Dear Pro-Life Friends:

 

Thank you once again for your support of the efforts of the Bucks County pro-life movement.

 

On December 17, 2025, Rep. Kathleen Tomlinson from Bensalem, voted for H.B.1957, a Bill which would create a "right to abortion" in the Pa. Constitution.  This Bill passed the Pa. House 102-101.

 

In response, the Bucks County Pro-Life Coalition, and other supportive organizations, commenced conducting periodic Public Witnesses at her District Office in Bensalem.  These Witnesses have continued most First Fridays since then, with the most recent occurring on June 5, 2026.

 

On June 18, 2026, Laura Gumprecht, the President of the Bucks County Pro-Life Coalition, Ed Haskell, a pro-life activist from Bensalem and the Pro-Life Coordinator for St. Ephrem Parish in Bensalem, and I, met with Rep. Tomlinson in her District Office for approximately one hour.  As a result of this meeting, we are suspending these Public Witnesses until further notice.

 

Summary

 

Rep. Tomlinson stated that she voted for this Bill because

 

1. She realized that the Pa. Senate would not pass this Bill

 

2. She feared that voting against this Bill would harm her chances of re-election in the November 3, 2026 General Election.

 

She did commit that if this or a similar Bill has a realistic chance of passing the Pa. Senate, she would vote against it regardless of the impact of such a vote on her re-election chance.

 

Analysis

 

I soon address what I believe are the spiritual and temporal flaws in her reasoning.  First, I introspectively provide my analysis of the deficiencies of our movement and the Church that are again exposed by the position of this legislator.

 

1. This position exemplifies the adage, "Citizens get the legislators they deserve."  Many of our fellow citizens, when voting, place political loyalties and/or self-interest above principles and/or policies.  Thus, we should not be surprised when such legislators elevate winning elections above all other considerations, including, in this case, the legalized killing of children in the womb.

 

2. Pro-abortion legislators continue to demonstrate more zeal and commitment to their position than many legislators who vote pro-life.  Such pro-abortion legislators do not falter, even when the legislation that they support is widely opposed by public opinion.

 

3. Our local and Southeast Pa. pro-life movement, post Dobbs (the June 24, 2022 U.S. Supreme Court decision reversing Roe v. Wade), has not yet succeeded in generating significant support for efforts in our State Capital, such as in the Pa. General Assembly and the now annual Pa. March For Life on a September Monday in Harrisburg.

 

4. The 102-101 passage of this "right to abortion" Bill primarily occurred because 59 of 66 Pa. House Members from the five County Southeast Pa. area voted for this Bill.  Many of these Pa. House Members represent areas (e.g., Northeast Philadelphia) with relatively large Catholic populations.

 

One generic candle and a transition to a report on and analysis of Rep. Tomlinson's position is that our modestly attended Public Witnesses have bothered her.

 

Rep. Tomlinson is aware of and accepts some relevant facts.

 

She recognizes the scientific reality regarding the beginning of human life and that abortion destroys a developing life.  However, if she were making the law, she would only protect children after their first trimester of life.

 

She recognizes that current law allows the killing of children in the womb until 24 weeks gestation.  So, the failure to pass H.B.1957 does not "threaten" legal abortion in Pa.

 

She claims that her District is "82% pro-choice" from a "Republican Poll" without citing the question or other relevant facts.  Yet, she admitted that most of her constituents believe "24 weeks is too long."

 

She believes that the Democrat Pa. House leadership ran H.B.1957 to help defeat her in November 2026 by forcing her to choose between offending her "82% pro-choice constituents" or her "Republican base."

 

In fact, the Pa. House Democrat leadership were reluctant to run this Bill, which was one of seven pro-abortion bills passed by pro-abortion zealots in the Pa. House Judiciary Committee in November 2025, because they feared that such a vote might harm the Democrat Members chances of re-election.  However, these leaders ran this Bill to appease these zealots.

 

In my view, this "82% pro-choice" allegation is highly dubious.  Her predecessor in this District (Rep. Gene DeGirolamo) and her dad, Pa. Sen. Tommy Tomlinson, have won numerous elections in Bensalem, and both had consistent pro-life records.  With a mixed position/record, she has won four elections since March 2020.  In November 2024, she won her District by 11.5%.  She proudly informed us that her margin of victory exceeded President Donald Trump's 11% margin of victory in this District.

 

I believe that Rep. Kathleen Tomlinson votes amorally on pro-life/pro-abortion legislation.

 

She claims that she needs to "vote her District."  Yet, she deflected my challenge to her as to why we could rely on her pledge to vote against H.B.1957 if it had a chance to pass in the Pa. Senate.

 

The only angry response from her came when I challenged her premise of "I need to vote my District," by "Would you vote for Jim Crow laws if your District favored them?"

 

She is not above distorting or even lying to defend her amoral position if she believes that she can get away with them before a certain audience.

 

For example, she claimed that a fellow Bucks County Republican House Member, Todd Polinchock, lost his re-election in November 2022 because of his July 2022 vote to "ban abortion."

 

This Bill did no such thing.  This Bill was a proposed Constitutional Amendment stating that there was no "right to abortion" in the Pa. Constitution.  Other leaders and legislators in the Pa. pro-life movement and I advocated for this Bill because of the realistic danger that the Pa. Supreme Court would invent such a right.

 

When I confronted Rep. Tomlinson with this fact, she altered her argument that "the public perceived that this Amendment would be a ban on abortion."

 

When I reminded her that during the 2021-22 term, she cast several pro-life votes (including a ban of killing children in the womb who have a diagnosis of Down Syndrome), she responded, "That was before Dobbs."

 

I believe, in an effort to demonstrate that some of her votes are based on principle and not necessarily on polling, she reminded us that she has voted to protect female sports from male participation.  In fact, she stated that this issue was "a hill she was willing to die on."  As of now, that claim is shallow because current polling in Pa. indicates that 75-80% of Pennsylvanians oppose allowing males to participate in female sports.

 

Near the end of our meeting, we addressed the topic of in vitro fertilization (IVF).  She challenged us that, if we were "pro-life," why would we not welcome a process that creates (actually, manufactures) children for infertile couples.  In response, Laura and I explained the human embryo-destroying nature of IVF, as well as the medical, psychological, financial, and spiritual harms of IVF.  Rep. Tomlinson responded that she understood these arguments but did not fully accept them.

 

However, she then revealed that in her attempts to become pregnant (At 38-years-old, her first child, Vivian Kathleen, is due to be born in early August 2026.) she avoided IVF and engaged in natural, healthy, life-affirming infertility treatments.

 

Historical Review and Analysis

 

In the 1970s and 1980s, the Pa. General Assembly established itself as the leading pro-life state legislative body in the nation.  Pro-life legislation received support from an almost equal number of Republican and Democrat legislators.  The reality also meant that there were significant numbers of pro-abortion Republican legislators.

 

However, in the ensuing years, at both the Pa. and national levels, the Republicans became more pro-life, and the Democrats became more pro-abortion.  This transformation significantly benefited pro-life legislative efforts when the Republicans had the Majority.

 

However, post Dobbs and the loss of some State referenda, the pro-life commitment of some Republican legislators has diminished.  They (e.g., Rep. Tomlinson) believe that because of the zealously pro-abortion position of Democrat legislators, pro-life citizens "have nowhere to go" other than supporting squishy Republicans.

 

Sad to say, but that analysis currently has much accuracy.

 

Proposed Near-Term Actions

 

1. Contact with public officials (by written correspondence and/or public protest) remains highly effective.  Again, I am attaching a flyer that requests and enables such correspondence with Rep. Tomlinson and/or Sen. Frank Farry.  This flyer also explains why enacting H.B.1957 would likely result in a 10,000 annual increase in abortions in Pa.

 

2. Because of the importance of keeping a Republican Majority in the Pa. Senate, I propose that pro-life citizens in Bucks County's 6th Pa. Senate District (see map below) support incumbent Sen. Frank Farry, even though he has a mixed record.

 

3. The long-term solution to legislators, such as Rep. Tomlinson, is to challenge them in the Republican Primary with a consistently pro-life candidate.  For now, if I lived in Pa.'s 18th House District, I would vote for Rep. Tomlinson's re-election in November 2026 because of the much worse position of her Democrat opponent and the value of a Republican Majority in the Pa. House.

 

Conclusion

 

Thank you for reading this correspondence.  Please take the recommended actions and I welcome your input.

 

Sincerely,

 

Michael J. McMonagle
President
215-393-3610