OnTheIssuesLogo

Ryan Zinke on Abortion

 

 


Protect unborn victims

I believe in the value of life. I believe we must prepare our children for tomorrow with the family values of my grandparents. I believe in the value of life. I have fought for that value. I am the only candidate to carry a right to life bill, protecting unborn victims and ensuring that all life should be protected.
Source: 2014 Montana House campaign website, RyanZinke.com , Nov 4, 2014

Pro-life, but decision should not be made by government

Source: Montana Congressional 2008 Political Courage Test , Nov 1, 2008

No embryonic stem cell research; no emergency contraception

Q: Do you support state funding of stem cell research?

A: Yes.

Q: Do you support state funding of embryonic stem cell research?

A: No.

Q: Do you support allowing pharmacists who conscientiously object to emergency contraception to refuse to dispense it?

A: No.

Source: Montana Congressional 2008 Political Courage Test , Nov 1, 2008

Opposes abortion rights, according to Faith2Action.

Zinke opposes the F2A survey question on abortion rights

Faith2Action.org is "the nation's largest network of pro-family groups." They provide election resources for each state, including Voter Guides and Congressional Scorecards excerpted here. The F2A survey summarizes candidate stances on the following topic: 'Abortion: Do you generally support pro-choice or pro-life legislation?'

Source: Faith2Action Survey 14-F2A-Q1 on Jul 30, 2014

Opposes abortion rights, according to PVS rating.

Zinke opposes the PVS survey question on abortion rights

Project VoteSmart infers summary responses from campaign statements and news reports The PVS survey summarizes candidate stances on the following topic: 'Abortion: Do you generally support pro-choice or pro-life legislation?'

Source: Project VoteSmart Inferred Survey 14-PVS-q1 on Sep 30, 2014

No taxpayer funding of abortions via ObamaCare.

Zinke voted YEA No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act

Heritage Action Summary: The No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act (H.R.7) would establish a permanent, government-wide prohibition on federal taxpayer funding of abortion and health benefits plans that include coverage of abortion, as well as prevent federal tax dollars from being entangled in abortion coverage under ObamaCare.

ACLU recommendation to vote NO: (1/22/2015): We urge voting against H.R. 7. The legislation is broad and deeply troubling and the ACLU opposes it [because] H.R. 7 would make discriminatory restrictions that harm women's health permanent law. The bill singles out and excludes abortion from a host of programs that fulfill the government's obligation to provide health care to certain populations. Women who rely on the government for their health care do not have access to a health care service readily available to women of means and women with private insurance. The government should not discriminate in this way. It should not use its power of the purse to intrude on a woman's decision whether to carry to term or to terminate her pregnancy and selectively withhold benefits because she seeks to exercise her right of reproductive choice in a manner the government disfavors.

Cato Institute recommendation to vote YES: (11/10/2009): President Obama's approach to health care reform--forcing taxpayers to subsidize health insurance for tens of millions of Americans--cannot not change the status quo on abortion. Either those taxpayer dollars will fund abortions, or the restrictions necessary to prevent taxpayer funding will curtail access to private abortion coverage. There is no middle ground.

Thus both sides' fears are justified. Both sides of the abortion debate are learning why government should not subsidize health care.

Legislative outcome: Passed by the House 242-179-12; never came to a vote in the Senate.

Source: Supreme Court case 15-H0007 argued on Jan 22, 2015

Ban abortion after 20 weeks, except for maternal life.

Zinke voted YEA Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act

Heritage Action Summary: This legislation will protect unborn children by preventing abortions five months after fertilization, at which time scientific evidence suggests the child can feel pain.

ACLU recommendation to vote NO: (Letter to House of Representatives, 6/18/2013): The ACLU urges you to vote against the misleadingly-captioned "Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act," which would ban abortion care starting at 20 weeks of pregnancy. H.R. 1797 [2013 version of H.R.36 in 2015] is part of a wave of ever-more extreme legislation attempting to restrict a woman's right to make her own decision about whether or not to continue a pregnancy. We have seen state after state try to take these decisions away from women and their families; H.R. 1797 would do the same nationwide. We oppose H.R. 1797 because it interferes in a woman's most personal, private medical decisions. H.R. 1797 bans abortions necessary to protect a woman's health, no matter how severe the situation. H.R. 1797 would force a woman and her doctor to wait until her condition was terminal to finally act to protect her health, but by then it may be too late. This restriction is not only cruel, it is blatantly unconstitutional.

Cato Institute recommendation to vote YES: (2/2/2011): Pro-lifers herald a breakthrough law passed by the Nebraska legislature on Oct. 15, 2010: the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act prohibits abortion after 20 weeks gestation except when the mother has a condition which so "complicates her medical condition as to necessitate the abortion of her pregnancy to avert death or to avert serious risk of substantial or irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function." Versions of the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act are [being] introduced in a number of state legislatures.

Legislative outcome: Passed by the House 242-184-6; never came to a vote in the Senate.

Source: Supreme Court case 15-H0036 argued on May 13, 2015

Other governors on Abortion: Ryan Zinke on other issues:
MT Gubernatorial:
Brian Schweitzer
Steve Bullock
MT Senatorial:
Albert Olszewski
Amanda Curtis
Champ Edmunds
Corey Stapleton
John Bohlinger
John Walsh
Jon Tester
Matt Rosendale
Sam Rankin
Steve Daines

Gubernatorial Debates 2019:
KY:
Bevin(R)
vs.Goforth(R)
vs.Adkins(D)
vs.Beshear(D)
vs.Edelen(D)
LA:
Edwards(D)
vs.Abraham(R)
MS:
Bryant(R)
vs.Foster(R)
vs.Hood(D)
vs.Reeves(R)

Gubernatorial Debates 2018:
AK: Walker(i) vs.Dunleavy(D) vs.Chenault(R) vs.Huggins(R) vs.Begich(D) vs.Treadwell(D)
AL: Ivey(R) vs.Countryman(D) vs.Battle (R) vs.Maddox (R) vs.George(R) vs.Carrington(R)
AR: Hutchinson(R) vs.Henderson(D) vs.West(L)
AZ: Ducey(R) vs. Garcia (D) vs.Farley(D)
CA: Newsom(D) vs.Chiang(D) vs.Villaraigosa(D) vs.Eastin (D) vs.Hadley (R) vs.Cox (R) vs.Istvan (I) vs.Allen(R) vs.La Riva(P)
CO: Johnston(D) vs.Mitchell(R) vs.Kennedy (D) vs.Robinson (R) vs.Barlock(R) vs.Lynne(R) vs.Polis(D) vs.Coffman(R) vs.Brauchler(R,A.G.) vs.Stapleton(R)
CT: Malloy(D) vs.Lamont(D) vs.Stefanowski(R) vs.Srinivasan(R) vs.David Walker (R) vs.Lumaj(R) vs.Visconti(R) vs.Lauretti(R) vs.Drew(D)
FL: Gillum(D) vs.Graham(D) vs.Putnam(R) vs.Levine(D) vs.DeSantis(R)
GA: Kemp(R) vs.Cagle(R) vs.Hill(R) vs.Abrams(D) vs.Levine(D)
HI: Ige(D) vs.Hanabusa(D) vs.Tupola(R) vs.Carroll(R) vs.McDermott(R)
IA: Reynolds(R) vs.Leopold(D) vs.Boulton(D) vs.McGuire(D) vs.Glasson(D) vs.Hubbell(D) vs.Porter(L) vs.Battaglia(L)
ID: Little(R) vs.Fulcher(R) vs.Labrador(R) vs.Ahlquist(R) vs.Minton(D) vs.Jordan(D)
IL: Rauner(R) vs.Kennedy(D) vs.Pawar(D) vs.Daniel Biss (D) vs.Pritzker(D) vs.Ives(R)
KS: Brewer(D) vs.Hartman (R)

Gubernatorial Debates 2018:(continued) vs.Colyer(R) vs.Kobach(R) vs.Orman(I) vs.Kelly(D)
MA: Baker(R) &Polito(R,Lt.Gov.) vs.Warren (D) vs.Massie (R)
MD: Hogan(R) vs.Ross (D) vs.Cummings(D) vs.Madaleno(D) vs.Jealous(D) vs.Quinn(L) vs.Schlakman(G)
ME: Mayhew(R) vs.Mills(D) vs.Boyle(D) vs.Thibodeau(R) vs.Moody(D) vs.Capron(I) vs.Caron(I)
MI: Whitmer(R) vs.El-Sayed(D) vs.Walz (D) vs.Schuette(R) vs.Calley(R) vs.Tatar(L)
MN: vs.Smith(D) vs.Coleman(D) vs.Murphy(D) vs.Otto(D) vs.Liebling (DFL) vs.Walz (DFL) vs.Dean (R) vs.Pawlenty(R) vs.Johnson(R) vs.Swanson(D)
MO: Greitens(R) vs.Parson(R)
NE: Ricketts(R) vs.Krist(D)
NH: Sununu(R) vs.Jarvis(L) vs.Marchand (D) vs.Kelly (D)
NM: Lujan-Grisham(D) vs.Pearce(R) vs.Cervantes(D) vs.Apodaca(D) vs.Jarvis(L)
NV: Fisher (R) vs.Sisolak(D) vs.Laxalt(R) vs.Schwartz(R)
NY: Cuomo(D) vs.Nixon(D) vs.Hawkins(G) vs.Molinaro(R)
OH: DeWine(R) vs.Husted(R,Lt.Gov.) vs.Kucinich(D) vs.Sutton(D,Lt.Gov) vs.Taylor(R) vs.Renacci (R) vs.Pillich (D) vs.Schiavoni(D) vs.Whaley(D) vs.Cordray(D)
OK: Stitt(R) vs.Cornett(R) vs.Edmondson(D) vs.Richardson(R) vs.Johnson(D) vs.Powell(L) vs.Maldonado(L)
OR: Brown(D) vs.Inman(D) vs.Buehler(R)
PA: Wolf(D) vs.Fetterman(D,Lt.Gov.) vs.Wagner(R) vs.Barletta(R) vs.Krawchuk(L)
RI: Raimondo(D) vs.Brown(D) vs.Fung(R) vs.Morgan(R)
SC: McMaster(R) vs.McGill(R) vs.Pope(R) vs.Templeton(R) vs.Smith(D) vs.Warren(D) vs.Bryant(R)
SD: Noem(R) vs.Jackley(R) vs.Sutton(D)
TN: Green(R) vs.Dean(D) vs.Black(R) vs.Lee(R)
TX: Abbott(R) vs.Glass(L) vs.White(D) vs.Valdez(D)
VT: Scott(R) vs.Moody(R) vs.Hallquist(D) vs.Stern(D)
WI: Walker(R) vs.Harlow(D) vs.Vinehout(D) vs.Evers(D) vs.Roys(D) vs.Anderson(L)
WY: Throne(D) vs.Dahlin(R) vs.Gordon(R) vs.Rammell(R)
Abortion
Budget/Economy
Civil Rights
Corporations
Crime
Drugs
Education
Energy/Oil
Environment
Families/Children
Foreign Policy
Free Trade
Govt. Reform
Gun Control
Health Care
Homeland Security
Immigration
Infrastructure/Technology
Jobs
Local Issues
Principles/Values
Social Security
Tax Reform
War/Iraq/Mideast
Welfare/Poverty

 
Search for...





Page last updated: Mar 11, 2019