Senator Dillard's pro-life credentials

by Sen. Chris Lauzen

About a month, ago, my dear friend Jill Stanek, whom I deeply respect and admire, harshly criticized Governor-candidate and Senator Kirk Dillard’s pro-life credentials. I remember being very surprised at the virulence of the attack using words like “his overt act of treason”, “tried incoherently to explain”, “betrayed the pro-life community”, “I am actually insulted”, etc.  While I can understand that Jill supports a different candidate for Republican nomination, there are so few of us left who defend the sanctity of innocent life, I would ask for a more gentle consideration of our friends’ candidacies for higher offices.

Although Senator Dillard does not have a “perfect” pro-life voting record, he has repeatedly demonstrated his staunch pro-life beliefs. I will never forget the late night, after personally witnessing Dillard’s effective advocacy on the Senate Floor for Parental Notification before a minor's abortion (we prevailed with a majority vote), when Senator Dillard and I came out to the Capitol driveway, we discovered that the tires on both of our cars were slashed. This was reported in the Chicago Tribune several days later.

In addition to being the chief sponsor of the “real” Parental Notification Law where Peter Fitzgerald was a co-sponsor and Peter Roskam was the House sponsor, Senator Dillard was the Chief Sponsor of SB2025 which banned all funding for enforcement against pharmacists who refuse to dispense the morning-after pill.

Senator Dillard has been an effective co-sponsor for the successful ban of partial birth abortion, the Senate Resolution to communicate the abortion-breast-cancer link, and the law requiring parental approval of tattoos for minors. He was the lead sponsor for the “Choose Life” License Plate bill and Religious Ceremony for Unborn Children Cremation bill. Senator Dillard has led the fight for abstinence education, helps the Thomas Moore Society (Pro-Life Center), and Illinois Citizens for Life which is headquartered in his Senate district, opposes public funding for embryonic stem cell studies and E.R.A. (if it affects abortion policy). And, most importantly, he helped those who finally closed the Westmont Abortion Clinic.

Dillard’s clear record supporting traditional family values includes voting “No” on homosexual special rights, leading the crackdown on sex offenders, and his work as Illinois state chairman of the National Conservative Legislators Association (ALEC).

Senator Dillard has honorably served Illinois taxpayers and citizens for thirty-one long years. He knows where the skeletons are buried and would be an expert strategist, ally and friend for the pro-life movement in the Governor’s Office. Other candidates, who have never cast a vote in public office nor ever carried a piece of legislation, either successfully or unsuccessfully, should be careful and sensitive to not misrepresent his complete record.

It is so easy to be a victim of tactics from pro-abortion advocates that we need to be more generous to our friends. For example, despite his consistent practice of not responding to Planned Parenthood’s questionnaires, Senator Dillard received a misleading score on Project Vote Smart because he voted “Yes” to have insurance companies provide birth control pills as part of pharmaceutical coverage - - this was the only bill on the P.P evaluation that year.This caused an unfair skewing of Senator Dillard’s pro-life record for political opponents to use against him.

Regarding the Obama commercial, it was obviously an error in hindsight to even dare to say 21 positive words about “working with a colleague in a bipartisan way on ethics legislation” which has always been one of Senator Dillard’s top concerns. This was before the Oprah endorsement and I would ask “Which one of us thought at that time that decent and intelligent Iowa voters would choose a Chicago politician over either of the Clintons?” When Republicans work to win a General Election to have a pro-life Illinois Governor, this liability in the Primary will become an asset as proof of a willingness to reasonably reach out, based on traditional principles (anti-corruption), to those who may still hold majorities in the General Assembly in a currently Blue State . . . despite our best efforts to prevent it.

And, in the end, it was only Senator Dillard who offered his services and reputation as Senate Minority Leader when there was grave concern that our caucus members would elect a pro-choice, pro-gun-control, pro-homosexual-special-rights candidate who eventually prevailed. He was also the only statewide candidate to stand, defend and help restore Republicans’ right to vote for their party leadership on SB600.

Like all of us, Senator Dillard is not perfect, but he is reliably pro-life, pro-Constitution including 2nd Amendment, and pro-traditional values. He enjoys the respect of Establishment and Conservative Republicans and represents our best opportunity to unite this Party voluntarily, based on shared principles, and to beat Democrats.

Chris Lauzen - 25th District

Comments

[twitter.com/lheal]

Senator Dillard received a misleading score on Project Vote Smart because he voted “Yes” to have insurance companies provide birth control pills as part of pharmaceutical coverage - - this was the only bill...

Why did he vote to force insurance companies to cover birth control pills or anything else?

Senator Dillard is a big-government Republican.

[s]

You gotta be kidding. Of course insurance companies should provide birth control!

[s]

The American Cancer Society reports that "Research studies have not found a cause-and-effect relationship between abortion and breast cancer." Check for yourself.

[Kane Conservative]

sen. lauzen-if sen. dillard should come up short in this primary, are you going to support the winner and allow the pary to move forward, or are you going to again support a third party candidate like you did in 2006? or will take cheap and out of line shots at the winner like you did in the 2008 congressional primary? and just curious, how come you didnt offer up your services to stop the evil...villainous monster...el guapo...i mean radogno

[Dnstate]

Sen. Lauzin sorry most of the Candidates support those things you list that are common GOP issues. The problem if you're listing Pro-Life issues is that Dillard voted yes in 2007 on S4 (Vote Smart) which was a Vote to pass a bill that allows research on human embryonic stem cells but prohibits human cloning. Maybe that's why are friend Jill Stanek was so upset.

http://www.votesmart.org/issue_keyvote_detail.php?cs_id=20018

[John Poshepny]

I was just at the ICRF forum and Dillard did awful in my mind. He was harping on how he was Jim Edgar's Coffee Fetcher and how he and Mikey Madigan are friends.

[izzy]

Boy these career politicians certainly stick together. 1 term only in an office cumulatively and send them back home - that is the ticket. This will end a large part of the pension and health care problem.

[spintreebob]

"I'm personally one the right side of the issue BUT ON THE OTHER HAND..."

Dillard's problem is those BUTs and ON THE OTHER HANDs.

He plays a major role in a con game to convince people that a pro-death extremist is a moderate we can work with in a bi-partisan manner.

On abortion, taxes, corruption and other issues his conservative position has a BUT or ON THE OTHER HAND.
* * * * *
If we should vote for him because he is friends with some highly respected conservatives, then shouldn't we also consider his boasts of connections to the corrupt and those on the left?

Some run on principle above all else.

Does Dillard run on insider friendships above principle?

[reality]

Sen. Lauzen doesn't deserve the crap he's taking here. He's a smart, passionate public servant.

Sen. Lauzen also makes a good case for why he's endorsing Dillard - that Dillard is proven to lead (not merely support) on abortion, gay marriage, & abstinence. Folks here would prefer Dillard were 100% on all the social conservative issues.

None of the gubernatorial candidates is perfect. You have to weigh a lot of factors: issue stances, ability to trust their promises, chance to win the general election, ability to lead an organization (b/c this is an executive role), desirability as the visible leader of the GOP and the state, etc.

Knowing the candidates, Sen. Lauzen weighed the factors and made a rational decision. Debate the case for Dillard and the others, but don't hammer Lauzen for actually picking a horse in the race and giving a lengthy and thoughtful rationale for why he did so.

[Dnstate]

It's sad to see a good Sen. like Lauzen make the mistake to support Dillard who supports embryonic stem cell research which means Dillard isn't Pro-Life and there are plenty of other republicans that are to support.

[A.N]

This Sen. Lauzen just proved my point why I would never vote for Dillard, He says " sen. Dillard has Senator Dillard has honorably served Illinois taxpayers and citizens for thirty-one long years." I don't want anymore career politcians in charge of this state. Its time for Adam.

[Red Fred]

Thank god abortion is becoming the focus of yet another election.

[northsider]

Senator Lauzen
Why is it that Dillard won't put his stands on his website? Why won't he claim to be pro 2A on his site? Why is it you only see him with a 15 year old picture of Jim Edgar?
If he is a conservative why not say so all the time instead of when he is in front of pro lifers? BTW where does it say Republican on his stuff?

[Dennis C. Ryan]

Abortion or pro-life? The U.S. Supreme Court
has decided this one, and if it is to be reversed, either the Supreme Court has to change it, or Congress has to over-ride the Court's deciaion (something that has never happened in the past.)
So, let's drop this arguement as it applies to the Illinois state level of politics. We have other problems to debate here.

[reformer]

Here is a problem....Dillard vote YES on HB255. The largest tax increase of 2009. And he wants to get promoted? Another one of Senator Lauzen's boys is looking to get promoted to DC, Sen. Randy Hultgren. He also voted for HB255(and against SB600). Senator it is time to take a look at your friends, are they republicans or part of the good olde boys club. It seems to be take care of you and you take care of me time in Il.