As longtime readers know, as the publisher, I generally don’t write posts rebutting what other bloggers on OC Political write (and there’s no pre-approval process for our writers), as each writer’s opinion is their own, but last night’s blog post accusing Supervisorial Candidate Don Wagner of not being pro-life based on his record in the State Assembly is beyond the pale.
During his Assembly tenure, Wagner had a 100% on the legislative scorecards of both the California Pro-Life Council and the Life Priority Network, scoring identically to then-Assemblywoman/now-Senate Republican Leader Shannon Grove (R-Bakersfield) and to the right of even then-Assemblyman Travis Allen (R-Huntington Beach), for example.
I’m going to quote last night’s blog post and then note the reality below it.
“AB777 [Actually, this was AB775] – Required Pro Life medical clinics and Pregnancy Resource centers to promote and provide referrals to Abortion providers. (This legislation was so reprehensible that the Supreme Court struck it down last year, Nifla V. Becerra)”
Wagner so vigorously fought AB 775 (Chiu and Burke, 2015) that the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) of California took a clip of Wagner in committee and put it on YouTube under the title “Autumn Burke responds to anti-choice legislator at AB 775 hearing” and there was an article in the national liberal web site Jezebel that referred to him as “anti-abortion California Assembly member Donald P. Wagner” and quotes the video.
“AB154 – Nurse Practitioners, Midwives and Physicians Assistants can perform abortions. The purpose of this is obvious, to employ more professional who will perform abortions because less doctors are willing to participate in the procedure which make it difficult for the abortion cartel to expand their business.”
Wagner fought vigorously against AB 154 (Atkins, 2013) as well, such that NARAL California again took a clip of Wagner in committee and put it on YouTube, this time under the title “California Legislator Wants to Know Where the Underserved Women Are” and there was an article in MSNBC that attacked Wagner for his fight against this bill.
“AB980 – Cloaked as a building codes revision, this law makes it easier for buildings to be converted into surgical abortion facilities by reducing the standards for plumbing and patient treatment rooms. Because abortion is a surgical procedure that produces medical waste (i.e. dead babies) and because it potentially involves a life threatening complications, there should be safety, health considerations and ability to transport a patient or for emergency personnel to obtain access to a patient. These parameters however, can become expensive for a clinic to bring a facility up to those standards. The way the California legislature responded the the Planned Parenthood sponsored bill, was the lower, rather than raise, those standards for abortion clinics.”
Wagner voted against AB 980 (Pan, 2013) FOUR times in the Assembly.
“SB128 [SB128 failed but was reintroduced as ABx2-15] Assisted Suicide – this appears to have survived it’s court battle. It was passed in a “special session” in 2015 that was supposed to be dealing with budgetary issues only, this euthanasia law was pushed forward anyways. It passed, was signed by the governor, and faced legal challenges shortly after. The law seems to have survived the court process, as of 2018.”
Wagner was the only opponent of ABx2-15 (Eggman, 2015) who was quoted by the article on the bill in the San Francisco Chronicle that was headlined “Assembly passes assisted-dying bill after emotional debate”
On another note, last night’s blog post stated, “No one seems concerned or bothered by the fact that he vacates the seat he just ran for and will leave his city in a special election lurch, but yay for fiscal responsibility.” Well, that’s not the case: Irvine City ordinances specifically say that the Mayor Pro Tem becomes Mayor if the latter seat is vacated (and then the City Council appoints a person to fill the subsequent vacancy on the Council).
Finally, the premise of last night’s blog post was that the writer received “a forwarded email yesterday from someone who called herself, Dr. Something-or-other, Ph.D.” who provided a “representation that [Wagner] is the only ‘Pro Life’ Third District candidate is not only untrue, because there are two other ‘Pro Life’ Republicans in the race…” It is rather unseemly to launch an attack on a candidate based on receiving a forwarded email originally penned by some random emailer. I’m a resident of the Third District, and I’ve not seen a single mailer, social media posting, article, or press release from Wagner (nor from any independent expenditure) claiming that Wagner is the only pro-life candidate. Indeed, until last night’s blog post, I had not seen a single mention of abortion from any candidate literature or independent expenditure, nor was there any mention of abortion at the Third District candidate forum.