Two news reports from late last week indicate that Planned Parenthood and its various affiliates are coming in for long-overdue scrutiny from the courts and public officials.

In one case, the ACLJ won an important victory in the 9th Circuit – an exceedingly rare event. The pro-Life group is representing Victor Gonzalez, a former employee, who has publicly charged that the group is stealing money from taxpayers. Mr. Gonzalez alleges that Planned Parenthood’s Los Angeles affiliate has been overbilling the federal government for fraudulent services.

Planned Parenthood defended itself in federal court by alleging that Mr. Gonzalez could not bring the charges because he was relying upon a federal audit of the local organization. Fortunately, the 9th Circuit dismissed their legal stratagem, and Planned Parenthood will now have to answer questions in a federal lawsuit brought under the “False Claims Act”.

Another story, from WorldNetDaily, demonstrates that the LA scam is far from an isolated case of local mismanagement.

A GAO Report, requested by Leader Boehner, found that something on the order of $1.3 billion in tax money given to Planned Parenthood between 2002 and 2008 remains unaccounted for.

The story quotes Rita Diller of STOP as saying, “The report shows that Planned Parenthood spent $657.1 million [over the period], but their own reports show they took in about $2 billion in federal money…. That leaves the question, ‘where’s the $1.3 billion …?”

It is important to note that the missing money comes during the period in which the Bush Administration was responsible – meaning that much greater amounts are likely being poured out today under the increased funding provided by Obama and Pelosi’s Congress.

In commenting on the story, American Life League President Judie Brown made some crucial and disturbing points:

“Money has been pouring into Planned Parenthood and the amount of it has been increasing for thirty to forty years,” Brown said to WorldNetDaily. “We have had several supposedly pro-Life presidents and never has a single president opposed an increase in the funding for Planned Parenthood. Never in the history of Title X.

“My firm conviction is that we have to elect someone who is willing to put principle above politics and rid the government of any funding or any organization that is involved in destroying the family.”

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

At its recently concluded State Convention, Idaho Democrats revised their Party Platform.

In addition to calling for the withdrawal of all troops from Afghanistan and Iraq, Idaho Democrats will campaign this fall on a party plank calling for repeal of the Idaho Health Care Freedom of Conscience Act.

The new platform says that Democrats support “evidence-based medical decisions between a physician and patient”.

This is very curious language, certainly open to wide interpretation. But here is what we bet they are trying to say, without actually saying it: Morality has no place in the practice of medicine. We believe in pure science. If you have a conscientious objection to a medical procedure demanded by a patient – then you should either swallow your conscience or leave the practice of medicine.

But perhaps it would be more accurate to say that most Democrats have a blind spot when it comes to their own agenda. Certainly abortion, stem cell research and end-of-life care are morally-loaded areas of medicine. To pretend otherwise is to be willfully ignorant. With ObamaCare being imposed on the nation, we will witness many more cases in which bureaucrats force their own version of “evidence-based medicine” on patients – pretending that it is science, and not a political agenda, which drives the choices they make over the lives of powerless Americans.

Idaho Democrats are certainly driving a moral agenda, politically-stained though it may be. In truth, they have convinced themselves that abortion, euthanasia and assisted suicide are “moral goods” and have no qualms about using the brute force of government to run over anyone who disagrees with them.

Were these people granted the same kind of power now enjoyed by their national brethren, doctors and nurses and pharmacists would become mere employees of their radical agenda, built upon a sad embrace of death.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Florida Governor Charlie Crist has managed, in just a matter of months, to transform himself from a serious contender for the White House to the national symbol of all that is evil and broken in American politics.

While battling the rising star, Marco Rubio, for the Republican nomination to serve Florida in the US Senate, Crist protested that conservatives were misrepresenting his values and record. He cried that some voters didn’t appreciate his pro-Life values and commitment to upholding the principles of the Republican Platform. Smelling a rat in the soup, voters turned increasingly to Rubio as a man they could trust to do what he said he would.

The more Crist protested, the more powerful Washington, D.C. power brokers pushed, the lower Crist’s numbers fell.

Idahoans were probably more surprised by Crist’s departure from the Republican Party than were Floridians. They had the advantage of hands-on experience, and many opportunities to see the shallow self-centeredness which drives Charlie Crist.

Too many politicians, of course, are driven by ambition and a need to feel valuable. This is a large factor in many of our current problems.

But Governor Crist’s recent veto of pro-Life legislation sets him apart as a man worthy of particular public scorn.

Late last week, Crist vetoed legislation which would have required abortionists to inform mothers that they had a right to view an ultrasound of their baby prior to an abortion. This is similar to an Idaho law enacted a couple of sessions ago. Such laws have proven their effectiveness in reducing abortions in state after state.

Moreover, the legislation Crist vetoed contained a provision to prevent tax-payer funding of abortions in Florida under the new ObamaCare regime.

After selling out the Republican Party, which nursed his immense ego for many years, Crist apparently found it no big problem to use preborn children as mere poker chips in his sordid effort to retain public power. After all, now his independent bid for the Senate requires pandering to pro-choice Democrats; it took just a few clicks of his mouse to delete any references on his website to his previously “adamant” pro-Life value system.

His complete disregard for the defenseless babies he would now help destroy is just despicable. In our view, he has now come to personally define the lowest form of office seeker.

May the Lord intervene to prevent his cynical evil from being rewarded this fall. And may the voters of Florida repay him for his faithlessness with banishment from the public square.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

The London Times reports on a new medical study finding that babies as young as 6 months old demonstrate moral discernment. The research comes out of Yale University’s Infant Cognition Center.

One of the tests used involved an animated film, in which different colored geometric objects were depicted as trying to get up a hill. Other objects were shown pushing the yellow square back down, while others were pictured as helping push the yellow object toward its objective. 6 month old babies were then asked to pick out the “good” objects and “bad” objects. In 80% of the cases, babies chose the objects shown as helping the other up the hill.

Professor Paul Bloom said his research contradicted the assumptions of leading psychologists like Freud and William James who believed moral impulses were social contraptions imposed late in life.

“There is growing evidence that supports the idea that perhaps some sense of good and evil is bred in the bone,” Bloom is quoted as saying.

Indeed. What does the Bible say?

“I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts….” (Jeremiah 31:33)

But will such scientific research, suggesting that we are sentient, moral beings from the moment of our conception, make any difference to ideologues like Elena Kagan?

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Idaho’s primary election this week brought numerous blessings to the pro-Life movement.

There was plenty of concern that grassroots conservatives would not participate in the numbers we needed to overcome serious cross-over threats. In fact, as the election day drew closer – that threat increased as Mayor Dave Beiter issued a clarion call to Democrats to help elect his candidates to the Ada County Commission.

While Beiter’s effort was partially successful – pro-Life conservatives across Idaho participated in strong numbers to nominate one of the most conservative legislatures in memory.

Idaho Chooses Life lost a couple of our endorsed candidates, but those losses are mitigated by the fact that the victors are also pro-Life. We want to thank Sens. Lee Heinrich and Mike Jorgenson for their consistent votes in defense of the innocent.

The clearest set-back came in Canyon County, where Steve Kren lost to newcomer Christy Perry. We don’t know where she stands on the abortion issue. Rep. Kren offered strong opposition to the Abortion Lobby’s agenda.

We are grateful for the return of a strong team of pro-Life leaders in Districts 21 and 20. Sens. McKague and Fulcher, Reps. Hagedorn, Palmer and Bayer have been a blessing and it is nice to see the voters of their district express their appreciation as well. It will be great to have John Vander Woude back in the Idaho House.

The victory of Lynn Luker in District 15 is another blessing. His legal background and attention to detail has proven invaluable to the pro-Life movement many times in the past several years.

There were some very exciting developments on Tuesday.

Voters in Twin Falls gave the Republican Senate nomination to Lee Heider over incumbent Chuck Coiner. Sen. Coiner had, without possible dispute, one of the most liberal voting records in the Idaho Senate. He was particularly hostile to the interests of preborn children and pregnant women. We are very hopeful that Mr. Heider will provide the kind of family-friendly leadership Idaho deserves.

And nothing short of a miracle occurred in Latah County. Sen. Gary Schroeder was finally turned out of office. Our analysis was that Democrat cross-over had helped keep him in office for some 18 years – during which he developed a consistent pro-abortion record. But this year, Democrats apparently abandoned him. Gresham Bouma won a strong majority of Republican voters to gain the nomination. We will have to work hard this fall to ensure that he gains a seat in the Senate.

Of course, everyone is talking about the amazing victory of our endorsed candidate in the 1st District – Rep. Raul Labrador. He graciously acknowledged the contribution pro-Lifers made to his victory on election night, and we will have to re-double our efforts this fall. Abortion is one of the major differences between Labrador and Walt Minnick.

There are many other races to discuss – but suffice it to say that the Lord provided us with a tremendous election night. A little rest, a little rebuilding, then on to secure these advances in the General Election!

Thank you so much for your prayers, time and financial support. May the Lord bless you many times over for your generous hearts.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Two of the most fundamental responsibilities of any American converge this week with the election primary on Tuesday. It is incumbent (no pun intended) on all of us to be informed about what government is doing (in many cases to us rather than for us) and to exercise our franchise as voters based upon that information.

We have several statewide and local contested primary races and a few that deserve some special attention. In some races ideology creates the clear demarcation between candidates, and in others, competency is the distinguishing factor.

The Idaho voting system is somewhat different than most other states. At the time you register to vote in Idaho, you don’t have to claim a party affiliation, you just register to vote. The only time you actually indicate a party affiliation or preference through the voting process is when you vote in a Primary Election. At that time, you request either a Republican or a Democrat ballot. The reason is simple: it’s the parties that bring the candidates to the table in an election for the most part, and so the Primary provides the means of sifting through a party’s candidates to rally behind for the General Election held in November.

Independents and other parties, like the Constitutional or Green Party, may have their own candidates on the General Election Ballot in November, but typically don’t have contested primary races to determine the November finalists.

For the US Congress, 2nd District incumbent Mike Simpson is being challenged by several candidates, including most prominently, Chick Heileson from Iona. The Congressman gives great speeches, and articulates values that resonate with most Idahoans, but his voting record doesn’t necessarily reflect that. The Freedom Index, a congressional scorecard which tracks congressional votes vis-à-vis the Constitution, most recently ranked Simpson at 40, barely 4 points over the average for all congressmen. A perfect score of 100 indicates a voting record most true to constitutional governance. It would appear that the Congressman has been smitten by “Beltwayitis,” the affliction which smites most federal lawmakers after they’ve been in D.C. for too long, and is evidenced by votes for spending and government encroachment that they wouldn’t have supported as freshmen legislators. I’ve got to go with Heileson on this one. I think he’ll vote the way he talks and hopefully prove immune to the affliction Simpson suffers from.

A local race that is inscrutable from my perspective, is the challenge to Steve Hadley as County Commissioner by Dennis Spencer. There is no reason whatsoever to make a change here. Steve has done a superb job in keeping the county budget down at a time of great financial challenges all around us. His fiscal acumen is further evidenced by completing the fairgrounds improvements with no adverse impact on the budget, and saving taxpayers a million dollars by using county employees at the landfill. Steve is a proven leader and has a knack for fiscal management which has and should continue to serve the county well for years.

The Bannock County Assessor’s race is probably the hottest local ticket for this Primary. Incumbent Jo Lynn Anderson is being challenged by Geoff Ranere, a former county appraiser. Ranere left the Assessor’s office in 2008 along with three other appraisers due to internal politics and unscrupulous appraisal guidelines adopted by the office.

The Assessors office is required to abide by the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) developed by the Appraisal Standards Board (ASB). These standards mandate equitable and ethical appraisal of property values. Yet I have heard many examples of excessive valuations next to properties virtually unaffected by reassessment, in spite of more improvements made to the neighboring properties. Also contrary to USPAP standards, if the Assessor’s office can’t gain access to a residential property, the Assessor has instructed department appraisers to value the property with a half-finished basement. When the reluctant appraisers were told to engage in these questionable practices, the issue was forced by telling them it was not optional.

Geoff is not only a licensed appraiser well versed in USPAP standards, but he has the ethics which will return the office to equitable and fair treatment of taxpayers. Perhaps even of greater value to us, Geoff has the demeanor and professionalism to make the office hospitable to taxpayers. After all, we are the collective bosses to our public servants. They need to be reminded that they are there to serve us. Geoff has that perspective.

If you’ve been critical of how our government is working, or failing to work for you, now is the time to do something. Collectively, we hire our public officials. Let’s choose wisely, starting this Tuesday.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

U.S. Senate

Mike Crapo

1st District Congress

Raul Labrador

2nd District Congress

Mike Simpson

Idaho Supreme Court

Roger Burdick

Governor

Butch Otter

Lt. Governor

Brad Little

State Controller

Todd Hatfield

Please make sure you vote on Tuesday, May 25th. ! Our next legislative victory in rebuilding the wall of protection around God’s little ones will begin with electing strong pro-Lifers to office on Tuesday.

Use your ballot as a shield of protection for preborn children.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

BOISE – The 2010 version of the Gem State Voter Guide is now available to view online at www.GemStateVoterGuide.com.

This is the sixth edition of the online publication which was first produced in 2006 and covers each Idaho election on both a state and federal level – excluding judicial races and superintendant of public instruction.

Candidates throughout the state were asked 26 questions on subjects covering: Life, Marriage and Family; Education; Freedom and Liberty, Fiscal and Tax Policy as well as various other subjects.

The Gem State Voter Guide is a joint project of the Idaho Chooses Life and the Idaho Freedom Foundation and is designed to serve both the voters and candidates in Idaho’s upcoming primary election.

This guide is designed for the Idaho Primary Election to be held May 25, 2010.

For further information on the positions of the candidates, the Gem State Voter Guide encourages voters to contact candidates directly. Contact information may be obtained through the Idaho Secretary of State’s office at (208) 334-2300 or by visiting the Idaho Secretary of State’s website.

The purpose of the Gem State Voter Guide is to allow candidates to answer some of the many questions they may face in the upcoming election. Whenever a candidate’s answer did not fit within the scope of the questionnaire or the candidate expanded on their answer, additional comments were scanned and also appear on the website.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

District Judge John Bradbury is challenging incumbent Justice Roger Burdick in the May Primary Election for a seat on Idaho’s Supreme Court.

Bradbury very narrowly lost a similar bid in 2008, challenging Justice Joel Horton in that race. (As you read on … give thanks for the bullet we narrowly missed).

There are interesting – indeed, disturbing – backstories to Bradbury’s quest for higher office.

Part of that story is the very unusual lawsuit he has pending against the Idaho Supreme Court in federal court, because it had the audacity to require that he live in the judicial district over which he presides – a requirement laid out in Idaho Code. It seems Judge Bradbury doesn’t much care to live in Grangeville, and prefers to remain in Lewiston.

After being ordered to move to Grangeville, Bradbury sued the Supreme Court in federal court. Judge Lynn Winmill struck down his lawsuit. Bradbury has an appeal pending before the 9th Circuit.

It seems his back-to-back campaign(s) for the Supreme Court is driven by a mixture of ambition and revenge against the high court. That is a bit disturbing.

What is most important, however, is to realize that Judge Bradbury has a rather long political history.

In the early 1990’s John Bradbury sought a seat in the Idaho legislature as a Democrat. During his first quest in May of 1991, Bradbury wanted a nomination from the Democrat Central Committee. He told his fellow Democrats that he was “pro-Life” on abortion. For whatever reason, he failed to get the seat.

Less than a year later, he challenged incumbent Democrat Representative Chuck Cuddy in a primary. By this time, apparently, his views on the most important moral issue of our time had “evolved”. He was now a “woman’s right to choose” kind of guy.

Bradbury told the Lewiston Tribune (05.15.92), “I personally think forcing women to have children they don’t want won’t stop abortions.” In a later interview (05.23.92), he explained to this same paper that his views had “evolved” to the point where he sought, and earned, the endorsement of “Freedom Means Choice” in that primary election.

On many levels, John Bradbury seems to be a dangerous candidate for the state’s highest court.

Justice Burdick appears to be a temperate, conservatively-inclined member of the court – though we cannot absolutely declare him to be “pro-Life” in his moral and judicial philosophy. All we can say with certainty is that pro-Life Idahoans need to make darn certain that Bradbury does not win a seat on the Supreme Court, packing the ACLU’s agenda under his robes.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

His lawsuit against the Republican Party comes despite his ostensible status as a district chairman of the GOP.

To make matters worse, Ricks attempted to embroil Idaho Chooses Life in his bizarre lawsuit. He presented us with a five-page subpoena last year, seeking to gain access to emails, documents, personal correspondence and board minutes. Nor were we alone. He vendetta extended to two other organizations who did not support his last campaign – the Idaho Realtors and the Idaho Association of Commerce and Industry.

All three organizations responded by going to court. We asked Judge Timothy Hansen to protect this ministry from Ricks’ blatant harassment and abuse of the legal system.

Judge Hansen issued a decision on our motion last week. He blocked Rick’s subpoena, finding that his quest posed a serious threat to the constitutional rights of Idaho’s pro-Life community:

“…Plaintiff [Ricks] has provided the Court with no compelling reason for the disclosure of the information he seeks. As a result, he has failed to meet his burden of proof and the Court therefore finds [giving Ricks access to this] information would have an impermissible chilling effect on the associational rights of the members … of Idaho Chooses Life.”

This decision is a big relief. The threat posed by Ricks’ vendetta could have led to a scenario where confidential information about the ministry was laid bare not just to Mr. Ricks but to the Abortion Lobby itself.

This whole episode raises profound doubts about Ricks’ claim to being “pro-Life”, and additional questions about his judgment and obsession to gain political office.

Once again, he is a candidate for the state senate, challenging Sen. Russ Fulcher in the Republican Primary next month. His victory would be a big set-back for the pro-Life movement at a time when we face serious problems as a result of ObamaCare being imposed on the states.

But even if he doesn’t win, he has already seriously hurt the movement. Thousands of dollars and many hours have been wasted in dealing with his unseemly ambition – resources that should be going into advancing the cause.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.