Ohio Right to Life PAC: Planned Parenthood’s Endorsement of Kulewicz Raises Serious Concerns Ohio needs an attorney general willing to hold the abortion industry accountable COLUMBUS, Ohio — Ohio Right to Life Political Action Committee is speaking out against Democratic attorney general candidate John Kulewicz’s close relationship with Planned Parenthood, whose Ohio advocacy organization has endorsed his candidacy. “Planned Parenthood’s endorsement tells Ohioans something important about John Kulewicz,” said Carrie Snyder, executive director of Ohio Right to Life. “He has been a friend and legal defender of the organization, and now its political advocacy arm wants him to become Ohio’s chief legal officer. What happens when Planned Parenthood’s interests conflict with protecting children and enforcing the law?” Ohio Right to Life PAC’s concern extends beyond Planned Parenthood’s role as the largest abortion industry in Ohio. “Parents should be involved when their minor daughter is facing a pregnancy and a decision with lifelong consequences,” Snyder said. “Planned Parenthood has fought laws supporting that involvement. We need an attorney general who will defend lawful protections for children and respect parents’ responsibility to care for them.” Kulewicz’s relationship with Planned Parenthood includes representing its Southwest Ohio affiliate in Roe v. Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region. In that case, parents alleged that the organization failed to comply with parental involvement requirements and failed to report suspected sexual abuse involving their 14-year-old daughter. The 2009 Ohio Supreme Court ruling blocked the family’s access to information that would have helped them establish whether the failure to report their daughter’s abuse was part of a larger pattern of keeping parents and law enforcement in the dark. Mr. Kulewicz’s work helped Planned Parenthood limit a family’s efforts to obtain evidence and pursue accountability. Now, their pro-abortion advocacy arm is endorsing him for an office that requires independent judgment and a willingness to enforce the law against powerful interests. Ohioans deserve clear answers about whether Kulewicz would enforce parental involvement requirements and mandatory child-abuse reporting laws against Planned Parenthood, regardless of its political support. “Planned Parenthood clearly believes John Kulewicz is the right choice for its priorities: opposing parental involvement, opposing basic safety standards for abortion centers, and pushing for tax dollars to pay for abortion,” said Snyder. “He's the wrong choice for Ohio families. Our attorney general must be willing to hold the abortion industry accountable, protect vulnerable children, and defend the laws that safeguard them.”

Three Years After Issue 1, Ohio Is Seeing What “Abortion Access” Actually Means The Urban Institute just published a review of Ohio’s abortion amendment called “Ohio Is Expanding Abortion Access Even as Implementation Proves Uneven.” And they are right—abortion access is expanding in Ohio. But our question is this: Do Ohioans understand what that actually means for our state? Three years have passed, but the meaning and consequences of the vote to add the “right” to abortion to our constitution are still being worked out in courtrooms, hospitals, doctors’ offices, and abortion clinics across our state. The Urban Institute’s report is just a small sample and not a representative survey of Ohioans, as they recognize. They simply collected the opinions and experiences of 22 policymakers, abortion providers, and advocates, and then gathered two focus groups of 15 women. The report is useful, though, because it describes what abortionists and abortion advocates themselves are saying about what this amendment has done. Among the changes they celebrate are the elimination of Ohio's 24-hour waiting period, routine ultrasound and in-person counseling requirements. One provider interviewed for the report explained that eliminating these requirements freed appointment slots and meant doctors could perform more abortions. So, to restate that plainly: eliminating time, counseling and ultrasounds freed appointment slots and increased the number of abortions providers could perform. We constantly hear that abortion should be “between a woman and her doctor.” Yet here, fewer and faster encounters with patients and greater clinic throughput are described as progress. Does that sound like a trusted doctor-patient relationship or more like an assembly line? Ohio’s Department of Health statistics show that this broader expansion of abortion access is having measurable consequences: abortions increased by 15% in 2025, reaching a shocking 25,135 babies aborted for the year. Even more significantly, ODH said the increase was primarily attributable to telehealth abortion prescriptions provided to Ohio residents. Nearly six out of 10 Ohio abortions involved mifepristone, the chemical that blocks progesterone, a hormone needed for pregnancy to continue. The Urban Institute report portrays the expansion of chemical abortion as an improvement and recommends still more telehealth abortion access, particularly for women living in rural and Appalachian communities. Women in rural Ohio need access to OB/GYNs. They need prenatal care and hospitals where they can safely deliver their babies. They need mental-health services, affordable child care, and transportation. Women facing unexpected pregnancies need to know that carrying their child will not mean facing the future alone. If abortion pills become dramatically easier to obtain while maternity care disappears from rural communities, how can we call that progress for women? In the real world, more chemical abortion means fewer doctors involved at all, since that is no longer a requirement. The lack of ultrasound means ectopic pregnancies are likely not caught, which could prove fatal to a woman who is suffering bleeding and pain but thinks that is a normal part of the process. It means women who are beyond a time frame where drugs can be used for an abortion may never know it, making complications or an abortion “failure” (ie, the baby lives) more likely. It means women with diabetes or other health complications have no monitoring or follow up care. It means women are left at home, often alone, with pain and potential complications they may not be equipped to manage. We don’t think that’s something to celebrate. The report also flagged Catholic-affiliated health systems as a continuing obstacle to abortion access because those institutions restrict abortion and sometimes abortion referral or coordination. The report stops short of calling for Catholic hospitals to be forced to perform abortions. But its framing reveals a tension Ohio eventually must address: whose freedom counts? Does a barely-restricted “right” to abortion create an obligation for doctors, nurses, pharmacists, and Catholic institutions to provide or refer for these services? “Reproductive freedom” cannot come to mean eliminating everyone else's freedom of conscience. Finally, the report identifies cost as another remaining “barrier.” Interviewees note that most private insurance plans and Medicaid do not cover abortion, requiring many women to pay out of pocket. We should pay attention to where that argument leads next, because the road from “this is my constitutional right” to “government must help pay for me to exercise it” may not be as long as we think. Ohio Right to Life will continue defending unborn children, but our response cannot simply be opposition. We also have an obligation to build the alternative. We want an Ohio where no woman believes abortion is necessary because she cannot afford another child. Where foster families receive support. Where child care is within reach. Where new mothers struggling with mental health can find help. Where pregnancy centers and community organizations can walk alongside women in difficult circumstances. And where women receive real choices and real hope. As much as we wish the 2023 vote had gone another way, we know that a tremendous number of Ohioans who may have voted in favor of it are still firmly opposed to abortion-on-demand, taxpayer funding of abortion, and wiping out safety standards that help protect women from an abortion industry that cares more about their bottom line than actually helping women. After three years, we are only beginning to see the repercussions of this vote. More abortion is not true care for the women, children, and families of Ohio. Ohio can do better.

The pro-abortion-for-any-reason team knows their champion.... Billionaire Abortion Doula Gives Thousands to Influence This Senate Race dailysignal.com/2026/08/24/s…

📷 Ohio Right to Life PAC Announces 2026 General Election Candidate Recommendations The Ohio Right to Life Political Action Committee today announced the candidates it is supporting in the 2026 general election. These candidates have demonstrated a commitment to protecting innocent human life, supporting women and families, and advancing public policies that recognize the dignity of every human being. “Ohio voters deserve to know which candidates can be trusted to stand for life,” said Michael Gonidakis, Chair of Ohio Right to Life PAC. “These candidates have shown that they understand the importance of protecting vulnerable human life and supporting practical policies that help women, children, and families thrive.” The PAC supports the following candidates: United States Senate • Jon Husted United States House of Representatives • District 2: David Taylor • District 4: Jim Jordan • District 5: Bob Latta • District 6: Michael Rulli • District 8: Warren Davidson • District 9: Derek Merrin • District 10: Mike Turner • District 12: Troy Balderson • District 13: Carey Coleman • District 14: Dave Joyce • District 15: Mike Carey Statewide Offices • Governor: Vivek Ramaswamy • Attorney General: Keith Faber • Secretary of State: Robert Sprague • State Auditor: Frank LaRose • State Supreme Court: Colleen O’Donnell and Dan Hawkins Ohio Senate • District 1: Craig Riedel • District 3: Michele Reynolds • District 5: Phil Plummer • District 7: Zac Haines • District 9: Linda Matthews • District 17: Shane Wilken • District 19: Ryan Rivers • District 27: Steve Demetriou • District 29: Jane Timken • District 31: Al Landis • District 33: Al Cutrona Ohio House • District 9: Bruce Euans • District 12: Brian Stewart • District 15: Dan Conway • District 16: Sophia Tjotjos • District 17: Mike Dovilla • District 26: Tom Brinkman • District 29: Cindy Abrams • District 30: Michael Odioso • District 31: Mike Kahoe • District 34: Craig Shubert • District 35: Vik Sandhu • District 39: Mark Campbell • District 41: Ian Chamberlin • District 44: Edward Schimmel • District 45: Jennifer Gross • District 46: Thomas Hall • District 47: Diane Mullins • District 48: Christina Hagan • District 49: Jim Thomas • District 50: Matthew Kishman • District 51: Jodi Salvo • District 54: Kellie Deeter • District 55: Michelle Teska • District 56: Adam Mathews • District 59: Tex Fischer • District 60: Brian Lorenz • District 61: Shawn Stevens • District 62: Jean Schmidt • District 63: Adam Bird • District 64: Nick Santucci • District 65: David Thomas • District 66: Sean Hutson • District 67: Melanie Miller • District 68: Thad Claggett • District 69: Kevin Miller • District 70: Brian Lampton • District 71: Levi Dean • District 74: Bernard Willis • District 75: Haraz Ghanbari • District 76: Marilyn John • District 77: Meredith Craig • District 78: Matt Huffman • District 79: Monica Blasdel • District 80: Johnathan Newman • District 81: Patti Rockey • District 82: Roy Klopfenstein • District 83: Ty Mathews • District 84: Angie King • District 85: Tim Barhorst • District 86: Ben Weber • District 87: Jeff McClain • District 88: Gary Click • District 90: Justin Pizzulli • District 91: Bob Peterson • District 92: Mark Johnson • District 94: Kevin Ritter • District 96: Ron Ferguson • District 97: Adam Holmes • District 98: Mark Hiner • District 99: Sarah Fowler Arthur The Ohio Right to Life PAC evaluates candidates based on their records, stated positions, responses to candidate surveys, and willingness to support policies that protect human life. Ohio Right to Life encourages pro-life Ohioans to make their voices heard in the November 3, 2026, general election.

Who Is Really the Extremist? In an obvious case of the pot calling the kettle black, Amy Acton is touting her endorsement by Reproductive Freedom for All (formerly known as NARAL Pro-Choice America, formerly known as National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League, formerly known as National Abortion Rights Action League, and originally known as National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws), and labeling her opponent as “extreme.” I’ll concede that most Americans’ views are somewhere in the middle on the abortion issue, but I think we need to examine what exactly “extreme” means in this discussion. A consistent pro-life position acknowledges that while some pregnancies occur in very difficult or traumatic circumstances, ultimately there is a second human life involved that must be considered. People may land in a variety of places in these situations, but we know that a life is in the balance. We also know these times are rare when compared to the vast majority of abortions that take place. The Reproductive Freedom for All position supports any and every reason for an abortion decision. In their view, the mother (wait, no—person) who is pregnant needs no justification for abortion and no limit is reasonable. You didn’t want a boy? Sex-selection abortion is fine. You broke up with your partner and want to punish him? Abortion is fine. You have a TikTok channel and you want to go viral by showing how little you care about the baby within? Abortion is fine. Reproductive Freedom for All opposes restrictions based on sex selection, opposes legislation protecting infants born alive after attempted abortions, and backs a right to abortion throughout pregnancy, with no limits. It supports forcing taxpayers to subsidize abortion through Medicaid and federal abortion funds—even when millions of Americans have profound moral objections. By accepting this endorsement while refusing to identify any abortion limit she supports, Amy Acton has an obligation to tell Ohioans where—if anywhere—she disagrees with the organization. Does a baby who survives an abortion deserve life-saving treatment? Does a child with a minor birth defect, or potentially Down Syndrome, deserve to be protected? Is it legitimate to say no to a third trimester abortion? Should taxpayer dollars be used to pay for abortions? Voters want to know. Amy Acton wants to talk about how extreme Vivek Ramaswamy is by holding a pro-life view, while accepting the endorsement of a group that is clearly in the minority on its pro-abortion advocacy. It’s interesting she’s not actually talking about that position though: her quote in the press release says, “As governor, I will protect reproductive freedom so that every Ohioan has access to the reproductive healthcare they need, from contraception to IVF.” Could someone please tell her that contraception and IVF are not even the discussion? Acton’s press release attacks Ramaswamy’s endorsement by Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America Candidate Fund, noting that they oppose “late term abortion.” Yes, actually. A massive proportion of Americans and more specifically, Ohioans, oppose late term abortion. I first thought the “late term abortion” part was a typo. But as I pointed out in a previous post, the decisions of Amy Acton’s Department of Health allowed late term abortion specialist Martin Haskell to continue operating in Dayton, despite his struggle to maintain basic safety standards required by the State of Ohio. Upon further reflection, I think that’s exactly what she meant. I’m pretty sure if it boils down to how each candidate feels about late term abortion, that Vivek is going to come out ahead in November – and that’s exactly how it should be. If Amy Acton wants to make abortion extremism an issue in this campaign, Ohioans deserve a direct answer: Is there any point in pregnancy, or any reason for abortion, at which she believes the law should protect the life of the child? --Carrie Snyder, Executive Director

Last week, news reports covered the latest lawsuit between Planned Parenthood and the Ohio Department of Health: apparently, the abortion giant isn’t happy about a delay in transferring the license of the notorious Women’s Med Dayton to their ownership. Dr. Martin Haskell, the abortion center’s outgoing owner, is widely credited for popularizing the gruesome partial-birth abortion method when he described it and encouraged its use to other abortionists in 1992. At that time, he wrote that he had performed over 700 of these procedures and that the ideal time to extract the baby feet first and suction the contents of the skull before completing the abortion is at 20-26 weeks. It’s hard to imagine a more callous disregard for human life. Planned Parenthood’s lawsuit may ultimately be decided in court, and I won't speculate on how that legal dispute might end. What struck me most, though, isn't the procedural question over a clinic license. It’s what the story reveals about the broader direction of abortion in Ohio. First, Planned Parenthood’s carefully crafted rhetoric, happily repeated by the media, frames abortion as "care." Words shape how we think about an issue. An abortion facility exists for the purpose of ending the lives of unborn children. This is certainly not care, and calling abortion "care" does not change the nature of what is happening when women end up at their facility. Ohioans deserve language that is clear and honest, especially on an issue with such profound moral and human consequences. Second, Planned Parenthood's own statements undermine the argument that this debate is simply about meeting the needs of Ohio women. According to its CEO, only about half of the abortion patients they now serve are from Ohio, with the organization increasingly providing abortions for women traveling from other states. During the 2023 constitutional amendment campaign, voters were repeatedly told that abortion policy was about “healthcare” for Ohio’s women. Now Planned Parenthood openly acknowledges that Ohio has become a destination for abortion. It’s taken less than 3 years. Finally, Planned Parenthood’s assertion that this delay is just a political stunt overlooks the fact that the Department of Health has a legitimate job to do. There are safety standards for every ambulatory surgical facility. In fact, Planned Parenthood has previously been cited by the Ohio Department of Health for failing to comply with state regulations at its Cincinnati facility. Furthermore, the Dayton facility had previously lost its license due to lack of a transfer agreement with a local hospital. A transfer agreement is critical for continuity of care if there is a medical emergency during or after an abortion procedure. The Dayton facility tried to regain the license and was denied by the Court of Appeals and the Ohio Supreme Court. It was not until a new corporate entity applied for a new variance and license that Amy Acton's Department of Health approved the application, allowing the facility to continue operating after years of litigation had upheld the revocation of its previous license. That administrative decision became one of the most consequential abortion-related actions taken during her tenure as Director of Health. The outcome was devastating for the unborn children and women of southwest Ohio. Haskell’s retirement marks the end of a long and deeply troubling chapter in Ohio's history—and honestly, it’s welcome news for that corner of the state. But Planned Parenthood is fighting to ensure that the abortion business continues uninterrupted under new ownership. Whatever the courts ultimately decide about this license, Ohioans should look beyond the legal filings and ask bigger questions. Are we really okay with becoming a regional hub for abortion tourism? Do we want a penny of our tax dollars going to Planned Parenthood? Do we want to elect the person at the helm of DOH when they reversed course and allowed Haskell to continue snuffing out the lives of babies in Dayton? Ohioans will have the opportunity to evaluate Amy Acton's entire record as they consider their choice for governor. Her decision to approve the variance and new license that allowed Martin Haskell's abortion business to continue operating is part of that record, and voters deserve to understand it. --Carrie Snyder, Executive Director

The expiration of a temporary federal policy does not mean Ohio taxpayers should be forced to subsidize abortion providers. Planned Parenthood wants this conversation framed as “access to health care,” but Ohio women have many options for real health care through Medicaid providers, community health centers, pregnancy centers, hospitals, and local physicians. The question before Ohio is simple: should taxpayer dollars go to organizations that perform abortions, or should those dollars be directed to providers that serve women and families without taking innocent human life? Ohio should choose life, accountability, and better care for women. We are grateful to legislators who are looking for a way to protect Ohio taxpayers from being forced to fund abortion providers, and we will continue advocating for policies that direct public dollars away from abortion and toward life-affirming care.

Today marks four years since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. That decision was a true and historic victory. For nearly 50 years, Roe distorted our laws, silenced the people, and denied protection to millions of unborn children. Its fall mattered deeply. But in Ohio, we cannot pretend the story ended there. Since Dobbs, our state has taken a heartbreaking step backward by placing abortion into our Constitution. That reality should not make us despair. It should remind us why this movement has always required more than one court case, one election, or one victory. The pro-life mission remains the same: to change laws, change hearts, serve women, protect children, and build a culture where life is cherished. Dobbs was not the finish line. It was a turning point. And we are not done.

Alexis won her local High School Oratory Contest with Mercer County Right to Life, then went on to represent Ohio at the National Right to Life Convention, placing 4th overall. Great job, Alexis!

This courageous woman is speaking out. She and the baby she carried deserve justice. dailywire.com/news/my-ex-bou…

It was a privilege to be part of the Wayne-Holmes Right to Life (Ohio) Townhall on Abortion Pill Reversal! Bekah Hilty of Pregnancy Care Center of Wayne County, State Rep. Meredith Craig, Pastor Walter Moss, and Ohio Right to Life Executive Director Carrie Snyder each discussed aspects of abortion pill reversal and the need to increase public awareness about this process. The primary abortion pill, mifepristone, stops progesterone in a woman's body, cutting off nutrition to the baby. If a woman takes the first pill and regrets it--which is common--she can seek out help from abortionpillreversal.com which will connect her to medical support to determine if there is still a window of time to help. The reversal process only involves restoring progesterone to her body and is not dangerous to her health. Studies estimate that if reversal starts in time, over 60% of babies can be saved.