Introducing: The Vulnerable Pro-Abortion (and Pro-Impeachment) Democrat Encyclopedias

Throughout 2019, the pro-abortion extremists have taken off their masks and revealed their true colors like never before. From legislators voting in favor of radical abortion laws in New York, Rhode Island, and Illinois to elected prosecutors promising not to enforce newly passed abortion laws in red states, the pro-abortion forces seemed more determined than ever.  While many of these individuals represent deep blue districts, states, counties, or cities, a handful of them could face blowback from the voters in their jurisdictions. 

Let’s start off with New York State legislators that voted for the “Reproductive Healthcare Act” who represent districts that President Trump either won or lost by a very small margin.  Control of the New York State Senate hangs in the balance in 2020 and ousting these Senators could make a big difference in who controls the upper chamber.  Currently, Democrats control 39 of 63 seats in the New York State Senate, Republicans control 22, Simcha Felder, a Senator who voted against the radical abortion bill currently does not identify with either party, and a district formerly represented by a Republican remains vacant following the resignation of Catherine Young.  I have included seven members of the New York Senate in the “vulnerable pro-abortion Democrat encyclopedia,” which includes their name, district, and President Trump’s margin of victory in their district in 2016.  If all seven of these seats go back to the Republicans next fall, that would reduce their number of seats to 32; a bare majority.  At this point, Felcher would become the swing vote; if he decided to caucus with Republicans, then they would retake the majority.  For a complete list of all New York Senate Democrats who voted for the “Reproductive Healthcare Act,” click here.  The data about President Trump’s margin of victory in the table below comes from the Daily Kos, which has compiled a list of election results by legislative district.

Table 1: Vulnerable Pro-Abortion Democrats in New York State

Name	District	Trump Margin 2016	Chamber	Counties
Monica Martinez	NY-3	+5.98	Senate	Suffolk
James Gaughran	NY-5	-3.01	Senate	Nassau, Suffolk
Kevin Thomas	NY-6	-2.74	Senate	Nassau
John Brooks	NY-8	-2.77	Senate	Nassau, Suffolk
Andrew Gounardes	NY-22	+0.78	Senate	Kings
James Skoufis	NY-39	+3.53	Senate	Orange, Rockland, Ulster
Jen Metzger	NY-42	+5.22	Senate	Delaware, Orange, Sullivan, Ulster
Fred Thiele	NY-01	-0.80	Assembly	Suffolk
Steven Englebright	NY-04	-0.43	Assembly	Suffolk
Aileen Gunther	NY-100	-0.56	Assembly	Orange, Sullivan
Didi Barrett	NY-106	-1.64	Assembly	Columbia, Dutchess
Angelo Santabarbara	NY-111	+11.79	Assembly	Albany, Montgomery, Schenectady
Carrie Woerner	NY-113	+2.13	Assembly	Saratoga, Washington
D. Billy Jones	NY-115	+1.55	Assembly	Clinton, Franklin, St. Lawrence
Albert Stirpe	NY-127	-1.62	Assembly	Onondaga
Patrick Burke	NY-142	+5.92	Assembly	Erie
Monica Wallace	NY-143	+8.78	Assembly	Erie
Steven Cymbrowitz	NY-45	+19.74	Assembly	Kings

Even if voters choose to oust all of these Senators and Felder decides to caucus with the Republicans, the repeal of the “Reproductive Health Act” would require the support of the New York State Senate, the New York General Assembly, and the governor.  The Democrats have an insurmountable majority in the Assembly and the governorship shows no signs of going to the Republicans anytime soon.  Even if all 11 of the members of the New York State Assembly listed in the vulnerable pro-abortion Democrat encyclopedia lose, that will do little to cut into the Democrats’ 106-44 edge over Republicans. 

In Rhode Island, the Senate initially rejected the House-passed “Reproductive Privacy Act.”  However, thanks to a clever maneuver by Senate Democrats, a revised version of the bill made it to the Senate floor; where it narrowly passed by a margin of 21-17.  Four Democrats who represent districts that President Trump either won or lost very narrowly voted in favor of the bill.  Should Republicans defeat them next fall, that would make all the difference when it comes to the repeal of the “Reproductive Privacy Act.”  The Senate President voted against the bill; meaning that in spite of the strong Democratic majority that will continue even if these four Democrats lose re-election, Senate leadership might have a willingness to put a repeal bill up for a vote. Such a bill might struggle in the House, where the bill passed by a much larger margin of 45-29.

Table 2: Vulnerable Pro-Abortion Democrats (and Republicans) in Rhode Island

Name	District	Trump Margin 2016	Chamber	Towns
Adam Satchell	RI-09	+1.23	Senate	West Warwick
Steve Archambault	RI-22	+5.43	Senate	Smithfield, Johnston, North Providence
Hanna Gallo	RI-27	+1.95	Senate	Cranston
Mark McKenney	RI-30	-0.06	Senate	Warwick
K. Joseph Sekarchi	RI-23	+0.73	House	Warwick
Thomas Noret	RI-25	+3.41	House	Coventry
Julie Casimiro	RI-31	-4.74	House	North Kingstown, Exeter
John Lyle	RI-46	-4.16	House	Lincoln
Alex Marszalkowski	RI-52	-3.5	House	Cumberland

Upon closer inspection, I realized that the Reproductive Privacy Act actually received the support of a Republican member of the House of Representatives; John Lyle.  While the legislation would have passed even without his support, he should still face the same political consequence that the Democrats who supported it deserve: defeat at the ballot box. While the defeat of the Democrats will come in the form of a Republican challenger, Lyle’s defeat will have to take place in the primary.  Generally, Rhode Island holds primaries for statewide elections on the second Tuesday of September.  That would make primary day Tuesday, September 8, 2020; the day after Labor Day.  Between now and then, Republicans in Lincoln should work hard to find a primary challenger who values the sanctity of life. 

Illinois also passed a radical abortion law just this month that repealed the state’s ban on partial birth abortion and requires all private health insurance plans to cover abortions.  Unfortunately, very few Democrats who supported this legislation fall into the “vulnerable” category. Nonetheless, a few members of the Illinois legislature managed to make it into the encyclopedia, as Table 3 indicates.

Table 3: Vulnerable Pro-Abortion Democrats in Illinois

Name	District	Trump Margin 2016	Chamber
David Koehler	IL-46	-2.18	Senate
Diane Pappas	IL-45	-1.93	House
Katie Stuart	IL-112	+5.5	House

In addition to pro-abortion legislatures, pro-abortion Attorneys General have already signed a joint statement promising not to enforce pro-life legislation and claiming that these laws “appear to be unconstitutional.” Ironically, most of these Attorney Generals represent states where any pro-life legislation has little chance of passing; so their statement amounts to little more than virtue-signaling.  The Attorney Generals of California, Vermont, Minnesota, Maryland, Nevada, Massachusetts, Delaware, Michigan, DC, Illinois, Oregon, and Pennsylvania signed the Fair and Just Prosecution statement.

A few of these Attorneys General could find themselves vulnerable in their next election; especially in the states that President Trump won.  Remember that President Trump carried Michigan and Pennsylvania in 2016 and could very well carry Minnesota and Nevada in 2020.  Michigan’s Democratic Attorney General Dana Nessel had the smallest margin of victory of any Democrat running for statewide office in 2018.  In addition to virtue-signaling to the pro-abortion lobby, she has also promised to review the Southern Poverty Law Center’s 2018 list of hate groups as part of her new hate crimes unit.  The Southern Poverty Law Center casually throws around the term “hate group” and uses it against any group that does not conform to its far-left agenda but Nessel does not seem to care.   Hopefully, Michigan voters will keep all of this in mind when Nessel has to face re-election in 2022.  In Pennsylvania, Attorney General Josh Shapiro will have to run for re-election in 2020…with President Trump on the ballot. I have a message to all Trump voters in Pennsylvania: vote for the Republican Attorney General candidate.  Shapiro managed to win the Attorney General race despite Minnesota elected former Congressman and Louis Farrakhan sympathizer Keith Ellison Attorney General last year; even after sexual assault allegations emerged against him.  At the very least, Ellison’s election (and the scant media coverage of the accusations) proves that liberals do not give two craps about “protecting women,” they only care about power.  Ellison will have to run for re-election in 2022; the results of the 2020 Presidential Election in Minnesota and Nevada will determine the vulnerability of their state Attorneys General. 

Elected prosecutors in Jefferson County, Alabama (Birmingham), DeKalb and Fulton Counties, Georgia (Atlanta), the Macon Judicial Circuit in Georgia, and Columbus, Ohio have vowed not to enforce new abortion laws in their respective states. In other words, these officials seem all too content to ignore the law.  Many of these same people probably would have raised holy hell when Kim Davis refused to issue same-sex marriage licenses in defiance of the Supreme Court’s Obergefell v. Hodges decision and when Judge Roy Moore refused to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the building that houses the Alabama Supreme Court.  Then again, liberals seem to have no problem flouting Federal law when they don’t like it; as demonstrated by their support for sanctuary cities, which defy federal immigration law. 

I had initially planned on writing a separate blog highlighting vulnerable pro-impeachment Democrats in the United States House of Representatives but I figured I might as well include it right here because it only includes three people:

Table 4: Vulnerable Pro-Impeachment House Democrats

Name	District	2016 Trump Margin	Difference Between 2012 and 2016 Republican Vote Share
Dan Kildee	MI-5	-4.2	+7.2
Tom Malinowski	NJ-7	-1.1	-5.0
Katie Porter	CA-45	-5.4	-10.2

Currently, 73 Democrats have called for President Trump’s impeachment. As that number goes up, I will continue to update the vulnerable, pro-impeachment House Democrat encyclopedia as necessary.  As Table 4 demonstrates, all of the vulnerable pro-impeachment House Democrats represent districts that President Trump narrowly lost.  I included the difference in the Republican share of the vote between 2012 and 2016 to show that two of the three districts swung against Republicans from 2012 to 2016 while the third swung towards Republicans.  Ohio Congressman Tim Ryan deserves an honorable mention. While Ryan just barely fails to meet the “vulnerability” criteria (Hillary Clinton won the district with 51 percent of the vote), his district represents the kind of district that could vote Republican in my lifetime. 

After I post this blog, I will create a separate page on my website for the encyclopedias I have created; updating the webpage as necessary.  While these encyclopedias may not succeed in their desired goal in removing all of the people in them from office or enabling the immediate rollback of the horrendous pro-abortion legislation that they supported, they will at the very least allow voters to have the opportunity to make their voices heard.  In 2009, the Iowa Supreme Court found a “right” to same-sex marriage.  Voters responded by throwing out the three justices who faced a retention election at the first available opportunity; the first time in Iowa history that had happened. It did not result in the reversal of that decision but it enabled the people to make their voices heard. When New York legalized same-sex marriage in 2011, four Republican Senators voted for the bill.  The voters responded by throwing them out of office in either the Republican primary or in one of the two general elections following the vote. One of the four opted not to run for re-election. I, for one, hope that the removal of the people in my encyclopedias will not only send a clear message but result in policy changes that favor the pro-life and anti-impeachment movements.