Many of you have asked how the North Dakota gubernatorial candidates stand on the issues important

to the family. In the past we have provided a Voter Guide for the fall general election, but have not
done so for the primary elections as will take place in June.
Specifically we understand the importance of this years gubernatorial primary race and in an effort to
provide information for youwe contacted the 2016 gubernatorial candidates. Candidates Nelson and
Riske did not respond. Paul Sorum returned a printed copy of our questionnaire. Candidates Stenehjem
and Burgum decided to honor us with a personal visit in lieu of returning a printed copy of the
questionnaire. As such they were relying on their ability to articulate their positions and my ability to
fully understand their views, in the course of a 45 minute conversation.
As I conducted the face to face visits with Stenehjem and Burgum I wanted their views, I wasnt there to
debate with them, I wasnt there to validate the consistency of their views with past statementsany
inconsistencies can easily be clarified by the candidates themselves.
Below you will see my summary of those visits and a comparison of how the candidates views align with
positions held by the North Dakota Family Alliance. Per your discretion you may use the information
below as you prepare to cast your ballot. And let be clear, the information is not to be considered an
endorsement of any candidate. In addition, let me encourage you to use this information to further
question the candidates on the issues important to the family.
So here goes, on the issue of life these were the questions posed.
Life
Would you have supported and signed legislation? Yes or No.
_____ 1) SB 2368 Pain Capableabortions prohibited when unborn feels pain, with exception to
save life of the mother
_____2) SB 2305 Physicians required to be licensed and have admitting privileges in the state to
perform abortions
_____ 3) HB 1305 prohibits abortions for the purpose of sex selection and/or genetic
abnormalities
_____ 4) HB 1456 prohibits abortions when a heartbeat can be detected (since declared
unconstitutional).
_____ yes
the mother?

_____ No

Are you opposed to all abortion, with the exception of saving the life of

_____ Yes
_____ No
Are you opposed to all abortions, but with exceptions for rape, incest,
or to save the life of the mother?

Stenehjem
Stenehjem would have signed Life bills 2368, the Pain Bill, SB 2305 Abortion Physicians licensure and
admitting privileges, HB 1305 preventing abortions based on sex selection and genetic abnormalities,
and HB 1456, prohibiting abortion when a detectable heart beat is present. Asked if he opposed all
abortions, with the exceptions for rape, incest, and/or to save the life of the motherStenehjem
responded yes.
Burgum
Burgum shared that he would have signed the Pain Capable Bill, the Physician Licensure and Admitting
Privileges bill, and the prohibition of Sex Selection and Genetic Abnormalities bill. He characterized his
overall position as feeling that every abortion is a tragedy and that the fewer the abortions the better,
and decreasing the number of unwanted pregnancies by any number of means including abstinence is
important.
Regarding the heartbeat bill, Burgum would not say whether he would have signed it or not, but had
strong reservations relating to legal precedent and costs. He shared in his words his concern of dealing
with two people here, a mother and the unborn baby, and raised the issue of viability of that unborn
baby.
When discussing the question dealing with opposing all abortion, with exceptions for rape, incest, or to
save the life of the motherI did not sense a clear cut answer, yes or noand I placed a ? mark next to
that question. *Since that interview the Burgum campaign believes it responded with a yes. They
certainly have the opportunity to make that position public, and acknowledge that position would
require supporting the heartbeat bill as well as overturning Roe v Wade, defunding Planned
Parenthoods budget going toward it performing 350,000 annual abortions.
Sorum
He supported all the life bills listed and shared his opposition to all abortion with the only exception
being to save the life of the mother.
NDFA Action Comparative Alignment
Paul Sorums responses are in direct alignment with NDFA.
In my view Mr. Stenehjems views are in closer alignment with the NDFA positions than Mr. Burgums.

Marriage
_____ Yes
_____ No
Do you support marriage between one man and one woman as defined
in our North Dakota Constitution?
_____ Yes
_____ No
Do you support the SCOTUS decision to redefine marriage enabling
same sex couples to legally marry in North Dakota.

_____ Yes
_____ No
configuration of marriage?

Do you agree the SCOTUS decision in reality opened the door to any

Stenehjem
Although Stenehjem does favor retaining North Dakota's definition of marriage in our Constitution,
when it comes to the Obergfell vs. Hodges decision, Stenehjem agreed the decision was not based on
the constitution, he sees little recourse available short of a Republican President and a Supreme Court
with the appetite to overturn the ruling, and although he accepts the decision as the law of the land,
would prefer that the matter had been left to the states respectively in accordance with the Tenth
Amendment to the US Constitution.
Burgum
In his view the Supreme Court decision legalizing same-sex couples marrying provided for equality and
as such he agreed with the decision, and consequently could not agree with existing ND constitutional
language defining marriage as between one man and one womanbecause it does not provide for
equality.
Sorum
Sorum supports existing ND constitution language defining marriage as between one man and one
woman, and does not support the SCOTUS decision to legalize same-sex marriage.
NDFA Action Comparative Alignment
Mr. Sorums responses were in direct alignment with NDFA.
Stenehjems views are somewhat in alignment with NDFAs views, Mr. Burgums response in not at all in
alignment with NDFA, and as such, Stenehjem is in closer alignment with NDFA than Burgum.
Privacy
_____ Yes
_____ No
Would you support and sign legislation protecting the privacy of public
school children by requiring students to use the school bathroom designated according to their gender
as recorded at birth?
Stenehjem
Of public school bathroom bills: Stenehjem said he did not favor a state approach to these decisions,
rather that he would prefer to work directly with local school boards to find a solution which provided
students who struggle with identity issues an option without compromising the safety, security, or
privacy of other students by placing them in a vulnerable position. He indicated that the rights of some
must not depend upon compromising the rights of others.
Burgum

Burgum would not support a legislative privacy law requiring public school students to use the school
bathroom or locker room designated according to their gender as recorded at birth. If such a bill was
passed by the legislature he thought he would veto it, believing it was a matter each individual school
should deal with, including providing accommodations.
Sorum
Paul Sorums response affirmed his support for the privacy measure designating public school bathroom
and locker room use according to their gender as recorded at birth.
NDFA Action Comparative Alignment
Mr. Sorum is in alignment with the NDFA position, recognizing the issue as one of safety and privacy.
Neither Stenehjem nor Burgum agreed with the NDFA position that this is an issue which needs to be
handled on the state level; Burgum went as far as to say he would veto such a bill.
In my view, Stenehjem in closer alignment with NDFA than Burgum.

Religious Freedom
_____ Yes
_____No
Would you support and sign legislation preventing infringement of First
Amendment rights of religious exercise and conscience relating to ones beliefs on marriage between
one man and one woman?
Stenehjem
In regard to Religious Liberty bills preventing infringement of First Amendment rights of religious
exercise and conscience relating to ones beliefs on marriage between one man and one woman,
Stenehjem said, "I don't know why we wouldn't want to protect individual rights to manage one's own
affairs in accordance with their deeply-held religious beliefs, nor do I understand why anyone would
want to force another individual to violate those beliefs by compelling them to perform service to
them". Stenehjem believes those who expect tolerance should be prepared to demonstrate tolerance
to others of differing perspectives.
Burgum
Burgum did not commit to supporting religious freedom legislation relating to protection from
government discrimination based on an individuals views on marriage as between one man and one
woman, based on their soundly held religious beliefs. He did encourage tolerance and respect to be
displayed by all, and that accommodations could solve many of the problems.
Sorum
Mr. Sorum responded in favor of legislation protecting First Amendment rights of religious exercise and
conscience.
NDFA Action Comparative Alignment

Mr. Sorums recorded written response was in alignment with NDFA.

Doug Burgum did not commit to supporting this needed First Amendment protective legislation. While
Stenehjem did not commit to supporting legislation, he left the door open to considering it, and as such
is in closer alignment with NDFAs position.
LGBT Special Rights
_____ Yes
_____ No
Would you support and sign SOGI legislation (2015-SB 2279) to grant
special protections based on perceived discrimination?
Stenehjem
SOGI Bills: Stenehjem cringed at the certain prospect of widespread litigation and liability guaranteed
by the potential passage of SOGI bills, such as have been introduced in recent legislative sessions. Along
the same lines, with regard to Religious Liberty bills preventing infringement of First Amendment rights
of religious exercise and conscience relating to ones beliefs on marriage between one man and one
woman, Stenehjem said, "I don't know why we wouldn't want to protect individual rights to manage
one's own affairs in accordance with their deeply-held religious beliefs, nor do I understand why anyone
would want to force another individual to violate those beliefs by compelling them to perform service to
them". Stenehjem believes those who expect tolerance should be prepared to demonstrate tolerance
to others of differing perspectives.
Burgum
Burgum shared his support for recent SOGI legislation, such as SB 2279 introduced during the 2015
session, which would have provided protections based on perceived gender identity discrimination.
Sorum
Mr. Sorums response indicated he would not support or sign SOGI legislation as SB 2279, introduced
during the 2015 session.
NDFA Action Comparative Alignment
Mr. Sorum is in alignment with the stated NDFA position. Mr. Burgum in not in alignment with the
NDFA stated position. Stenehjem is somewhat in alignment and as such is in closer alignment than Mr.
Burgum.
Overall Comparison
Overall based on the responses received and the interviews, Wayne Stenehjems responses are in closer
alignment with NDFA views than Doug Burgums, with Mr. Sorums responses in direct alignment with
NDFA.