:21:29 AM

You people are crazy!!!!!!!! How could you possibly be mad NARAL for supporting Obama? Hillary has openly and blatantly lied to her supporters and all of America and the only thing that you can say is that she's a woman. What ignorance. Go ahead and vote for McCain and the republicans and see where women's rights, mens rights, animal rights and other rights will get you. Don't be fools!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: I'm appalled! | May 15, 2008 9:03:26 AM

We get caught up in the fighting so much we are attacking good organizations now, why are we doing this? This is a good decision, it will take a lot of time to unite the party for all of our rights so that we are not divided in the fall. The longer this continues and as much as I love Hillary she could compromise our chances of winning in the fall and we would wind up with more conservative Judges, Republican legislators and another four years of Bush like executive branch. I thought her winning big in West Virginia would enable her to claim a great victory and set her up for the future, unfortunately it would appear her tone has changed and she will not put this political race aside for the good of the party. She is talking of changing the required delegate count. She seems to feel that gracefully uniting the party is bad compared to fighting to the bitter end. Her stance to go all the way to the convention, is starting to worry me. I like that the voting conitues in the rest of the primaries, short of a miracle Hillary is not going to get the nomination, I'm a pragmatist, It will take me some time to get behind Obama, but I will for the good of us all.

Posted by: outraged08 | May 15, 2008 7:55:50 AM

I am a woman, and I find it disheartening that so many women appear to support Senator Clinton simply because she is a woman to the point that they will vote for McCain, writer Clinton's name in, or sit out the election if Obama is the nominee. What lunacy. If you do not vote for Obama, McCain will win, and if your concern is women's rights, then you should know that McCain is ardently pro-life and will fill the Supreme Court with justices who will happily overturn Roe vs. Wade.

Not voting for Obama because he beat a female candidate makes as little sense as not voting for Senator Clinton because she is a woman. Please, I beg you, do not let your frustration over this issue lead you to vote in a way that will allow McCain to become president.

Also, just as a note: Obama voted to support the bill that would deny medical care to fetuses who survive abortions because the bill described the fetus as a "child." As he correctly pointed out, it is illegal to kill a child, so such language is really dangerous if made into law because it could be used to undermine other abortion-related rights.

Basically, my fellow women, please use your vast resources of intelligence and recognize the fact that if Obama does not win this presidency (assuming that he is the nominee), then McCain will work to set back women's rights every day for the next 4-8 years.

Posted by: isis dagmar | May 15, 2008 7:48:34 AM

We have a right to vote for anyone we want, that is what choice is all about. I would not vote for Hillary EVER. Her hubby Bill is the reason this country is so messed up and Hillary has shown she is more for herself than this country. Her mud slinging and lying political tactics have left a bitter taste in the mouths of woman and I am one of them, good for naral for standing up to the american people and showing we can vote for who we want to, now just because it is expected.

Posted by: Lilcntrydarling | May 15, 2008 7:48:27 AM

I was a supporter of NARAL in the past and alway found their e-mails informative. I have removed myself from their e-mail list and will not be giving any money to them again for this endorsement of Obama. They should have waited until there was a clear nominee. They should have also consulted with the state NARAL offices. They made a very bad mistake.

Posted by: Lori | May 14, 2008 11:53:20 PM

I don't understand WHY NARAL felt compelled to jump into the foray at this point. There will be a Democratic cantidate, that is certain. At the point we HAVE a cantidate, it is appropriate to endorse the cantidate that is pro-choice. It is pretty clear to me that this was NOT a well thought out decision, that the national organization and membership were NOT consulted. I am saddened, disappointed and disillusioned that an organization that I thought advocated the well being of women would so completely ignore someone who has been a champion of women's reproductive rights and health for three decades. I will no longer support or respect NARAL. Sad.

Posted by: Lori | May 14, 2008 10:51:59 PM

Hillary Clinton assisted George Bush in bringing us the Iraq war resulting in the death of over 4000 American personnel.

Hillary Clinton voted to adopt the resolution to declare
Iran a "terrorist organization" thereby enabling Bush to invade Iran.

Hillary spoke of "obliterating" Iran.

Hillary always speaks of herself as being a fighter, when what we need is a statesman. We need someone who will want to negotiate, compromise. Hillary is not the person with the judgment necessary to take take the office of commander in chief - "from day one," or from any other time.

Posted by: rhbate | May 14, 2008 10:47:14 PM

Obama does not have my vote! No more Obama! No more NARAL!

Posted by: maggie | May 14, 2008 10:38:53 PM

They should have waiting until Obama is thoroughly vetted first. In fact why hasn't this been done by the mainstream media No need to bet the ranch on someone so unknown.

Posted by: AmericanWomanPatriot | May 14, 2008 10:33:08 PM

Why is Lady McCain hiding her tax returns. Accountants can't think of an accounting reason for not filing a joint return, so their filing separate must be to hide her return from the public. McCain has been involved in several scandals over the years, not just the influence peddling Keating fiasco. Do a search using his name and Navajo to learn of an earlier land grab for his buddies. Then just to stay current look at the land sway for his supporters in Arizona, Fred Ruskin, Wes Guillett, Kurt Davis & M. Jimenez. Good ready for development federal land for remote grassland and ponderosa pine forest.

Posted by: Javalation | May 14, 2008 10:21:30 PM

I have been a NARAL supporter for years and I am stunned at the gall of these board members. Hooray for you - you've jumped on the bandwagon of this year's "American Idol" and betrayed a steadfast ally at a time when she should have been able to count on you. Now you've put all of us in the pro-choice community in the crappy position of having to decide whether YOU are worthy of support.

To paraphrase a former president, "Better to have kept your organizational mouth shut and be thought fools than to speak as you did and remove all doubt."

Posted by: Sue | May 14, 2008 10:17:31 PM

Good for you NARAL! Hillary Clinton's Rovian tactics (Karl Rove)was not doing women across this nation a favor. She knew that the Obama, our nominee, will work for women too and didn't care that she was trashing him worse than a Republican. Yes, a repub can say the same things about him but it is worse coming out of a Democrats mouth. Hillary is a politician of the past and will be tainted worse than John Kerry after this election is over.

Posted by: Hooray Naral | May 14, 2008 10:08:50 PM

I never heard so much bitterness over an election process in my whole life. I am a 54 year old male and I understand what it like when you have daughter who became pregnant at 16 years old. My daughter had to endure hardship at school among her friends and other family members. She could have went someplace to have an abortion without telling her mother and I, but she choose to come to me and her mother about her pregnancy I told her that it was her choice to make whether she wanted to have an abortion or not, that we will support her in her decision. If Roe vs. Wade is any indication of choosing, I rather have a candidate that will back up me and wife actions for our daughter. I think Obama or Hillary would get my support as democratic candidates whoever is nominated, because I believe in both of them making a clear path for American to choose for their daughters and granddaughters. I Obama is the clear nominee I will support him to the fullest. I've followed this whole campaign and I am convince that he will do the right thing for this country in so many ways of change and that the Republican will continue to keep giving Americans the same ole same. Don't be fooled America, look forward to the future and stop looking backward.

Posted by: h.taylor | May 14, 2008 9:51:16 PM

What was the terrible HURRY, NARAL ??
Shame on you a thousand times! You are going down the wrong road, like so many others who have NOT done their homework! NARAL, you have sold us down the river! I am a 63 yr old woman. I know what progress has been made, and I have invested SO MUCH into it. I and many of my friends and collegues are through with NARAL!!

Posted by: Sharron Chapman | May 14, 2008 9:41:04 PM

Ellen Malcolm has done wonderful things for women candidates around the country and has repeatedly worked to get women elected who have made valuable social change happen. Do not mistake this as we dissect this.

But this is a misstep, a mistake, a blunder, and a bad call. Are you kidding? Look at Obama's record here.

He's one of us. Pro-choice, pro-woman, and right on the issues.

Hillary Clinton, who I would ABSOLUTELY vote for if she were the candidate, mischaracterized his voting record in Illinois on abortion and other key topics when Obama's team had agreed upon the strategy with pro-choice leaders. She and groups like NOW either didn't do their homework on this, or chose to ignore it and go anti-Obama. Wrong place, wrong time.

And less we forget that Clinton supported this war. Even after we all knew what a debacle it was. What about Iraqi women? The women in our military who have died needlessly?

I was on the fence for so long and finally chose Obama after watching this play out and after thinking long and hard about the war vote Hillary cast. She is no friend to these women.

All that said, she is better than McCain who will stay at war, overturn Roe v. Wade and more.


Oh, And how incredibly crass and ridiculous to slam NARAL in a public comment. Talk about "tremendously disrespectful." EMILY's List is important and can do better than such low-lying play.

Posted by: Ingrid Temple | May 14, 2008 9:13:45 PM

Job discrimination and cowardice at its finest! People that are upset about this endorsement are NOT just for Hillary Clinton because she's a woman. We happen to think she's the more qualified person for the job. Talking about the number of delegates and that the math doesn't add up, is discounting the possibility of people having changed their minds about Barack Obama. Democrats haven't won in recent past because 'they don't get it!' Now you have joined the club. Shame on you for not giving the most qualified person for the job, who happens to be a woman, and a longtime champion of women rights, a chance to go all the way, because you had to jump on a bandwagon. You are weak!

Posted by: debra | May 14, 2008 9:08:53 PM

Why in the world is NARAL making an endorsement in a Democratic Primary, especially when that endorsement will alienate an overwhelming majority of NARAL supporters? I have just sent in my annual dues, but never again will I donate money. Please remove my name from your mail and phone lists.

Posted by: vc | May 14, 2008 9:07:26 PM

There's absolutely no reason why NARAL had to do this now. I don't think women's groups have to support Hillary because she's a woman. But I think it is a shame how some women's groups are treating her, and I agree this action was disrespectful; Clinton WILL drop out, and they could have waited until then. African American groups are at least being supportive of Obama. If I were a woman who wanted to run for president, after seeing how Hillary has been treated, I would reconsider.

Posted by: sillyme | May 14, 2008 8:56:01 PM

when American women can't support the first presidential candidacy of what is a VIABLE woman candidate, I finally understand how and why it is that we consistently lag behind"
___________

Why do some women think it's their duty to vote for Hillary just because she is a female?

Posted by: rhbate | May 14, 2008 8:29:36 PM

Post a comment





 

POLITICAL VIDEOS