The religious right funding and the slick but untruthful advertisements of the anti-abortion campaign, known as Yes for Life tell an even bigger story.

 
They show how much the right wing has invested in overturning women's reproductive freedom and that South Dakota is only the starting point.  The vast outpouring of religious right and church funds, combined with campaign-lie advertising in the Willie Horton and Swift Boat mold, is the future we will experience if Roe v. Wade is overturned.

South Dakota, and the country, should wake up.

They would, too, if it were not for a state media that is either in league with the religious right or so compliant as to be just plain wimpy.  It is not at all clear that voters will have accurate information in their hands before the election..

To step back for a moment, the ballot measure is Referred Law 6.  If passed, it would place a total ban on all abortions in all circumstances except to save imminent death of the pregnant woman.  The law also gives a right to life to a pre-zygote, defining the beginning of life as a sperm and egg union, and granting it constitutional rights under state law.  The ban was introduced by Rep. Hunt last winter and signed by the governor in March.  Vote Yes on Life is the campaign to support this ban, headed by Leslee Unruh, executive director of the SD Campaign for Healthy Families is the lead group opposing the ban.

Even as James Dobson's Focus on the Family, Janet Folger's Faith2Action, Alan Keyes. and Rich Scarborough see flyer on right for Mount Rushmore religious right rally, Nov. 4) and American Life League's Rock for Life stump the state for the ban on abortion to be inscribed into law, the theocratic bent of the ban has not been discussed in the local or national media (Talk2Action is the exception).  What it means for the breakdown between the separation of church and state is completely overlooked.

But a review of those contributing to the Vote Yes for Life campaign gives a pretty good indication of who wants this law, and the religious right and religiously-based groups are deeply involved in pushing this governmental interference into women's lives.

From Women's eNews under the sub-heading "Religious Groups Send Funds Too":

The campaign report by Yes for Life also indicates the extent to which it is fueled by religious advocacy groups and religious organizations, which provided an additional half million dollars of its funding.

Among the donors are the religious advocacy groups American Family Association in Tupelo, Miss., and Focus on the Family in Colorado Springs, Colo., which gave $150,000 and $60,000, respectively. The Knights of Columbus, a Catholic fraternal association, donated $80,750, of which $70,000 was wired from an unreported location.

Operation Rescue in Kansas, a group known for aggressive anti-abortion protests, delivered $2,500. The Rev. Jerry Falwell of the Moral Majority in Lynchburg, Va., issued an appeal to followers to donate to the Yes for Life campaign, calling it a "historic battle" that "will affect the future of America." Faith 2 Action in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., a Christian group that features a picture of a fetus and a South Dakota ad on its Web site, delivered $18,505. Marlin Maddoux's National Center for Freedom and Renewal in Dallas, Texas, which describes itself as a "Christ-centered advocacy" organization on its Web site, donated $15,000.

Individual churches or church organizations, including the Catholic Chancery Office; in Sioux Falls, S.D., and churches in Oklahoma, Washington and Missouri, were responsible for $153,000 in donations. The Catholic organization, American Life League, from Stafford, Va., provided $6,000 in stickers and claimed in the Conservative Voice online that it "has had people working in South Dakota for most of this year."

Right-to-life groups, generally Catholic, sent $16,700 in donations and the Baptist Seminary in Sioux Falls offered apartments for "out-of-state volunteers," the Yes for Life campaign reported in its campaign filing. Crisis pregnancy centers--which provide services to pregnant women to persuade them not to have abortions--made donations of $2,300.

The full list of anti-abortion donors also shows that $20,000 came from the right-wing Christian group Citizens for Community Values in Cincinnati. The ultra-right religious group in Washington, D.C., Concerned Women for America, also put $500 in the ban bucket and founder Beverly LaHaye made radio ads for local stations, urging South Dakotans to vote for the ban. "All of America, and even the world, is watching," she said. Not even counted in my calculations of religious-right donors are individuals who identify themselves as employees of similar groups, including of Coral Ridge Ministries, Christian bookstores, churches -- even a priest from out-of-state.

The other scandal in anti-abortion campaign financing is also incredibly outrageous. Reporting shows three separate donations from a company called Promising Future, Inc.  The company was incorporated as a one-man corporation in mid-September by Roger Hunt, the self-same initiator of the abortion ban.  The incorporation papers declare that the purpose of the corporation is to invest in real estate and to promote ballot measures.  Despite reporting in South Dakota intended to inform voters of who is behind the funding of ballot measures, Promising Future managed to give the largest donation to the campaign on either side -- three quarters of a million dollars in three separate donations of $250,000 -- without disclosing the source of the money. In an interview, Secretary of State Chris Nelson, a Republican, said that corporations who donate to ballot committees are required to file a report and declare the source of the funding. Failure to do so is a crime, he said.

The state's largest newspaper, the Argus Leader , on Saturday (Nov. 4) called upon Hunt to reveal the name of the donor and stop skirting campaign finance laws.

Political donations simply must be public. It's a matter of openness, honesty and democracy. Voters have a right to know who's trying to influence them.

State Rep. Roger Hunt is frustrating that basic tenet of our electoral system, hiding behind what he admits is a sham corporation....

Hunt must follow the law and disclose who donated the money. It's a matter of openness. Democracy. And honesty.

Voters have a right to know who's trying to influence them. Hunt has no right to keep that secret.

But the newspapers have ducked like crazy in offering any other scrutiny of the anti-abortion campaign, including deception, lies, disdain for the facts, and intimidation and harassment of those who oppose the abortion ban -- ordinary citizens, campaign workers and especially pro-choice pastors, organized into a new group, Pastors for Moral Choices.  One pastor said:  "The pro-Amendment 6 forces took over our clergy Association meeting. They distributed signs ... (which are) posted on at least one church lawn. I refused to take to these signs, and listened respectfully to what was being said.  A pastor spoke, basically stating that the pro-choice people are the devil's disciples. I was very disturbed when I left the meeting." Other pastors report incendiary emails and calls, telling them that they are unfit to serve in their capacities.

Even though pro-choice forces in South Dakota have a several-point advantage in the polls, it is not at all clear that they can overcome the vast involvement of churches, organized and mobilized to use the government to force women to follow their beliefs. No watchdogs are insisting upon accountability.  Nor is it clear that pro-choice forces can match the funds delivered by the religious right from around the country, and from hidden financing such as that provided to Hunt.

Not only South Dakotans, but the nation will suffer if these tactics, simultaneously overbearing and underhanded, are successful in snookering a vote to support an abortion ban that will secure and encourage religious right control.