“The Purpose of Abortion Is to Produce a Dead Baby, Not to Save a Mother’s Life”

The Harris-Walz campaign wasn’t shy in its push for abortion.  It has been a major emphasis for the ticket this election cycle, with both Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris and her running mate and Minnesota Governor Tim Walz openly supporting abortion with no limits.  According to Family Research Council President Tony Perkins, the Left, including the Harris-Walz campaign, have continuously told “deceptive, incomplete, [and] sometimes flat-out false narratives to give lift to Kamala Harris’s talking point on what she calls ‘Trump’s abortion bans,’ which are the pro-life laws of states.”

In an of “Washington Watch,” Dr. Donna Harrison, board-certified OB-GYN and director of Research for the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, joined host Perkins to discuss the truth behind the “lies” coming from pro-abortion activists on the Left, drawing special attention to the story of a woman in Texas whom abortion activists “claim died after doctors said it would be a crime to intervene in her miscarriage.”  The story was published by ProPublica.  But as Perkins asked, could it be that this is “just another case of a woman dying because of the Left’s lies and not pro-life laws?”

As Harrison pointed out about this case in Texas, “A lot of what we know is just what’s reported in the media.”  However, “what I can say is … that pro-life doctors for 40 years before Dobbs have separated moms and babies when the mom’s life is at stake.  And that isn’t anything” new.  It’s “part of the tragedy” of caring for “any mom that is sick” with an “infection [and] needs to be separated from her baby,” she emphasized — “even if that baby can’t live.”  But being able to discern when to make that decision is “just part of … good medical care.”  It “has nothing to do with pro-life laws,” Harrison underscored, and “nothing to do with abortion regulations.”

“[A] mother is the first patient, is she not?” Perkins added.  And while she’s not the only patient, doctors “are always going to work to help that mother in her medical condition.”  Harrison agreed.  “The mother is our patient.  The child is our patient.”  But the reality is, “There are … situations that are life-threatening that will save the mom’s life even though the baby dies.”  And yet, even in those cases, Harrison contended that they’re still not considered abortions.

Harrison went on to explain how “the confusion about what an abortion is” often remains at the center of this debate pertaining to the treatment of miscarriages and ectopic pregnancies.  “An abortion,” the doctor clarified, “is a procedure that’s done for the purpose and intent of producing a dead baby.”  She further clarified that in an instance where a mother’s life is at risk, and the baby does not survive, that is not an abortion because “the purpose [was] not to produce a dead baby.”  Again, Harrison stated, “The purpose of an abortion is to produce a dead baby.”

She went on to illustrate this further: “If there’s an abortion going on at 32 weeks and the baby lives, what do you call that?  That’s a failed abortion.  Why?  [Because] the baby failed to die.  The baby didn’t fail to separate.  The baby failed to die.”  As such, “it’s very clear that the purpose of an induced abortion … an elective abortion, is to produce a dead baby, not to save a mother’s life.  That’s a completely different purpose.”

And now, Perkins argued, in addition to the harmful nature of abortion, “women’s lives [are] being endangered by these false narratives that are being told by political leaders like Walz and Harris.”  In fact, he contended, “what I take away from statements they have made” is that they want “no limits” on abortion.

“Well, that’s exactly right,” Harrison replied.  “[T]here are women that are dying from chemical abortions in states that have no pro-life restrictions.  It’s not an issue of regulating abortion causing women to die.  It’s an issue of women [who] deserve excellent medical care, and they deserve medical care that treats both them and their child as patients.”  This, Harrison stressed, is “what we do as OB-GYN’s.”

“But when you become fixated on abortion [and] the ending of life,” Perkins concluded, “it’s hard to provide good health care and saving lives.  I mean, that [abortion] becomes their top priority [is] astounding.”

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

Kamala Harris Concession: Loyalty to ‘Our God’ Drives Me to Fight for Abortion

Vice President Kamala Harris conceded the 2024 presidential race in a brief, angry, and graceless call-to-arms in which she claimed her “loyalty to our conscience and to our God” and belief in “the dignity of all people” will drive her to continue fighting for abortion.

Harris delivered her concession speech at her alma mater, Howard University, where she had planned to hold her victory party.  About one-third of those at her watch party returned to “The Yard” to hear Harris admit defeat and prod them to take up four, or eight, years of hostility.

“[T]he light of America’s promise will always burn bright, as long as we never give up,” she said, her voice rising to a crescendo, “and as long as we keep fighting.”

“I know folks are feeling and experiencing a range of emotions right now.  I get it,” she said laughing, as no one in the crowd joined her laughter.  “But we must accept the results of this election.  Earlier today, I spoke with President-elect Trump and congratulated him on his victory,” she said, as the crowd booed.

“We owe loyalty not to a president or a party, but to the Constitution of the United States, and loyalty to our conscience and to our God.  My allegiance to all three is why I am here to say, while I concede this election, I do not concede the fight that fuels this campaign, the fight — the fight for freedom, for opportunity, for fairness and the dignity of all people, a fight for the ideals at the heart of our nation, the ideals that reflect America at our best.  That is a fight I will never give up,” thundered Harris, as she turned to the theme that would dominate most of her 11-minute address.

“I will never give up the fight for a future where Americans can pursue their dreams, ambitions and aspirations — where the women of America have the freedom to make decisions about their own body and not have their government telling them what to do,” said Harris, tying success to abortion as she received a fulsome cheer primarily from young college-aged females in the crowd.  College-age single women constitute the abortion industry’s target market.  “[W]omen in their 20s accounted for more than half of abortions (57.2%),” and 86% of women who had an abortion were unmarried in 2020, according to data from the Biden-Harris administration.

Apparently without appreciating the contradiction latent in her beliefs, Harris also claimed to uphold “the sacred idea that every one of us, no matter who we are or where we start out, has certain fundamental rights and freedoms that must be respected and upheld.”

Harris made abortion the primary, virtually the only, issue of her 107-day campaign, saying she would not consider any protections for unborn children at any stage of development, nor any exemptions for people of faith who did not want to participate in an abortion.  “I don’t think we should be making concessions when we’re talking about a fundamental freedom to make decisions about your own body,” candidate Harris told MSNBC’s Hallie Jackson in a rare campaign interview. 

She also vowed to continue to oppose “gun violence,” which in the Democratic lexicon translates to putting restrictions on the right to bear arms, and to continue “the fight for our democracy.”  Her campaign attempted to paint Donald Trump as “a unique threat to democracy.”  When Anderson Cooper asked Harris “Do you think Donald Trump is a fascist?” during a poorly received CNN town hall, Harris rapidly replied, “Yes, I do.”

Harris encouraged the crowd to begin “looking in the face of a stranger and seeing a neighbor” — a reference to continued support for illegal immigration, when her administration’s spokespeople rebranded illegal aliens as “newcomers.”

“This is a time to organize, to mobilize and to stay engaged for the sake of freedom and justice and the future that we all know we can build,” Harris stated.  “We will continue to wage this fight in the voting booth, in the courts and in the public square, and we will also wage it in quieter ways.”

Harris, who underperformed President Joe Biden’s 2020 performance in all 50 states and lost the popular vote, appeared to be casting herself as the leader of a new anti-Trump Resistance movement.  “What exactly is Kamala doing here?  Trying to position herself as some sort of future Dem powerbroker,” said Saagar Enjeti, the co-host of “Breaking Points” with Krystal Ball.  “Hillary could cling to the popular vote and Russiagate.  She has literally nothing.”

“On the campaign, I would often say, when we fight, we win.  But here’s the thing, here’s the thing, sometimes the fight takes a while.  That doesn’t mean we won’t win,” Harris told the crowd, including her husband, Doug Emhoff, who at times began openly weeping.  “Only when it is dark enough can you see the stars,” she said, holding up her hands and nodding her head as she did when describing space exploration to children.

“Many people feel like we are entering a dark time … [I]f it is [true], let us fill the sky with the light of a brilliant, brilliant billion of stars” seemingly echoing President George H.W. Bush’s description of the United States as a “thousand points of light.”

Viewers were quick to dismiss Harris’s remarks, which Fox News host Laura Ingraham described as “a Resistance speech.” 

“It felt inauthentic.  It felt light,” Ed Henry told Newsmax moments after the conclusion, and featured “cheap shots there at the end.” 

Pro-life observers also chided Harris for placing her faith in the power of abortion to power her campaign to victory.  “Killing babies is not the W,” or win, “you thought it was, Kamala,” noted Lila Rose of Live Action.

“Page, turned.  What’s been, unburdened,” said Kristan Hawkins of Students for Life of America Action.  “Goodbye Kamala, and don’t come back.”

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

Joy Came in the Morning … After the Election

If Kamala Harris ever lived up to her self-description that she is “not aspiring to be humble,” it came when her campaign treated the Bible verse “joy cometh in the morning” as though it foretold her election as president.  Yet on the morning that false prophecy came to nought, God seemed to reassert His sovereignty, deliverance, and vindication through His Word and an ancient hymn recorded in a prayer book used by 85 million Christians worldwide — including many of her supporters.

Early Wednesday morning, it became clear America had been spared the election of a candidate who promised to erase religious objections and force Christians into funding and participating in abortion and other sinful activities.  The 2024 election felt different; it felt definitive.  On one side stood a candidate who wanted to honor America’s heritage; on the other, a team that aimed at “fundamentally transforming the United States of America” now asked for four more years to “finish the job.”  In 2024, America voted in favor of itself.

Through the centuries, it has become customary to pray a hymn known as the Te Deum after receiving a blessing, or deliverance from some great calamity.  This hymn, which is so ancient that no one is certain who wrote it, welds every order of earthly and angelic creation into one chorus of praise.  Before proceeding to the Te Deum, look at Psalm 30.  The Bible always applies God’s eternal and unchanging wisdom to our everyday circumstances, but this specific Psalm prophetically addressed the election and its misuse of God’s Word.

“I will magnify thee, O LORD; for Thou hast set me up, and not made my foes to triumph over me,” it began.  “O LORD my God, I cried unto Thee; and Thou hast healed me.  Thou, LORD, hast brought my soul out of Hell: Thou hast kept my life, that I should not go down into the pit.” 

Reading this Psalm the morning after an election, God seemed to engage the Harris-Walz campaign’s hermeneutic and convey the voice of America itself crying out to God in thanksgiving.

Then, verse five says: “Heaviness may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning.”

Kamala Harris, or whoever writes her soliloquies, branded the party’s desperate defenestration of Joe Biden after his June 27 debate performance an act of “joy.”  Soon, Psalm 30:5 became the ubiquitous rallying cry of Democrats, who had begun to despair over Biden’s inevitable loss.  House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (NY-D) gave an uncharacteristically religious speech to the Democratic National Convention, invoking the phrase like a revivalist trying to get the American people to accept Kamala Harris as their political lord and savior.  Jeffries quoted the verse twice in one minute — just 50 seconds after he reassured the nation that a President Harris would “always protect a woman’s freedom to make her own reproductive health care decisions,” a euphemism for abortion.

Maryland Senate candidate Angela Alsobrooks wound the Psalmist’s verse into a political omen as she completed her DNC address.  “It’s always darkest before the dawn.  We know that we can endure for a night, because ‘joy cometh in the morning,’” Alsobrooks, who won her Senate race on Tuesday, told the DNC.  “Morning is coming!  Morning is coming, and that joy will be led by Kamala Harris!”  Last Sunday, nine days before the election, the vice president even shouted the phrase from the pulpit of West Philadelphia’s Church of Christian Compassion in a strange new accent.  (Unlike Jesus, she thought it appropriate to bear witness of herself.)

A better scriptural commentator, St. Augustine of Hippo, interpreted Psalm 30’s “weeping” as the human race straining under the yoke of sin and death, while the “joy” foretells “the exultation of the resurrection, which hath shone forth by anticipation in the morning resurrection of the Lord” Jesus Christ.  Crafting an entire campaign around the idolatrous application of a Messianic prophecy to Kamala Harris is … not an act of humility.  Yet ever since “values voters” made up the margin of victory in the 2004 presidential election, Democrats have alternated between invoking their newfound public faith on the campaign trail and violating its traditional beliefs in office.  Nancy Pelosi invoked her Catholicism at least 10 times while supporting abortion and claimed it “compels” her to support same-sex marriage.

In 2024, the Kamala Harris campaign tried to conceal its contempt for half of America and rebellion against God’s moral standards behind a campaign of vibes wrapped up in a twisting of the Bible.  But God had the last laugh, putting the words of her failed campaign slogan on the lips of Christians in praise to Himself on the morning she contemplated writing her concession speech.

The Book of Common Prayer has been a resource for the 85 million Anglicans around the world.  The vast majority of clergy in The Episcopal Church not only supported Kamala Harris but preach a god who blesses abortion and the LGBTQIA+ agenda in sermons that combine thick, syrupy postmodernism and a thin gruel of non-specific religious sentimentality.  And, despite many unhappy revisions to the American prayer book, Psalm 30 remains the first Psalm read on the sixth of each month.  They, too, read Psalm 30 the morning after the election as an indictment of their attempts to redefine biblical morality.

America will not find healing until it learns that no politician delivers any lasting joy.  God alone can provide satisfying and abiding spiritual joy, which is a virtue, not a vibe; a fruit of the spirit, not a fleeting campaign slogan; and the gift not of any earthly ruler, prince, or satrap, but of the King of kings and Lord of lords, Who has given us an everlasting kingdom that is not of this world.

If you share my view that God has given us a reprieve from the worst, I invite you to join me in reading Psalm 30 in its entirety and praying the Te Deum, which I’ve printed below.  And let us give thanks for the power of the One Who alone brings true joy.

Psalm 30:

I will magnify thee, O LORD; for Thou hast set me up, and not made my foes to triumph over me.

O LORD my God, I cried unto Thee; and Thou hast healed me.

Thou, LORD, hast brought my soul out of Hell: Thou hast kept my life, that I should not go down into the pit.

Sing praises unto the LORD, O ye saints of His; and give thanks unto Him, for a remembrance of His holiness.

For His wrath endureth but the twinkling of an eye, and in His pleasure is life; heaviness may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning.

And in my prosperity I said, I shall never be removed: Thou, LORD, of Thy goodness, hast made my hill so strong.

Thou didst turn thy face from me, and I was troubled.

Then cried I unto Thee, O LORD; and gat me to my LORD right humbly.

What profit is there in my blood, when I go down into the pit?

Shall the dust give thanks unto Thee? or shall it declare Thy truth?

Hear, O LORD, and have mercy upon me; LORD, be Thou my helper.

Thou hast turned my heaviness into joy; Thou hast put off my sackcloth, and girded me with gladness:

Therefore shall every good man sing of thy praise without ceasing. O my God, I will give thanks unto Thee for ever.

Te Deum laudamus:

We praise Thee, O God; we acknowledge Thee to be the Lord.

All the earth doth worship Thee, the Father everlasting.

To Thee all angels cry aloud; the heavens, and all the Powers therein;

To Thee Cherubim and Seraphim continually do cry,

Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God of Sabaoth;

Heaven and earth are full of the majesty of Thy glory.

The glorious company of the Apostles praise Thee.

The goodly fellowship of the Prophets praise Thee.

The noble army of Martyrs praise Thee.

The holy Church throughout all the world doth acknowledge Thee;

The Father, of an infinite Majesty;

Thine adorable, true, and only Son;

Also the Holy Ghost, the Comforter.

Thou art the King of Glory, O Christ.

Thou art the everlasting Son of the Father.

When Thou tookest upon Thee to deliver man, 

Thou didst humble thyself to be born of a Virgin.

When Thou hadst overcome the sharpness of death, 

Thou didst open the Kingdom of Heaven to all believers.

Thou sittest at the right hand of God, in the glory of the Father.

We believe that Thou shalt come to be our Judge.

We therefore pray Thee, help Thy servants, whom 

Thou hast redeemed with Thy precious blood.

Make them to be numbered with Thy saints, in glory everlasting.

O Lord, save Thy people, and bless Thine heritage.

Govern them, and lift them up for ever.

Day by day we magnify Thee;

And we worship Thy Name ever, world without end.

Vouchsafe, O Lord, to keep us this day without sin.

O Lord, have mercy upon us, have mercy upon us.

O Lord, let Thy mercy be upon us, as our trust is in Thee.

O Lord, in Thee have I trusted; let me never be confounded.

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

Wife Arrested in Connection with Missionary Husband's Murder

A Minnesota woman has been arrested in Angola on suspicion of murdering her husband, a missionary serving in the African nation, according to their church.

Authorities have taken Jackie Shroyer into custody in connection with the death of her husband, 44-year-old missionary and former pastor Beau Shroyer.

“Today, our grief and sadness has deepened immeasurably as we’ve learned that his wife, Jackie Shroyer, has been arrested in connection with his death,” wrote Lead Pastor Troy M. Easton of Lakes Area Vineyard Church in a statement released to the congregation, as reported by Fox 9.

The church, located in Minnesota, had previously announced that Beau was killed in a “violent, criminal attack” on October 25 while on mission work in Angola.

The Shroyers moved to Angola in 2021 with their five children to serve as missionaries with SIM USA, a North Carolina-based Evangelical organization.

According to the church’s statement, they aimed to teach residents about Christianity and God’s love in a “remote bush village” without electricity.

Before their missionary work in Angola, Beau served as a pastor at Lakes Area Vineyard Church and had a background in law enforcement, having worked for the Detroit Lakes Police Department in 2013, according to the Detroit Lakes Tribune.  He also worked as a real estate agent prior to moving abroad.

The couple’s five children are being “well cared for,” and the church is collaborating with SIM USA and SIM Angola to ensure their continued safety and well-being, according to Easton’s statement.

SIM USA’s Chief Personnel Officer and General Counsel Mark Bosscher told the Tribune that the organization “has taken steps to ensure that Jackie has appropriate legal representation.”  He added that they are “working closely” with Lakes Area Vineyard Church to “care for the Shroyers’ five children.”

In the days leading up to his death, Beau shared glimpses of his missionary work on social media.  He posted on Facebook about meeting a young student named Mauricio, who walked long distances to attend school.  “One of the reasons that the Nyneka people, who we are serving, are among the most marginalized people groups in Angola was a lack of access to education,” he wrote.  “Please pray for Mauricio and others like him who spend half of their day walking to school and back.”

Another post mentioned his agricultural efforts, saying he had spent the day “spreading manure by hand over a 40x16 meter agricultural plot.”

Authorities in Angola have not released details about how his wife is connected to the incident.  Fox 9 reported that authorities have not disclosed whether any charges are pending.

The church has requested privacy for its members and announced adjustments to their Sunday services to “honor the needs of our community at this time.”  Easton said they are preparing to handle media inquiries by pointing back to the official statement.

SIM USA, which focuses on spreading the Gospel in difficult-to-reach areas, said in a previous statement that “Beau and Jackie Shroyer, together with their five children, were some of the first missionaries to begin service with SIM USA after the COVID lockdowns eased.  They have brought a faithful, energetic, growing, loving aroma of Christ into our family,” Randy Fairman, president of SIM USA."

Beau Shroyer had earlier explained during a presentation that the government of Angola had given the ministry a parcel of land next to an orange farm that was constantly under attack from criminals which affected the property they were trying to develop.

At the top of a list of needs for the property he presented to Country Faith Church was the need to build a perimeter wall and hire more security.

The late pastor said the orange farm next to the property of the youth ministry installed an electrified, 10-foot high razor wire fence and hired about 50 guards to protect the farm day and night but they still struggled with crime in the area.

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

Pastor, Family Burned Alive in Islamist Attack

Islamist villagers in eastern Uganda burned a pastor and his family to death after he led three Muslims to faith in Christ, the pastor’s brother said.

Pastor Weere Mukisa, his 25-year-old wife, Annet Namugaya, and their two daughters, 7-year-old Judith Banirye and 4-year-old Sylvia Bamukisa, died when the assailants set fire to their home shortly before 3 a.m. on October 13, said the church leader’s brother, James Tusubira.  Pastor Mukisa was 30.

The tragic attack took place in Kibale village, Mpumiro Parish, Bulange Sub-County, Namutumba District.  Pastor Mukisa had led the Muslims to Christ in September.

“When the three young Muslims converted to Christ, my brother started receiving threatening messages that he should stop any contact with the three young converts, and that the act committed is against the teaching of Islam to not join the religion of infidels,” Tusubira told Morning Star News.

Tusubira said he saw flames and smoke coming from the family’s home at 2:48 a.m.  “We rushed to the scene of the incident and found the house torched and the five bodies burned beyond recognition,” he said.  “Many people started arriving till the break of the day.  Plastic bottles of petrol were found outside the house.”

The assailants were from a neighboring village and were known to the pastor, Tusubira said.  The killings have been reported to the police in Kibale.  Officers were hunting for the suspects, who have absconded, Tusubira said.  Villagers were in great shock and fearful over the gruesome attack, he said.

“Please pray for us so that these radical Muslims who destroyed my brother and the entire family can be brought to book,” Tusubira said.

In Nankoma, Bugiri District, a mother of three children was beaten and burned with acid by her Muslim husband after he learned she had put her faith in Christ.

Hidaaya Nabafa, 27, was receiving hospital treatment for severe burns after the attack by Juma Nsibambi, 42, she said.

Nabafa had received Christ in August at a church in Nankoma village, undisclosed for security reasons.  Keeping her faith secret, she had gone to a worship service on October 9 while her husband was in Kampala.  “When I came back at 4 p.m., I found my husband at home, and he asked me about where I have been; I kept quiet for a while,” Nabafa told Morning Star News from her hospital bed.  “At last, I decided to tell him the truth that I gave my life to Jesus.”  She had Christian tracts about the life of Christ, she said.

“Upon hearing my confession, he got annoyed and boxed me and started beating me up,” Nabafa said.  “I tried to make an alarm for rescue, but all in vain.”  Nsibambi momentarily left, leaving her on the ground, and when he returned he poured battery acid on her, she said.  “I lost consciousness, only to find myself in the hospital bed,” said the mother of three children, ages 7, 5 and 2.

Neighbors arrived and took her to a hospital in Bugiri, where she was expected to continue treatment for a few more weeks due to the severity of the burns.  She is expected to need reconstructive surgery for some parts of her body badly injured by the acid.

These attacks were the latest of many instances of persecution of Christians in Uganda that Morning Star News has documented.

Uganda’s constitution and other laws provide for religious freedom, including the right to propagate one’s faith and convert from one faith to another.  Muslims make up no more than 12% of Uganda’s population, with high concentrations in eastern areas of the country.

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

Kamala Harris is Most 'Anti-Faith' Candidate in History

Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts warned Americans in a Friday press call that Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic nominee for president of the United States, is the most “anti-faith” presidential candidate in history and that her administration would lead to Christians losing their freedom to worship.

Roberts, who has led the conservative think tank since 2021, hosted a Virtual Faith Media Roundtable to Discuss Why Christians Should Vote Friday.  In his remarks, he warned about the implications of a Harris Administration and assuaged Christians with concerns about the Republican candidate for president— former President Donald Trump. 

The conversation took place four days before the 2024 presidential election, where the Republican ticket of Trump and Sen. J.D. Vance (OH-R), is locked in a tight race with the Democratic ticket of Harris and MN Gov. Tim Walz. 

Roberts described Harris as “the most anti-faith, anti-religion presidential candidate in history.”  He maintained that “People of faith who are worried about the choice they are making really need to understand what’s at stake.”  He asserted, “We’re going to lose our ability to worship, we’re going to lose our religious liberty if the Harris-Walz campaign prevails.”  He cited the vice president’s suggestion to attendees at one of her recent rallies who shouted phrases including “Christ is King” that they were at the wrong rally as an example of her hostility to religion. 

Roberts expressed concern about the prospect of a Harris-Walz Administration “expanding abortion” if the Democrats gain complete control of the U.S. Congress in addition to the presidency as well as “a real abridgement of religious liberty” and efforts to “abridge free speech.”  He expressed concern that “they’re going to abridge free speech for people of faith” as well as media organizations. 

“Although I’ve got other things I’m concerned about, I think it’s not hyperbole for me to say that I think the entire First Amendment is endangered” in the event of a Harris-Walz victory in the 2024 election, Roberts declared.  In addition to laying out the implications of a Harris-Walz Administration for people of faith, he attempted to reassure those with concerns that a Trump-Vance Administration would not be much better. 

Roberts lamented that “There are people of faith who are sitting on the sidelines because they have forgotten that we are electing a president, not a pastor.”  He contended that Christians who plan on sitting out the 2024 election because of their concerns about Trump need to remember that “none of us is perfect,” including Trump and Vance. 

Roberts’ comments about people of faith “sitting on the sidelines” in the 2024 election comes as a study from the Cultural Research Center at Arizona Christian University published last month estimated that 32 million self-identified Christians will abstain from voting. 

Addressing the concern that Trump has taken an inadequately pro-life position by insisting that the issue of abortion should be left to the states following the U.S. Supreme Court’s Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision determining that the U.S. Constitution does not contain a right to abortion and his vow to not sign a national abortion ban, Roberts maintained that “I think people of faith need to remember the … former president’s track record” on the issue from his previous time in the White House. 

“I’m cautiously optimistic that in a Trump-Vance Administration, that the policy default of the president and vice president will still be solidly pro-life,” he said.  Reflecting on the assembly of a presidential cabinet and administration that would follow a Trump-Vance victory, Roberts declared “It’s sort of impossible to avoid appointing pro-life people.” 

Roberts described the pro-life movement as “a vital, vital part of the political coalition that will have succeeded in electing Trump and Vance,” stressing that giving pro-life activists prominent roles in the administration would be “politically intelligent.” 

Polling at the national level as well as in individual swing states as of Friday forecasts a close election.  The RealClearPolitics average of national polls asking voters which candidate they support shows Trump with a very narrow lead of 0.3 percentage points over Harris.  The RealClearPolitics “no toss-up” map, which projects the outcome of the presidential election in the electoral college based on polling averages in individual states, shows Trump capturing 287 electoral votes to Harris’ 251. 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

Harris Rejects Religious Exemptions in Abortion Debate

Democratic candidates have been running on abortion for years, and both President Joe Biden and now Vice President Kamala Harris have pledged to resurrect a more extreme version of Roe v. Wade if Democrats win the White House in November.  But Harris is promising more than just unrestricted abortion on demand: she’s promising to make American Christians carry out and pay for abortions.

In an NBC News interview on last week, Harris was asked if she would consider “making concessions” on abortion if she were to win the White House in order to garner support from pro-abortion Republicans like Senators Lisa Murkowski (AK-R) and Susan Collins (ME-R).  “What concessions would be on the table?  Religious exemptions, for example; is that something that you would consider if the Republicans control Congress?” NBC’s Senior Washington Correspondent Hallie Jackson asked.  Harris replied, “I don’t think we should be making concessions when we’re talking about a fundamental freedom to make decisions about your own body.”

When Jackson asked if Harris would consider religious exemptions as an “olive branch” extended to Murkowski or Collins, the vice president said that “a basic freedom has been taken from the women of America, the freedom to make decisions about their own body, and that cannot be negotiable, which is why we need to put back in the protections of Roe v. Wade, and that is it.”

Christian organizations were quick to react.  In comments to The Washington Stand (TWS), Mary Szoch, Family Research Council’s director of the Center for Human Dignity, said that Harris “isn’t pro-choice; she is pro-abortion.”  Szoch continued, “She wants to force everyone to perform abortions — even physicians who recognize that the killing of an innocent unborn child is murder and a grave sin — and she wants to force American taxpayers to pay for abortions.”  She concluded, “This woman will do everything possible to increase the number of babies aborted in this country.  No Christian can vote for her in good conscience.”

The Center for Baptist Leadership called Harris’s comments “chilling,” adding, “This means that all Christian hospitals, healthcare providers, businesses, etc., would be forced to provide/cover abortion if she got her way.  It would be the end of the First Amendment and religious liberty as we know it.”

In comments to TWS, William Wolfe, the executive director of the Center for Baptist Leadership and a former Trump staffer, said, “In the final moments of her floundering campaign, Kamala Harris has decided to drop the mask and reveal her deep-seated hatred for the unborn and all American Christians.  There are so many things wrong with her recent comments, both morally and legally, that it’s hard to know where to begin.”

“First, there is no ‘fundamental freedom’ to murder the unborn in the womb.  Rather, the government is obligated, under God and the Constitution, to defend the lives of all American citizens, including the unborn,” Wolfe explained.  He continued, “Second, her rejection of ‘religious exemptions’ when it comes to abortion would be the end of the First Amendment as we know it.  She is openly admitting that, if elected, she would use the full force of the federal government to require Christian doctors to perform abortions against their conscience and religious beliefs.”

Wolfe called the agenda “nothing short of a satanic tyranny that flies in the face of everything America was founded on.”  He added, “As a Baptist, this is particularly concerning, as we believe that religious liberty is foundational for free societies.  She’s made her antipathy toward those who want to uphold the First Amendment and protect innocent life in America known.  Now, we will see how Christians respond at the ballot box.”

CatholicVote, a conservative advocacy group, protested in a statement over social media, “Kamala Harris admits she would deny religious exemptions for abortions — forcing Christians to kill unborn children and seemingly doubling down on weaponizing the government to jail pro-lifers who pray outside abortion facilities.”  The organization wondered, “Why would any Christian vote for her?”

Andrew T. Walker, professor of ethics and public theology at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, summarized, “Killing a pre-born child is a more fundamental right than religious liberty according to Vice President Harris.”  Ben Domenech, editor-at-large for The Spectator, commented, “Forcing Catholic hospitals, which supply care to some of the most vulnerable populations, to perform abortions or shut their doors is literally the most vile thing a major party candidate has ever endorsed.”

Former President Donald Trump has repeatedly condemned Harris for her demonstrable animosity towards American Christians and pro-lifers.  At the “11th Hour Faith Leaders Meeting” on last Monday, Trump insisted that Harris is “very destructive to Christianity and very destructive to evangelicals and to the Catholic Church.”  He added, “She is your worst nightmare.  Much worse, much worse than Biden, and he wasn’t so hot.”

Trump has previously called Harris “militantly hostile toward Americans of faith,” pointing out her record on such issues as abortion and the LGBT agenda, as well as her repeated prosecution — both in the White House and prior to becoming vice president — of pro-life Americans and her complicity in targeting American Catholics with the FBI.

Trump has pledged to “stop the Biden-Harris Administration’s weaponization of law enforcement against Americans of faith” and has said that “no longer will the DOJ and the FBI be allowed to target, persecute, or round up Christians or pro-life activists and throw them in jail for living out their religious beliefs.”

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

Does Every Vote Really Matter?

Imagine you’re a candidate who took the scary leap and ran for office.  Month after month, you, along with family members, friends, and other volunteers, go out and talk to voters, raise money, and work through intense media interviews — all in hopes of winning the election.

Then imagine what it would be like once the ballots were tallied on Election Day to find out you didn’t win.  And you didn’t lose.  Your race ended in a tie.  Or imagine you’re in a different race and find out you lost by a single vote.  These stories, and many others like them, aren’t hypothetical.  They’ve actually happened.

Before we get into these surprising outcomes, let’s take a look at the big picture.  Every election cycle we hear, “Be sure to vote” and “Every vote matters.”  We know that’s what we’re supposed to say as responsible citizens, but some Americans aren’t convinced.  In a nation of over 335 million people, about 75% of whom are voting-age adults, it can be tempting to wonder if one vote is really going to make a difference.

According to a recent survey conducted by George Barna and the Cultural Research Center at Arizona Christian University, there are an estimated 41 million born-again Christians who are unlikely to vote in the 2024 elections (and 32 million unlikely to vote who regularly attend church).  Interestingly, the survey found that one out of seven of these likely non-voters said they could be convinced to vote if family or friends talked to them about the election’s importance, if they received objective information about the important positions of the major candidates, or if they believed the election was going to be close and their vote would make a difference.

That last point shows how many people don’t think their vote will actually matter.  While I believe we have a duty to steward our votes and participate regardless of how close we think the elections may be, there are many, many examples of close races where just a few votes made all the difference.  In most of these cases, people had no idea just how close these contests would be ahead of time.  From the presidential contest all the way down to local school board campaigns, there are thousands of important federal, state, and local races on the ballot this election.  Regardless of whether you live in a deep red state, a deep blue state, or a purple state, there’s a very good chance that there will be elections somewhere in your state decided by just a handful of votes.

So how many races are really that close?  The answer might surprise you.  Here are a number of notable examples, from oldest to most recent, where just a few votes changed the outcome.

Senator Bernie Sanders (VT-I)

Given his far-left positions, you probably weren’t expecting me to start out with an example about Senator Bernie Sanders.  But his story really illustrates this point.  A self-described socialist, Sanders is well-known nationally and is considered by some to be among the most liberal members of the U.S. Senate.  He’s also credited with moving the Democratic Party significantly left during his presidential runs and was considered the party’s presidential frontrunner for a period of time in the 2020 primary.  What most people don’t know is that Sanders’s political career was launched when he won his election for mayor in the small town of Burlington, VT.  He won that contest by just 10 votes.  Had six of those voters cast their votes the other way, it’s entirely possible that most of us wouldn’t even know who Bernie Sanders is today.

2000 Presidential Election

One of the most well-known “nailbiters” in history, the 2000 presidential race, was incredibly close.  The battle for control of the White House came down to the state of Florida.  President George W. Bush secured the nomination because he bested Al Gore in the state and won the electoral college 271 to 266.  His narrow margin of victory in the Sunshine State was just 537 votes.  That incredibly small number is even more noteworthy when we remember over 5.9 million votes were cast in the state that year.

2016 Presidential Election

Let’s fast-forward to more recent elections.  In 2016, Donald Trump was the decided underdog — so much so that well-known outlets like Reuters declared “Clinton has a 90 percent chance of winning.”  We all remember how wrong the “experts” were that year.  But many people forget just how close the race was.  Four different states were decided by less than one percentage point (Michigan, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin).  Had President Trump lost Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, Hillary Clinton would have won the election.  These states combined for 13.9 million votes, but Trump’s combined margin of victory was less than 78,000 votes.  In other words, he won the White House because he won these three states collectively by less than six-tenths of one point.  It’s also worth noting there were an estimated 7.4 million voting-eligible adults in these three states who didn’t bother to cast a ballot.

2017 Virginia State House

Seven years ago, control of the Virginia State House of Delegates came down to one last House race.  When most of the dust had settled after the election, Republicans held a total of 50 seats, Democrats had 49, and the final race was too close to call for a while.  When the final tally came in, the race was tied: 11,608 votes to 11,608 votes!  So how did the state decide the winner?  Believe it or not, a name was drawn at random from a bowl.  Republican David Yancey’s name was drawn and Republicans ended up with a 51-49 majority.

2018 State Legislative Races

You might be thinking, “Yeah, those are a few examples of close races.  But that’s bound to happen every once in a while.  Are there really that many in the grand scheme of things?”  As a matter of fact, there are.  An analysis by Ballotpedia found that in 2018 there were 88 different state legislative races decided by a half a percentage point or less.  This included two state legislative races that were tied, and 16 that were decided by 10 votes or less.

2019 Boston City Council

Boston, Massachusetts is a large city that boasted nearly 700,000 residents in 2019.  That year, there were races for city council, one of which was extremely close.  After three days of hand-counting the ballots, Julia Mejia (D) bested her opponent 22,492 votes to 22,491 votes — the margin was a single vote.

2020 Presidential Election 

The 2020 presidential race was also extremely close, and the Electoral College winner came down to Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin.  These were the closest states that collectively could have swung the outcome.  There were 11.7 million votes cast in these three states, but they were decided by a mere 44,000 votes combined.  There were five million voting-eligible adults in these three states who did not bother to vote.

2022 U.S. House Majority

Control of the U.S. House of Representatives is tremendously significant and carries important public policy ramifications that impact every single American.  In 2022, Republicans won the House majority.  But just a few thousand votes could have swung the gavel back to Democrats.  In the 435-seat chamber, 218 seats are needed for majority.  Republicans ended up with 222 seats.  The GOP won their five closest House races by a razor thin 3,340 votes in all five contests combined.

Close Elections Database

If these examples aren’t enough to convince you that every vote matters, take a look at Public Interest Legal Foundation’s database of tied and close elections.  They did a deep dive on historical federal, state, and local election results across the country.  Their research found an astounding 636 races that ended in ties and 173 more that were decided by a single vote!  And what’s more, this list of 800+ races isn’t comprehensive.  There are many other close races that aren’t even included.

So the next time you hear someone say, “My vote doesn’t really matter,” share these stories!  Of course, there are plenty of races that are not this close, and our votes matter in those races too.  But you can never completely predict just how close a race might be.

Ultimately, it’s not just about winning close elections.  The candidates who won these contests went on to implement policies that had a profound impact on their districts and, in some cases, the entire nation.  In a democratic republic like ours, your vote is your voice.  Use it!

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

‘Jesus Is Lord’? A Tale of Two Rallies

Political campaigns all too often come down to one memorable moment: Nixon’s debate with JFK, Reagan asking if Americans are better off today than four years ago, Bush promising “no new taxes,” or Trump descending a golden escalator.  Two rallies — and three events — over the last week presented a series of revelatory moments that should burn themselves into Christians’ minds, culminating with the way two of the most important figures in the election responded to the phrase, “Jesus is Lord.”

Kamala Harris presided over the first event at the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse the other week.  As she delved into a monologue castigating pro-life protections for the unborn, two university students declared, “Christ is King!” and “Jesus is Lord!”

“Oh, you guys are at the wrong rally,” replied the Democratic Party’s candidate for president of the United States.

The students — Grant Beth and Luke Polaske, two juniors at the university — said Harris singled them out during the speech.  “She was actually waving to me.  I took this cross off my neck that I wear, and as we were getting asked to leave, I held it up in the air and waved at her and pointed at her, and she looked directly in the eye, kind of gave me an evil smirk,” Polaske told “Fox and Friends Weekend.”  Sadly, the liberal university crowd shared Harris’s disrespect for Christians and, allegedly, for Christ. 

The New York Post reports: “I was pushed by an elderly woman.  We were heckled at, we were cursed at, we were mocked, and that’s the biggest thing for me personally,” Beth said.  “In reflection of the event, Jesus was mocked.  You know, [H]is disciples were mocked, and that’s OK.”

Contrast that scene with a rally Republican vice presidential candidate J.D. Vance held in Waukesha, Wisconsin.  During a lull in his speech, someone in the audience cheered, “Jesus is king!”

“That’s right.  Jesus is king,” Vance responded, as the Republican crowd erupted in approval.

One candidate signaled that the Name of Jesus Christ — the Name at which every knee shall bow and every tongue confess His eternal lordship — is unwelcome speech at any of her rallies.  And if the Democratic nominee banishes Jesus’s Name from her campaign, when she’s trying to earn the votes of the largest share of U.S. citizens (and, alas, others), how much more will Jesus find disfavor once she’s comfortably ensconced in the Oval Office for the next four years?

On the other hand, J.D. Vance rhetorically affirmed, not merely empty praise for Jesus, but the notion that God’s sovereignty supersedes even his own.  The phrase “Jesus is King!” recognizes the view that government, and those to whom it is temporarily entrusted, are subordinate to the will of God.  Their will is circumscribed by the rights, priorities, privileges, and kingdom rights of Christ the King.  Vance’s words pumped oxygen into the heart of the American experiment, that U.S. citizens enjoy certain unalienable rights which no government can ever take away.

As a Christian, those two images should stand preeminent above all others as you go into the voting booth.

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

State of the 2024 Election

Much has been made about what’s at stake in the upcoming 2024 election, and rightfully so.  The last three and a half years have seen wars emerge on almost every continent, a dramatically weakened dollar with persistently high inflation and declining standard of living, the deterioration of military readiness, a wide-open southern border, the politicization of our legal system, an unprecedented all-out assault on the unborn and those standing up for life, attacks on religious freedom, a disconcerting rise in political violence, and more.  As a result, just 28% of Americans say the country is on the right track, and they are primed to make their voice heard.

The presidential election between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump has generated most of the attention and campaign spending and will be the main driver of turnout among voters.  Every day, there are several new national and battleground polls released to the public, and in general they show a race within the margin of error (give or take 2-4 points depending on the specific poll) at the national level.  Harris currently enjoys a two-point edge in the head-to-head polling average at RealClearPolitics.  The Democratic candidate has traditionally won the national popular vote, but because of the wisdom of our Founding Fathers, the Electoral College is determinative.  

Sixty-one percent of Americans agree the country is on the wrong track, and while this portends trouble ahead for the Harris campaign in persuading voters to continue the Biden-Harris policies in a Kamala Harris administration, it does translate to some anti-incumbent sentiment among voters, which plays to the benefit of Senate Republicans hoping to take the majority in the upper chamber in Congress.  With a slim 51-49 seat majority, the Senate Democrats stand severely disadvantaged this election.  Of the 34 Senate seats up for a vote this cycle, 23 are held by Democrats, many of which are in states that are also highly competitive at the presidential level.  

After redistricting in 2020, the number of competitive races in the House of Representatives dipped. Gone are the days of 40-60 seat swings like we saw in the Tea Party era.  This year, Cook Political Report has identified just 26 toss-up races in the U.S. House of Representatives.  Of these 26, Republicans are defending 14, and Democrats are defending 12.  For the current razor-thin, three-seat Republican majority, winning every one of these toss-up races is a must.  With just 23% of voters approving of the job Congress is doing, the GOP is swimming against the tide to keep their majority.

Unlike the Senate, where a presidential candidate’s coattails can be decisive, most of the toss-up races in the House are in states that are not particularly competitive at the statewide or presidential level.  Each individual candidate will have to win or lose in their own foxhole.  Alaska, California, Colorado, Iowa, Maine, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, and Washington account for 16 of the 24 most competitive House races and will not see a competitive result at the presidential or Senate level, or do not have a competitive Senate race. GOP incumbents in these states will have to win in an environment of supercharged Democrat turnout, and vice versa for Democrat incumbents in toss-up races in Republican states.  If you’re the GOP, of particular concern are GOP incumbents in California and New York.  There are eight GOP incumbents between these two states alone, and both states are likely to go for Kamala Harris by as much as 20 points, or more.  Combine anti-incumbent sentiment with deep blue states and you have a strong headwind for GOP incumbents in these states.

Hundreds of thousands, if not millions of Americans, have updated their voter registration or registered to vote for the first time this year.  All this data is important and tells us some early signs of how the election will go.  

Early vote data shows a dramatic decline in the number of mail-in ballots requested compared to 2020. Mail-in voting is likely to play a smaller role in the 2024 election than it did in the 2020 election when so many were still dealing with COVID-19.

Then there’s the campaign spending. Kamala Harris’s campaign has raised $678 million to Donald Trump’s $313 million.  The Democratic National Committee similarly enjoys a fundraising advantage over its Republican counterparts, raking in $385 million to the Republican National Committee’s $331 million.  The Republicans enjoy a slight campaign finance edge in the Senate contests, outraising their Democrat counterparts $200 million to $173 million.  In the House, the National Republican Congressional Committee raised $183 million to the Democrats’ $250 million.  This all amounts to billions of dollars flooding the airways and cell phone towers with campaign messaging.

All of this to say, the respective candidates and political parties have their own advantages and disadvantages.  It’s incredibly difficult to say which advantages will determine outcomes, whether it’s a campaign cash advantage or public polling, voter registration or mail-in ballot requests, we will not know for sure until election night.  Right now, the presidential race looks like it’s trending toward Donald Trump, the Senate is securely within reach of the Republicans, and the speaker’s gavel is at risk of being handed back over to the Democrats. If that’s the case, then we’ll look back and say 2024 was clearly an anti-incumbent election, and the country is asking for change.  If Harris wins, the Democrats retain control of the Senate, and win back the House, then we can say campaign funding is the decisive factor in elections.  If Trump wins, the GOP wins the Senate, and retains control of the House, we can say it was a repudiation of the Biden-era with its excessive social engineering, abortion extremism, runaway spending, foreign policy blunders, and all.

As followers of Christ, we know God is sovereign.  This is not an excuse for inaction, but an acknowledgement that no election outcome surprises Him.  The best day of the republic still falls short of the glory of the New Heaven and New Earth to come.  We should pray for righteous leaders to prevail in November and pray that our nation would once again humble itself before the Lord acknowledging how far we have fallen from His righteous standard.  The 2024 elections are incredibly important because of the stark differences in worldview represented by the major parties, but their importance pales in comparison to the work needed to repair our nation’s spiritual walls.

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

Why You Should Care about the Electoral College

At a time when Americans feel more divided than ever, influential members of the Democratic Party seek to undermine one of the Constitution’s greatest provisions assuring national unity: They want to abolish the Electoral College. Although many see the institution as a throwback to premodern times, the Electoral College still accomplishes the Founding Fathers’ will of seeing that people of all states have their interests represented in their government.

The most recent attempt to undermine the Constitution came from Democratic vice presidential candidate Tim Walz, who said, “I think all of us know, the Electoral College needs to go.”  Over the years, nearly every prominent Democrat, including Hillary Clinton, has called for the presidential election to be determined by a national popular vote.  But doing so would undermine national unity, eliminate voters’ confidence in election outcomes, and drown small states’ votes in a sea of blue.

The Founding Fathers established the Electoral College, in part, to ensure small states like Rhode Island did not end up subject to the whim of a few large states, such as Virginia and Pennsylvania. They made America a constitutional republic, which views individuals’ rights as individual, God-given, and unalienable and forbids the government from passing any law denying a person these rights, regardless of how popular the motion might be.  A democracy, on the other hand, says a majority — 50% plus one — can strip a 49% minority of all its rights.  The Founding Fathers “feared majority tyranny,” said Michael Maibach, distinguished fellow for Save Our States, on “Washington Watch” last Thursday.  “Every state has two senators for a reason.  That was the Connecticut Compromise, so that they would have two electors, no matter” its population.

The Electoral College reflected the Founders’ aim to protect minority rights and assure diversity in the national government.  Presidential candidates would have to go beyond courting voters in large population areas and truly represent the interests of all to be elected.  In The Federalist Papers, Alexander Hamilton wrote (Federalist No. 68), “Talents for low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity, may alone suffice to elevate a man to the first honors in a single State; but it will require other talents, and a different kind of merit, to establish him in the esteem and confidence of the whole Union, or of so considerable a portion of it as would be necessary to make him a successful candidate for the distinguished office of President of the United States.”

The Founders understood, even two centuries ago, Americans differ greatly from one region to another.  These divisions have only grown in the last 235 years.  The Pew Research Center’s Religious Landscape Survey showed blue states such as California and Colorado have a diametrically opposed view of abortion from Kentucky, West Virginia, and Alabama.  Earlier this year, the liberal Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) reported:

A 33% difference between Massachusetts and the most faithful states (Utah and Idaho) on pro-life protections for innocent, unborn children.

A 31% difference between the most secular state (Massachusetts) and the most faithful state (Mississippi) on support for same-sex “marriage.”

A 29% difference between the most radical state (Massachusetts) and the most faithful state (West Virginia) on religious business owners’ right to live out their faith in the workplace.

While the Electoral College gives these smaller, more conservative states a voice in selecting a president, the national popular vote would bury their voice beneath a torrent of city voters.  “Nine of our states have 50% of our people,” Maibach noted.  “Los Angeles County has more people than 41 of our states, and New York City has more people than 39 of our states.”

Increasingly, these blue states seek to impose their will on the rest of America by doing an end-run around the Constitution.  Since 2006, 17 states and the District of Columbia, controlling 209 of the 270 electoral votes necessary to win the presidency, have enacted the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPV).  The NPV states that, regardless of how state voters cast their ballots, the state will instruct its presidential electors to vote for whichever candidate won the national popular vote.

This is a problem for numerous reasons.  First, the U.S. government does not determine a national popular vote; each state calculates its popular vote total. NPV states would instruct electors to vote for the winner “I guess as tabulated by CNN or CBS or some other news organization,” said Maibach. Second, should the government come up with a way to calculate the national popular vote, every election could turn into the 2000 election — but instead recounts would multiply from one state to all 50, with all the penchant for mischief we have seen in recent elections.

The NPV would deny people the right to select their own rulers, which legal scholars say would render it unconstitutional.  In effect, it is a constitutional amendment without taking the form of a constitutional amendment.  Additionally, denying citizens the ability to select their own state’s electors would violate the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause, according to Peter Wallison of the American Enterprise Institute.  Thomas Jipping of the Heritage Foundation holds that the NPV violates the Constitution’s Compact Clause, regulating state compacts that would harm other states’ interests.

A national popular vote would violate the Presidential Elections Clause of Article II of the U.S. Constitution, writes Norman R. Williams of Willamette Law School, because “[n]ot only did the framers of the Constitution expressly reject the idea of a direct, popular election for President, but also not one state either in the wake of ratification or at any time thereafter has ever sought to appoint its presidential electors on the basis of votes cast outside the state,”  Still others believe a national popular vote runs afoul of the U.S. Constitution’s promise, “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government” (Article IV, Section 3).

The NPV also ignores the American System, in which some areas specialize in urban manufacturing (or did), while others cede vast areas of their state to agriculture.  Rural states naturally have lower population density in the national interest.  “Most of our farmers would feel like serfs if they if they were feeding the cities, but only the cities rule,” said Maibach.  “And the founders never wanted to have that.”

That NPV Compact overrides the rights of the people in another way.  For years, red parts of blue states have threatened to break off and form their own states.  Northern California, dating to the 1941 proclamation of the State of Jefferson.  Eastern Oregon counties want to join Greater Idaho.  But their moves toward independence would see their electoral votes wiped out by a national popular vote.

Not only would abolishing the Electoral College create mob rule, wipe out the voice of more conservative voters in rural areas, and put the government into the hands of big cities — it could see the U.S. government selected by illegal aliens.  The 1993 National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), or “Motor-Voter Law,” prevents states from erecting meaningful barriers to illegal immigrants and other ineligible residents from registering to vote.  Contrary to media “fact-checkers,” the threat of illegal immigrants voting is actual, not potential.  Thousands of non-citizens have cast ballots, in Virginia alone.

The real impetus behind the popular vote is not to secure the national will; it is to secure Democrats’ electoral prospects.  As with the efforts to pack the Supreme Court, the Left seeks to overturn the Electoral College, because left-wing candidates cannot win there.  As of January 1, 2024, Republicans controlled 28 state legislatures, or 59% of the states.  A total of 27 states have elected Republican governors.  Individual states reject liberal policies, while those who favor them live largely in coastal metropolises.

“It is important for small states to be heard,” insisted Maibach.  “Voices have to be heard from all parts of the country and not just from the big cities.”  And it is vital Americans respect the prophetic genius that went into the creation of the Electoral College.

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel