Election Night Results and the Pro-Life "Increment".

Although the overall election results November 7 were very disappointing, polling clearly demonstrates that many pro-life candidates who otherwise would have been defeated prevailed because of their position on the abortion issue. As has been the case in election after election since 1973, election eve and post-election polling showed that the majority of those who voted on the basis of abortion voted for pro-life candidates. This difference between those who vote for pro-life candidate because of the abortion issue and those who for pro-abortion candidates is known as the pro-life "increment."

Unfortunately, this pro-life increment was not enough to save other pro-life Republicans who were swept away by the larger anti-Republican tide.

National Right to Life PAC was active and highly visible. As a testimony to the hard work and reach of NRL PAC, a nationwide poll of 800 voters taken by The Polling Company found that fully 22% of voters said that they recalled hearing advertising or receiving information from National Right to Life PAC.

The Polling Company also found that 36% of the voters said abortion affected their vote. Of those, 23% said they voted for pro-life candidates while only 13% said they voted for pro-abortion candidates. This yielded a significant advantage for pro-life candidates in contest after contest.

The 23% who said they voted for pro-life candidates voted overwhelmingly for Republicans, according to the poll, while a large majority of the 13% who voted for pro-abortion candidates voted for Democrats, reflecting the fact that most pro-life candidates were Republicans.

However, the 60% who said abortion did not affect their vote voted heavily for Democrats. So, too, did the remaining 4% who were undecided on the question. In many races, this was enough to negate the pro-life increment.

The Polling Company found that 3.4% said abortion was the most important issue affecting their vote, and 70% of these said they voted for pro-life candidates. This yielded a 2% advantage for pro-life candidates among these voters.