§ 1 Key language
“supported pain-capable unborn child protection legislation”
Pro-life coalition, 2011
§ 2 Scorecard
Composite 6 of 12 — explicit incrementalist endorsement. Each dimension is scored 0 (none), 1 (implied) or 2 (explicit); the rationale column is the editor's one-line reason for every non-zero score.
| Dimension | Score | Meaning at this score | Rationale |
|---|---|---|---|
| D1 Exceptions | 2 | Explicitly supports rape, incest or health exceptions | The bill contains rape/incest/life exceptions. |
| D2 Immunity for the mother fault line | 0 | None | — |
| D3 Incrementalism | 2 | Explicitly endorses a regulatory or gestational bill instead of abolition | Gestational-limit regulation rather than abolition. |
| D4 Opposition to abolition or equal-protection bills fault line | 0 | None | — |
| D5 Framing | 0 | None | — |
| D6 Secular framing | 2 | Wholly secular, legal, fiscal, medical or political argument | Secular fetal-pain framing. |
§ 3 Signatories
Signature block not recovered. A letter record exists but the signature block was not located; no signature rows.
§ 4 Sources
Only press coverage located.
resources.cmda.orghttps://resources.cmda.org/
Secondary coverage only
§ 5 Notes
Attachment not recovered.
Editorial note
The rubric records distance from the standard published by Abolitionists Rising, not a moral verdict; every organization scored here regards itself as pro-life. This record is verified from secondary coverage only: the primary text has not yet been located, and its scores rest on language quoted in press coverage. Scores are judgment calls applied consistently by the published rubric; a disagreement is a disagreement with the rubric's conventions, not with an individual cell.