1). “Abortion, Every Day (5.1.24): Arizona Senate votes to repeal 1864 ban”, May 01, 2024, Jessica Valenti, Abortion, Every Day, at < https://jessica.substack.com/
2). “The Six-Week Abortion Ban in Florida Is Only the Beginning: The history of these bans suggests they’re far from the anti-abortion movement’s endgame”, May 01, 2024, Mary Ziegler, Slate, at < https://slate.com/news-and-
3). “Florida’s Abortion Ban Should Be Our Breaking Point: The Sunshine State’s six-week abortion ban takes effect today, eliminating the final bastion of reproductive rights in the South”, May 01, 2024, Cecile Richards, Daily Beast, at < https://www.thedailybeast.com/
4). “Abortion-rights groups have never faced a state like Florida: Voters in states across the political spectrum have backed abortion rights since the fall of Roe. But Florida’s November referendum will be tougher”, May 01, 2024, Politico, at < https://www.politico.com/news/
5). “Missouri lawmakers break new ground to stop constitutional amendments — and abortion: Missouri’s proposal combines two elements states have attempted to use to make it harder for voters to pass constitutional amendments, such as one to loosen the state’s abortion restrictions”, Mar 23, 2024, Meg Cunningham, The Beacon, at < https://kcbeacon.org/stories/
6). “Missouri House sends initiative petition bill back to Senate with ‘ballot candy’ reinstated: Provisions beyond the core of the bill were removed by the Senate in a deal between Democrats and Republicans. Thursday’s House vote could cause more gridlock in the session’s final weeks”, Apr 25, 2024, Anna Spoerre, Missouri Independent, at < https://missouriindependent.
7). “Anti-abortion groups say more aggressive approach necessary to stop Missouri amendment: Missouri could be the first test of a more aggressive strategy to keep abortion off the ballot and out of the state constitution, with organizations shifting from trying to dissuade people from signing petitions to encouraging them to withdraw their name if they have signed”, May 2, 2024, Anna Spoerre, Missouri Independent, at < https://missouriindependent.
~~ recommended by dmorista ~~
Introduction by dmorista : We are being shown the spectacle of police departments around the country storming Pro-Palestinian encampments, accounts that have not deigned to point out that these police forces stationed snipers and used armored cars to confront Pro-Palestinian encampments on various university campuses. Also arguments swirl around about “Outside Agitators” in some of those encampments; and yesterday the latest U.S. Congress' toady, bill trying to enforce support for Zionism and the Israel Lobby's version of Anti-Semitism on the American People, was passed by the U.S. House. Meanwhile, the implacable campaign to move American women and families access to Reproductive Healthcare and Abortion back to the Middle Ages continues.
The State of Florida's 6-week ban on abortion came into effect yesterday. Item 1)., “Abortion, Every Day (5.1.24): ….”, Item 2)., “The Six-Week Abortion Ban in Florida ….”, and Item 3). “Florida’s Abortion Ban Should ….”, all discuss the serious and dangerous ramifications of the now near-total ban on Abortions in Florida. Florida had been the last place in the Southeast south of North Carolina where abortion was still available. Of course in a state governed by the fascist Governor Ron DeSantis, and his ultra-right wing accomplises in the heavily Gerrymandered Florida Legislature, the future of access to reproductive healthcare and abortion was clearly coming to an end, at least for now. Of course the fact that reactionary politicians, like DeSantis, have become aware that the popularity of abortion bans is far lower than they had believed just a couple of years ago, or less. DeSantis signed the earlier 15-week ban into law at an ostentatious prime-time ceremony at some far-right school, the 6-week ban he signed in a subdued and secretive wee hours event only attended by his fawning staff and a few allies. In Item 2). Abortion and Reproductive Healthcare expert and U.C. Davis law professor Mary Ziegler points out that:
“Six-week bans block a sizable share of abortions—as of 2021, nearly 60 percent of procedures in Florida occured after that point in pregnancy. But the history of six-week bans like Florida’s suggests that this will not be the stopping point for the anti-abortion movement. Six-week bans were designed to be a stopgap in the fight for fetal personhood. And fetal personhood, which establishes that the word “person” in a law or even the Constitution applies to fetuses and embryos, could have implications not only for abortion but also for IVF and perhaps common contraceptives. That may be just what is coming next in Florida. (Emphasis added)
“Janet Folger Porter, a veteran anti-abortion advocate, had the idea for a six-week ban in the late 1980s. ….
“She argued that six-week bans would be a perfect step toward personhood because they could dramatize claims about 'the injustice and inhumanity of abortion,' and even rolled an ultrasound machine into legislative hearings to permit 'unborn children to “testify.” '
“For a while, Porter’s idea did not catch fire. Then Brett Kavanaugh was confirmed to the Supreme Court, and states across the South began passing heartbeat bills.”
In Item 4)., “Abortion-rights groups ….”, the authors discuss the difficulties of passing an abortion rights amendment in a state with a large population and expensive media markets and notes that:
“Early polling shows a chunk of voters who would be needed to get the referendum over the finish line haven’t decided what to do, meaning both sides have time to shape public opinion. Recent polling also shows Floridians don’t see abortion as being as salient to their vote as issues like the economy or immigration.
“Florida Republicans, who have a huge fundraising advantage over Democrats, have promised to counter-message aggressively to get Floridians to vote 'no' in November. They’ve called the referendum 'extreme' and Republican Party of Florida Chair Evan Power said on April 1 the party will 'fight to inform voters on the dangers of this amendment,' but this week declined to discuss specific strategy so far ahead of the election.”
The other key state with an attempt to put an initiative on the Nov 4th, 2024 election ballot to Protect access to Abortion is Missouri. Currently signatures are being collected for the initiative, and they must be turned in by May 5th (this coming Sunday). Of course the various elements and leaders of Missouri's Republican dominated state government did everything they could to try to stop the proposed measure and did manage to delay the beginning of signature collection by several months. Otherwise the needed number of signatures, plus a healthy excess to guard against challenges, would have been submitted weeks ago.
But that is not anywhere near the end of the attempts by the Right-Wing and the Forced-Birth operatives to try to defeat this initiative, before it even gets to a vote by the people. Missouri's Republican and Forced-Birth leaders watched the defeats in Ohio and Arkansas of measures, voted on by the general population that, defeated attempts to increase the needed margin of victory in State Consititutional Amendments to more than 50% + 1. Their general response is discussed in Item 5)., “Missouri lawmakers break new ground ….”. That article points out that:
“Now lawmakers are taking what experts call a hybrid approach: demanding that a proposal win not just on a statewide vote, but in at least half of the state’s congressional districts.
“ 'Missouri’s proposal is interesting,' said Sara Carter, an attorney who focuses on state legislatures and ballot measures at the Brennan Center for Justice. 'It takes pieces from two major trends we’re seeing: adding geographic distribution requirements and then increasing the approval threshold for a measure to be enacted.'
“Under legislation being considered by the General Assembly, passing a constitutional amendment in Missouri would require a statewide majority — plus majority support in five of Missouri’s eight congressional districts. (Emphasis added)
“The change, if approved by voters in August, would make it significantly more challenging for voters to have a say via one of the few forms of direct democracy available to them. That would also dramatically cut the chances that Missourians could vote in abortion rights in November.”
Of course the hurdle that the far-right must clear is to pass an amendment by a majority vote of the general populace, that would mandate the “majority support in five of Missouri’s eight congressional districts”, and to do so in the upcoming election in August. To obscure the actual intent of the proposed State Consitutional Amendment its proponents the Republicans included two irrelevant issues that are posted first, and written to be as long as possible. In Item 6)., “Missouri House sends initiative ….”, the author notes that: “The (Missouri) House added language to the bill that would ask Missourians if they want to change the constitution to define legal voters as citizens of the United States as well as whether they want to prohibit foreign entities from sponsoring initiative petitions.” Of course, non-citizens were prohibited from voting in Missouri's elections in 1924, and it is already illegal for foreign entities to sponsor initiative petitions. But the purpose of this “Ballot Candy” is to trick enough low-information Missouri voters will vote yes because they think that the “Ballot Candy” is the actual amendment, which it is not.
The Forced-Birth operations are trying some different tactics, since what they did in Ohio in particular did not work. Item 7)., “Anti-abortion groups say more aggressive approach necessary ….”, points out that Forced-Birth operatives:
“....enlisted elected officials to publicly decry the ballot measure. They set up a hotline to report the location of signature gatherers so volunteers could show up and hand out 'Decline to Sign' materials. And they stoked unsubstantiated fears about the initiative petition process, such as the notion that it could result in widespread identity theft. (Emphasis added)
“And with a Sunday deadline to turn in signatures for proposed initiative petitions, their message and strategy is transforming from 'decline to sign' to 'withdraw your signature,' with fliers distributed Wednesday hoping to reach those 'who regret signing – or who mistakenly signed.'
After signatures are turned in, anti-abortion advocates plan to pour over them to make sure anyone who opts out isn’t counted. (Emphasis added)
The day-to-day struggles should never be forgotten just because some more photogenic events are taking place. This map below, from KFF shows just, abortion related electoral struggles, they are vitally important but are not the whole story by any means.
Map: Abortion-Related State Constitutional Amendment Measures that Are Confirmed or Under Consideration for the 2024 Ballot, as of May 1, 2024
(Source: “Ballot Tracker: Status of Abortion-Related State Constitutional Amendment Measures for the 2024 Election”, May 1, 2024, KFF, at < https://www.kff.org/womens-health-policy/dashboard/ballot-tracker-status-of-abortion- related-state-constitutional-amendment-measures/ >)
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Abortion, Every Day (5.1.24)
Arizona Senate votes to repeal 1864 ban
Click to skip ahead: We start off with the bad news, I’m sorry to say: Florida Ban in Effect. Language Watch has a new anti-abortion term to keep an eye on. In the States, Arizona’s Senate voted to repeal the 1864 ban. In Attacks on Democracy, anti-abortion groups are targeting voters with lies over text. Ballot Measure Updates has better news: South Dakota pro-choicers collected enough signatures to get abortion on the ballot. Finally, in 2024, VP Kamala Harris was in Florida railing against the 6-week ban, and more comments from Trump on abortion.
Florida Ban In Effect
It’s a very sad day for Florida, where a 6-week abortion ban went into effect today, impacting millions of people in the state and region. As you know, Florida providers have been seeing patients from all across the South, and this law will set off a domino effect causing chaos across the country. Even abortion funds and providers in pro-choice states thousands of miles away will be impacted.
Stephanie Loraine Piñeiro, executive director of Florida Access Network, tells The New York Times, “This is going to be the biggest change to abortion access since Dobbs.” And in the BBC, Amber Gavin of A Woman's Choice says, “There's nowhere that can absorb all of the patients that we see, it's just not possible.”
Right now, Florida clinics are trying to fit in as many patients as they can. They’re extending hours and doing ultrasounds earlier in pregnancy in order to ensure they don’t see women too late to get care. The director of one Florida clinic, for example, tells The Guardian that they rarely see patients before the law’s cut-off:
“Most people don’t know they’re pregnant until at least six weeks. We try to get people in as quickly as possible, but sometimes we’re one or three weeks booked out, so it’s rare that someone is in before they’re six weeks.”
As such, there is going to a huge effort in the state from patient navigators—those who help patients travel out-of-state for care.
There’s also well-justified fear over women’s health. Dr. Leah Roberts says, “We’re being told that we have to wait until the mother is septic to be able to intervene.” Then there are those being forced to carry doomed pregnancies to term because of the law’s language around what constitutes a “fatal” fetal abnormality. Roberts says women are “feeling the kicks for months after they’re being told that they’re never going to have a live birth.”
For a refresher on the details of the law—including its ridiculous ‘exceptions’— read my piece from earlier this week:
Florida Senate Democratic Leader Lauren Book says the state has “taken a dangerous, disastrous step back in time where women have fewer rights today than our grandmothers before us.” And Congressional Florida Democrats released a statement pointing out that the impact of the ban doesn’t just hurt patients, but “threatens doctors and nurses, and drives away residents from our great state.”
Voters in the state will have the chance to repeal the law by supporting Amendment 4 this November, a measure to protect abortion rights in the state constitution.
For a look at the broader context of what Florida’s ban means for the rest of the country and the November elections, read Abortion, Every Day’s explainer here.
Some other quick Florida hits: Mary Ziegler at Slate writes that the 6-week ban is just the beginning; Teen Vogue has an interview with Florida House Minority leader Fentrice Driskell; The Washington Post spoke with clinic in the final hours before the ban took effect; and the Wall Street Journal on what Florida can learn from Georgia’s abortion ban.
Finally, Cecile Richards reminds us that “what’s happening in Florida right now—and what will continue to happen in the coming weeks and months—is a reminder that this is not some theoretical debate over an abstract issue.”
To donate to a Florida abortion fund or get help, click here. To order abortion medication, look to the list of resources at the end of this email.
Language Watch
If you’re a regular reader you know that anti-abortion lawmakers and organizations will do anything they can to avoid using the word ‘ban’. Their policies are so unpopular, they can’t even say them aloud. In the wake of fury over Florida and Arizona, conservatives are being extra careful to use language they think will go over better with pissed off voters.
I’ve written a lot about terms like ‘consensus’ and ‘standard’ being used in place of ‘ban’, but another word that I’m seeing more than ever is ‘protections’. In USA Today, for example, Caitlin Connor of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America talked about Florida’s newly enacted ban by saying that the state joined “states across the country who have put this protection in place.”
By calling bans and restrictions ‘pro-life protections,’ Republicans and anti-abortion activists think that they can convince voters that their policies are being done in the best interest of women. They’re not just protecting fetuses, they say, but women who are supposedly harmed by abortion. Keep an eye on this one, we’re going to see it a lot in the lead up to November.
In the States
I think we could all use some good news: Arizona’s Senate is has voted to repeal the state’s 1864 abortion ban today, a law that sparked national backlash. The state House voted to repeal the ban last week, after three Republicans voted with Democrats in response to pressure from national Republican leaders (including Donald Trump). The legislation will now head to Gov. Katie Hobbs, who will sign the bill.
This means that state will revert back to having a 15-week ban—a law that could be reversed if Arizona voters come out to support a pro-choice ballot measure in November. But remember, Republicans in the state are planning on proposing a measure of their own in order to trick voters out of supporting the authentic abortion rights amendment.
In the meantime, anti-abortion activists are furious at the two Republicans who voted to repeal the ban, Sens. T.J. Shope and Shawnna Bolick. The New York Times reports that as Bolick cast her vote, anti-abortion activists yelled at her from the gallery: “Come on!” “This is a disgrace!” “One day you will face a just and holy God!” (Something interesting about Bolick: She’s married to one of the state Supreme Court justices who voted in favor of the 1864 law.)
Students for Life also held a protest; vice president of the group, Chanel Prunier, saying “If Republican leadership and members go along with this Democrat-led repeal, Arizona will become the first state led by Republicans to strip protections from already-protected preborn babies.” There’s that word ‘protections’ again!
Meanwhile, a judge gave North Carolina abortion rights advocates a partial victory yesterday, ruling against one of the state’s restrictions on abortion medication. U.S. District Judge Catherine Eagles says that the mandate that doctors must prescribe abortion medication in person—essentially a telehealth ban—goes against federal rules. Eagles allowed other restrictions on the pills, like a an in-person exam and waiting period, to remain.
Democratic Attorney General Josh Stein, who is running for governor and was a party to the suit, said he was pleased that women in rural areas of the state will be able to access care more easily. “Republican legislators enacted the law to control, not protect, women,” he said.
In disappointing news, Kansas legislators overrode Gov. Laura Kelly’s veto of a law that will require doctors to ask abortion patients invasive questions and report those answers to the state. Emily Wales, president of Planned Parenthood Great Plains, said the group is considering suing over the law. “This is about shame and stigma, it’s not about improving care, or tracking critical vital statistics,” she said.
Abortion, Every Day has been tracking the way that abortion reporting has become an increasingly important tactic to anti-choice groups, who are looking to scare women out of getting care and hoping to collect information that they can use to argue that abortion is unnecessary or unsafe. (Remember my investigation into the Texas abortion ‘complication’ reporting law that’s used to fabricate statistics on the supposed-danger of abortion?)
A statement from Kansas House leadership, however, called the fear around abortion data collection “unreasonable,” claiming that Republicans are just seeking “up-to-date and relevant information.”
Finally, Louisiana Republicans are pushing legislate to classify abortion medication as a controlled substance. Rolling Stone reports that legislators snuck the language in through a last-minute amendment, which would criminalize possession of abortion pills. From attorney Elizabeth Ling at If/When/How:
“It’s unknown how police or prosecutors might choose to use this law, or might choose to use information against people. The amendment may have an exception for the pregnant person, but there’s no exceptions for the people supporting a pregnant person.”
Women in anti-choice states often rely on abortion medication, which can be shipped from pro-choice states—so this kind of law is especially troubling.
Attacks on Democracy
I told you earlier this week that Missouri voters were getting texts from anti-abortion groups, warning them that pro-choice petitioners were trying to steal their personal data. The texts, which you can see here, say “protect yourself from fraud and theft” and “don’t share your personal data with strangers.”
It’s a shameless move from the state’s “Decline to Sign” campaign, one that joins a deluge of anti-abortion attacks on democracy. And it turns out this isn’t just happening in Missouri. Just minutes after I posted about the tactic on TikTok, a commenter let me know that they had received similar texts in Nevada, where abortion is also on the ballot.
Remember, these anti-choice campaigns aren’t just being run by organizations in the state—they’re supported by powerful national organizations like Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America. That’s how little faith they have in their message on abortion; they need to trick voters out of signing pro-choice petitions.
I’ll have more on this campaign soon; I’m looking into just how many states voters are seeing these messages in.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
The Six-Week Abortion Ban in Florida Is Only the Beginning
Florida has long been a destination state for abortion-seekers in a region defined by sweeping criminal bans. And, despite being under Republican control, Florida had long been a place with one of the highest abortion rates in the nation. Yet this week, a six-week ban signed into law by Gov. Ron DeSantis in April 2023 is set to go into effect. Florida’s law will cut off access for a large number of patients, many of whom will have to travel as far as North Carolina and Virginia, where clinics have already reported long waiting periods and struggles to meet demand.
Six-week bans block a sizable share of abortions—as of 2021, nearly 60 percent of procedures in Florida occured after that point in pregnancy. But the history of six-week bans like Florida’s suggests that this will not be the stopping point for the anti-abortion movement. Six-week bans were designed to be a stopgap in the fight for fetal personhood. And fetal personhood, which establishes that the word “person” in a law or even the Constitution applies to fetuses and embryos, could have implications not only for abortion but also for IVF and perhaps common contraceptives. That may be just what is coming next in Florida.Janet Folger Porter, a veteran anti-abortion advocate, had the idea for a six-week ban in the late 1980s. She was looking for a way to weaken the right to choose abortion, which the Supreme Court then protected until the point of fetal viability. Porter argued that fetal cardiac activity was just as objective a line to draw as viability—she and her allies often quipped that the heartbeat was the universal sign of life.
Porter also believed that a six-week ban could be a critical step toward establishing that the word “person” under the 14th Amendment applied the moment an egg was fertilized, and that liberal abortion laws—or state constitutional protections for reproductive liberty—denied fetal persons equal protection and due process of law. She argued that six-week bans would be a perfect step toward personhood because they could dramatize claims about “the injustice and inhumanity of abortion,” and even rolled an ultrasound machine into legislative hearings to permit “unborn children to ‘testify.’ ”
For a while, Porter’s idea did not catch fire. Then Brett Kavanaugh was confirmed to the Supreme Court, and states across the South began passing heartbeat bills. Some, like Florida’s, made performing or actively assisting abortions that violated the ban a felony. Others, like Texas’ S.B. 8, created a bounty scheme, allowing anyone to sue an abortion provider or anyone who “aided or abetted” them for at least $10,000. Six-week bans captured so much interest not because they struck anti-abortion leaders as the best ultimate policy goal but because Republican leaders wanted a way to undermine Roe that would have high odds of succeeding before the court’s reconstituted conservative supermajority. That, Porter promised, was just what a six-week ban could do.
Florida Republicans had desperately needed a way out of the abortion conflict. The state was solidly under Republican control, yet to the frustration of the anti-abortion movement, it had been slow to pass a sweeping ban. Florida had a smaller group of anti-abortion voters than many of its neighbors; as recently as 2012, voters had rejected an effort to undo a right to abortion then recognized by the state supreme court. The state still seems more pro-choice than many in the South. DeSantis could frame the ban as a reasonable compromise, complete with exceptions for rape and incest. And yet anyone in the anti-abortion movement would understand how stringent a six-week ban really was—and would understand such a ban as a step toward fetal personhood.
But there is no reason to think that six-week bans will be enough for Florida abortion opponents going forward. Roe is gone. State anti-abortion groups have already begun to push bans from the point of fertilization.
And letting each state set its own policy is not what the movement wants, either. The goal is a nationwide ban. In the short term, conservative advocacy groups led by the Heritage Foundation propose that the Comstock Act, a 19th-century obscenity law, is actually a de facto ban on all abortion. These advocates ignore decades of precedent to interpret language in the 1873 law referencing abortion to create a federal ban on mailing or receiving any information or items designed, adapted, or intended for abortion. Donald Trump, who has consistently refused to answer questions about whether his Department of Justice would treat Comstock as a ban, may well be planning to fulfill the expectations of anti-abortion leaders who have predicted he will transform Comstock into a nationwide abortion ban voters would never enact.
And even the Comstock Act is not intended to be the endpoint. Anti-abortion groups in Florida and elsewhere argue that liberal abortion laws like the ballot initiative voters will consider in November violate the state and federal Constitution by denying fetal rights.
There is no doubt that Florida’s six-week ban will be one of the most consequential to go into effect since the demise of a right to choose abortion in 2022. But Florida voters will not just be deciding whether they approve of the new reality on the ground. They will also have to decide whether to open the door to a campaign for much more sweeping fetal rights.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Florida’s Abortion Ban Should Be Our Breaking Point
The Sunshine State’s six-week abortion ban takes effect today, eliminating the final bastion of reproductive rights in the South.
For nearly two years after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, Florida was the last safe haven for people in need of abortions in the South. As of today, that’s no longer true.
It’s hard to adequately convey the devastation of a six-week abortion ban taking effect in one of the country’s most populous states.
Last year, one in three abortions in the South happened in Florida. Already this year, 1,300 people have traveled from other states to Florida to access abortion. As of today, if you’re more than six weeks pregnant and living in south Florida, the closest abortion clinic will be in Charlotte, North Carolina—a 14-hour drive away. Beyond 12 weeks and you’ll have to drive 17 hours to Virginia.
Erin Gloria Ryan
But it’s more than just math stopping people across the country in their tracks today.
It’s the reports of clinics being inundated with frantic patients at the beginning of this week, now forced to turn people away. It’s the sinking realization that the most personal health decisions are now in the hands of Gov. Ron DeSantis and the Florida Supreme Court. It’s the accounts of doctors like the one I met in Louisiana who described the helplessness of talking to patients who couldn’t afford to travel hundreds of miles, take time off from work, find childcare, and book a hotel room to access basic health care. It’s the knowledge that our daughters have lost a right that goes to the heart of their ability to determine their future.
It’s the panic, the fear, and the cruelty.
What’s happening in Florida right now—and what will continue to happen in the coming weeks and months—is a reminder that this is not some theoretical debate over an abstract issue.
Since Roe was overturned, Americans have been confronted with the very real consequences of abortion bans: child rape victims forced to give birth, miscarrying patients turned away from emergency rooms and told to return when they’re in sepsis, pregnant people forced to undergo unnecessary c-sections rather than receive abortions. In Texas, a young woman died because of the state’s abortion ban. In Alabama, IVF was put on hold after the state Supreme Court declared embryos to be “extrauterine children.”
The domino effect doesn’t stop there. Florida’s six-week abortion ban—like similar laws across the country—will create a drain on health care and education across the state. Again and again, we’ve seen that obstetricians are being driven out of regions hostile to reproductive health, and it’s easy to understand why—no doctor wants to live in a state where they can’t take care of their patients.
Amanda Yen
Abortion bans are making pregnancy care worse and threatening to exacerbate existing physician shortages, especially in rural areas. Not only that, surveys have found that medical students are less likely to apply for residency in states with abortion bans. And a recent poll found that abortion laws are overwhelmingly impacting high school students’ decisions about where to go to college, with 84 percent of students reporting that they don’t want to be without abortion access at school.
Laws like Florida’s don’t just affect people who need abortions—they shape people’s attitudes about whether they would ever consider making a home in these states.
As dire as the situation is for reproductive rights in this country, the truth is, it could get much worse.
This week, Donald Trump—who not only appointed the three justices necessary to overturn Roe v. Wade and opened the floodgates for what’s happening in Florida and beyond, but bragged about it—said he would support states tracking women’s pregnancies and prosecuting people for having abortions, and wouldn’t rule out a national abortion ban. The choice between this walking worst-case-scenario and Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, who are deeply committed to restoring reproductive freedom and rejecting attacks on abortion, is incredibly stark.
Here’s the good news (yes, there is good news): Thanks to all of the volunteers and organizers who gathered nearly a million signatures to put the issue on the ballot, Florida voters will have the chance to reject this abortion ban in November.
An overwhelming majority of Floridians (and a majority of Americans!) believe decisions about pregnancy are personal, which is why every time voters have had the chance to weigh in, abortion rights have won. To say the “Yes on 4” campaign—encouraging voters to support the ballot initiative protecting reproductive rights—has the potential to impact races up and down the ballot in Florida this fall is an understatement.
Josh Fiallo
In the meantime, if you live in Florida, you still have options for abortion care.
Abortion providers in-state will continue to provide care before six weeks. After six weeks, you may need to leave the state to get care, or visit PlanCPills.org to get abortion pills by mail. No matter how you’re receiving care, abortion funds are here to help pay for your abortion, transportation, and other logistics. If you’re not sure where to start, Charley is an abortion chatbot built to provide confidential, accurate, and personalized information about all of your options.
I’ve spent a lot of time in Texas and Louisiana since they banned abortion. Which means I can unfortunately say from experience that we have only just begun to see the suffering Florida’s six-week abortion ban will cause.
With each new headline and heartbreaking story, Americans have a choice: Are we going to accept this as our nightmarish new reality? Or are we going to channel our righteous fury and do something about it?
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Abortion-rights groups have never faced a state like Florida
President Joe Biden and Florida Democrats have made a lot of noise about trying to reverse the state’s six-week abortion ban, which went into effect on Wednesday.
But Florida presents a significant — and unusual — hurdle for a ballot referendum that could deal the pro-abortion-rights movement their first electoral loss since the fall of Roe v. Wade.
Abortion rights have been on a winning streak with voters ever since the Supreme Court overturned Roe. In both blue and red states, in every statewide referendum, the pro-abortion rights side has won. Florida, however, requires ballot measures to get 60 percent voter support to pass. Reproductive rights groups have hit that mark in liberal bastions of California and Vermont — and fallen short of that elsewhere, from swingy Michigan to red-leaning Ohio and Kansas.
“It won’t be easy,” state House Minority Leader Fentrice Driskell said of the threshold during a Biden campaign stop at the end of April. “We will need Floridians from across the political spectrum to speak up and we will need allies bringing attention to our fight here in Florida.”
The race to clear 60 percent for Amendment 4 — or, in the case of anti-abortion activists, to keep support under that mark — could be the most defining characteristic of the battle in Florida. That threshold, combined with the state’s strict six-week abortion ban that went into effect on Wednesday, could supercharge what will already be the most closely watched referendum into a fight that has the potential to become the most expensive abortion-rights ballot measure to date.
And Democrats widely view this vote as not only an important policy win, but as potentially their winning ticket politically in a state that has slipped away. Florida’s changing abortion landscape is jolting interest at the very top of the ticket with Biden making a stop here last week and Vice President Kamala Harris heading in Wednesday.
Yet anti-abortion advocates have mounds of evidence for betting that Florida could buck the trend and tip in their favor, even though presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, a Florida resident, is staying out of the state’s fight so far and has shown he thinks his party is vulnerable when it comes to strict restrictions.
Early polling shows a chunk of voters who would be needed to get the referendum over the finish line haven’t decided what to do, meaning both sides have time to shape public opinion. Recent polling also shows Floridians don’t see abortion as being as salient to their vote as issues like the economy or immigration.
Florida Republicans, who have a huge fundraising advantage over Democrats, have promised to counter-message aggressively to get Floridians to vote “no” in November. They’ve called the referendum “extreme” and Republican Party of Florida Chair Evan Power said on April 1 the party will “fight to inform voters on the dangers of this amendment,” but this week declined to discuss specific strategy so far ahead of the election.
If the referendum passes, abortion would be legal in Florida until viability, which is generally considered to be around 24 weeks into a pregnancy. Abortion would also be legal later in a pregnancy under undefined “health” circumstances.
Gov. Ron DeSantis, who won reelection by almost 20 points in 2022, has pledged to get involved in the opposition push, a commitment he made again during a stop in Tampa on Tuesday. He and other Republicans predict that Floridians will balk when they learn that the referendum gives broad leeway to health care providers to determine the circumstances under which abortions late in a pregnancy would be allowed.
Abortion-rights groups will also have to contend with Florida’s increasingly red tilt: the GOP has out-registered Democrats by about 900,000 active voters — a gap that has only grown in recent years.
Most abortion-rights advocates readily acknowledge they’ll need to get Republican and independent voters to support the amendment if they want it to pass, and Florida Democrats said they plan to get messaging out across generations, beginning with college campuses.
But many also say everything will change for people on Wednesday, when the law making abortion illegal after six weeks of pregnancy takes effect. The law has exceptions for life-threatening pregnancy complications and, within 15 weeks of pregnancy, in cases of rape, incest and human trafficking.
By November’s election, voters will have lived six months under the new restrictions. Because over 90 percent of abortions happen during the first 13 weeks of pregnancy, per federal health data, Florida’s previous 15-week limit that’s been in effect since July 2022 may not have registered with many residents. In contrast, many women don’t realize they’re pregnant at six weeks.
“Unfortunately, the stories are going to tell themselves,” Florida Democratic Party Chair Nikki Fried said in an interview. “You’re going to start hearing the heartbreaking stories coming out of Florida, of women that are going to have to make this ultimate decision.”
Leading the push to first get the referendum passed is Floridians Protecting Freedom, which began as a coalition of pro-abortion rights groups including Planned Parenthood and the ACLU of Florida.
It formed after DeSantis signed the six-week ban into law just over a year ago, and the group has since launched the “Yes on 4” campaign, which is led by Lauren Brenzel. In a phone interview, Brenzel said a “major media campaign” was in the works using print, TV and digital ads, though she didn’t specify what they’d say or how much the group would spend in a state that’s notoriously expensive to advertise in.
Fundraising for the amendment has picked up significantly since the high court ruling, with plenty of contributions coming from outside the state, Brenzel said. The group had raised $17.9 million by the end of March, according to state elections data, and it spent far less money than a cannabis legalization effort to get on the November ballot. And on Tuesday, an organization tied to Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, a Democrat, said it was kicking in $500,000 to the campaign.
“The reality is that we are the third-largest state in the nation, and [donors] know that we can’t deny that many people access to care,” Brenzel said. “What we’ve seen since our qualification is a real shift towards the importance of funding Florida’s ballot initiative effort for abortion access.”
As evidence of support, the campaign also points to thousands of volunteers that have come out to help — and how 150,000 Republican voters lent their signatures to get an abortion referendum on the ballot. Brenzel adds that the 60 percent voter threshold is not new for Florida, with the requirement approved by voters statewide in 2006.
“We always knew that we’re going to face the 60 percent hurdle, and for us we also knew that we had the electorate to do that,” Brenzel said. “The reality is that abortion bans are incredibly unpopular, and that Floridians don’t want their politicians involved in these medical decisions.”
On the other side of the debate, anti-abortion groups plan to hammer the language on Florida’s ballot, which stipulates that health care providers can use their judgment to evaluate when abortion is “necessary to protect the patient’s health” and when a fetus is viable. Some health care providers working in states without gestational limits have taken a broader view than others, though abortion-rights advocates point out many of the cases involve devastating, life-threatening medical diagnoses.
One group leading the anti-abortion messaging is the political action committee Florida Voters Against Extremism, which includes organizations such as the Liberty Counsel, Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America and the Florida Conference of Catholic Bishops. The group posted a website breaking down its interpretation of the ballot’s language and statewide grassroots director Sara Johnson told POLITICO that Florida Voters Against Extremism would raise the money required.
“Florida voters do not agree with extreme abortion laws in states like California and New York, yet if Amendment 4 passes, Florida’s abortion laws would be among the most liberal in America,” Johnson said.
The anti-abortion organization Students for Life, which was key to getting the Legislature to sign the six-week law, formally known as the Heartbeat Protection Act, will be protesting the vice president’s visit in Jacksonville on Wednesday. The national group, which has staff working and living in Florida, says the state is its No. 1 target and launched a billboard tour last week, said Kristan Hawkins, the group’s president.
There will be an “Almost Aborted” marketing campaign in key Florida neighborhoods featuring parents who’d considered abortion before changing course, she said. The organization has been recruiting students and going door to door to share referendum materials, and helping Florida Voters Against Extremism with materials, including in Spanish.
“We have a decent chance of defeating this thing despite being outspent — which will likely happen — because in Florida we have a GOP leadership in Gov. DeSantis who’s speaking boldly out against this nonsense,” she said.
The campaign to get the abortion referendum on the ballot already overcame several obstacles to win over critics who supported the initiative, but were worried it was too difficult to pass in Florida. One was high-profile Orlando lawyer and Democratic rainmaker John Morgan, who was also the architect of the state’s 2020 initiative to gradually increase Florida’s minimum wage to $15 and bankrolled millions toward the successful 2016 initiative in which voters legalized medical marijuana.
Morgan said in November that Floridians Protecting Freedom would struggle to raise campaign dollars, meet new regulatory controls and also win the favor of the conservative-leaning state Supreme Court. With those obstacles overcome, Morgan still predicts that November’s outcome would be “very close” and that a 60 percent passage would be considered a landslide result. But the six-week ban may also have struck a nerve with voters, he added.
“The draconian law seems ripe to be reversed,” Morgan wrote in an email. “People don’t like to be told what to do … especially about their bodies … and especially by men.”
Kimberly Leonard reported from Miami and Arek Sarkissian reported from Tallahassee, Florida.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Missouri lawmakers break new ground to stop constitutional amendments — and abortion
Editor’s note (March 25, 2023): This story has been corrected to reflect that the proposal would require a majority support from voters statewide, plus a majority vote in five of Missouri’s eight congressional districts.
While state lawmakers across the country stumbled when trying to make it harder for voters to amend state constitutions, Missouri lawmakers took notes.
In rhythm with a national trend, Republicans want to make it harder for voters to change the Missouri Constitution.
As in other states, the efforts to block voter-led initiative petitions spring from increasingly tense fights over abortion. And the abortion rights movement has proved formidable once the issue goes to voters.
Republicans in Missouri watched closely as voters in other states voted the proposals down — and shifted their tactics. In previous years, they have looked to raise the threshold for passage of constitutional amendments from the current simple majority to 55% or 60% support from voters.
Now lawmakers are taking what experts call a hybrid approach: demanding that a proposal win not just on a statewide vote, but in at least half of the state’s congressional districts.
“Missouri’s proposal is interesting,” said Sara Carter, an attorney who focuses on state legislatures and ballot measures at the Brennan Center for Justice. “It takes pieces from two major trends we’re seeing: adding geographic distribution requirements and then increasing the approval threshold for a measure to be enacted.”
Under legislation being considered by the General Assembly, passing a constitutional amendment in Missouri would require a statewide majority — plus majority support in five of Missouri’s eight congressional districts.
The change, if approved by voters in August, would make it significantly more challenging for voters to have a say via one of the few forms of direct democracy available to them. That would also dramatically cut the chances that Missourians could vote in abortion rights in November.
It’s one of the few paths left anti-abortion lawmakers see to win.
Republicans “really do see it as the best chance they have to derail any effort to weaken the abortion laws in the state,” said Peverill Squire, a University of Missouri political science professor.
Lawmakers across the country have looked to roll back access to one of few methods of direct democracy available to voters. In the last five years, in Republican-led states like Arizona, Arkansas and Ohio, lawmakers have asked voters to OK raising the threshold for passing voter-led ballot measures.
Similar to Missouri, Ohio’s attempt to raise the threshold was closely tied with a ballot measure to amend the state constitution to legalize abortions.
But a simple majority has been the precedent for passing a voter-led change to the state constitution.
“It’s pretty easy to make the argument that majority rule is sort of the norm that’s been in place here in Missouri for over a century,” Squire said.
Nearly half of states allow citizens to place a change in law on the ballot. Of those, 16 allow citizens to use the initiative petition process put a constitutional amendment on the ballot.
The ballot measure process, known as a voter-led initiative petition, has been used widely in Missouri to pass things voters like and lawmakers don’t. Both medical and recreational marijuana were passed that way. So was Medicaid expansion, raising the minimum wage and restrictions on campaign finance.
“The concern is that many of these efforts (to toughen the ballot measure process) don’t appear to be fueled by valid concerns that the process is insufficiently regulated,” Carter said. “Instead, they appear to be animated by disagreement with the policies that citizens are enacting.”
Missouri’s history with the initiative petition process
Missourians have increasingly turned to ballot measures to pass ideas that are popular among the public but that struggle to make it through the General Assembly.
In 2010, Missourians changed state law through the initiative petition process to regulate the state’s puppy mills. The next year, the legislature repealed that law and passed a watered-down version.
Since then, citizen lobbying efforts turned more toward petitions to amend the Missouri Constitution. It’s a more arduous, costlier process. But legislators can’t reverse it.
Still, the General Assembly has attempted to undercut what voters did.
When Missourians voted on a constitutional amendment expanding Medicaid in 2020, the measure passed with 53% support. Since then, lawmakers have tried to take tax dollars away from the program.
They’ve also introduced resolutions that would force Missourians to vote on yet another constitutional amendment that would give lawmakers the power to decide on expanded Medicaid eligibility every year.
“Republicans have been uncomfortable with the initiative process for a while, given that it has worked against their preferences,” Squire said. “The voters have been willing to overturn them on several major issues.”
Medicaid expansion is one example. Missouri lawmakers for years refused to take up the topic in the General Assembly after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled expansion under the Affordable Care Act was optional for states. As a result, voters used the initiative petition process to expand eligibility.
And abortion could be another place voters assert their will over that of their lawmakers. After the nation’s high court overturned Roe v. Wade and set abortion bans into motion across the country, groups have turned to ballot initiatives to restore access.
Constitutional amendment efforts are underway in at least 13 states to place a question on 2024 ballots to allow access to abortion.
“The reason (lawmakers) are seeing so much pushback in direct democracy is because they’re legislating to the right of where the state is,” said Craig Burnett, an associate professor of political science at Hofstra University. “That’s pretty typical in most Republican-dominated states right now.”
Petitions circulating in Missouri this year want to put two questions on the ballot: one to weaken the state’s abortion restrictions and one to legalize sports betting.
Polls show varying support for both. A February poll from St. Louis University and YouGov found that 44% of respondents support a ballot measure to enshrine abortion rights in the state constitution, allow the General Assembly to enact laws that regulate abortion access after “fetal viability,” and barring criminal penalties for any pregnancy outcome, including a miscarriage or stillbirth.
The poll found that 37% of Missourians opposed the effort, while 19% weren’t sure.
Legalized sports betting had 60% support, with 25% of respondents opposed and 14% unsure. The poll didn’t ask Missourians if they specifically supported an effort to legalize sports betting through the initiative process.
Lawmakers have debated sports gambling for years without legalization, so sports teams are now going straight to voters.
Inside Missouri’s proposal to make constitutional amendments harder to pass
Meanwhile, lawmakers are trying to make it harder for efforts like those. Missouri state Sen. Mary Elizabeth Coleman’s proposal would raise the amount of voter support needed to pass an initiative petition. Coleman, a staunch abortion opponent from Jefferson County, is running to represent the 3rd Congressional District.
An earlier version of Coleman’s proposal was loaded with what she called “ballot candy” — popular, noncontroversial ideas with little practical effect that would make the idea of raising the bar for voter petitions more appealing. For instance, it said only U.S. citizens should be able to vote on constitutional amendments. That’s already the law.
But after a nearly 24-hour filibuster from Senate Democrats, that language was stripped out before the bill passed the Senate. When the Missouri House took up the bill, Coleman asked to put the language back in. House leadership has promised that the lower chamber will reinstate that ballot candy language.
Burnett said by including a citizen-only voting provision, lawmakers could set themselves up for legal trouble. Constitutional amendments in Missouri, like legislation, must stick to a single subject.
“I don’t think I’ve seen any other states sort of go directly to the citizen voting part of this and tie it with this issue,” Burnett said. “That language actually opens them up to challenge in the courts.”
The resolution is SJR 74.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Missouri House sends initiative petition bill back to Senate with ‘ballot candy’ reinstated • Missouri Independent
Provisions beyond the core of the bill were removed by the Senate in a deal between Democrats and Republicans. Thursday’s House vote could cause more gridlock in the session’s final weeks
By: Anna Spoerre - April 25, 2024 11:57 am
A hand casting a vote in a ballot box for an election in Missouri (Getty Images).
Legislation seeking to make it harder to change Missouri’s constitution through the initiative petition process was approved by the Missouri House on Thursday, sending it back to the Senate for a possible showdown between Republicans and Democrats over “ballot candy.”
The bill was initially approved earlier this year after Democrats ended their 21-hour filibuster in exchange for the removal of “ballot candy” provisions — referring to unrelated additions to a ballot measure designed to win voters who are skeptical of a proposal’s main focus.
On Thursday, the House added language to the bill that would ask Missourians if they want to change the constitution to define legal voters as citizens of the United States as well as whether they want to prohibit foreign entities from sponsoring initiative petitions.
Democrats called the additions “unnecessary” and “deceptive.”
“This feels to me like another situation where this body is being asked to bend to the will of the Senate,” said state Rep. Eric Woods, a Democrat from Kansas City. “We are putting this bad stuff back on to send it back over there and watch the Senate explode again as if we aren’t already in enough turmoil in this building.”
After the Senate vote in February, state Sen. Mary Elizabeth Colemen, a Republican from Arnold and the bill’s sponsor, asked the House Committee on Elections and Elected Officials to reinstate the “ballot candy.”
The committee complied. After an hour-long debate Thursday morning, the bill ultimately passed, with House Majority Leader Jon Patterson of Lee’s Summit the lone “no” vote among his Republican colleagues.
State Rep. Alex Riley, a Republican from Springfield who sponsored the bill in the House, said the amendment, if adopted by the people, would create “a broader geographic consensus from across the state.”
Citizen-led initiative petitions currently require signatures from 8% of voters in six of the state’s eight congressional districts. To pass once on the ballot, a statewide vote of 50% plus one is required — a simple majority vote.
The version of the legislation passed Thursday would require that constitutional amendments pass by both a simple majority of votes statewide and a majority of votes in at least a majority of the votes in Missouri’s congressional districts. It would also require the General Assembly have the approval of at least four-sevenths of the members in each chamber to make any modifications to a citizen-led constitutional amendment within two years of when it goes into effect.
An analysis by The Independent found that under the concurrent majority standard being proposed, as few as 23% of voters could defeat a ballot measure. This was done by looking at the majority in the four districts with the fewest number of voters in 2020 and 2022.
Republicans argued this is about engaging all voters, no matter if they live in an urban or rural area.
“Surely the ratification of something as sacred as the framework to our governance as a state should require something greater than just simply a simple majority statewide,” said state Rep. Brad Banderman, a Republican from St. Clair.
State Rep. Jamie Gragg, a Republican from Ozark, said the legislation would give his constituents in Christian County more voice.
“I have a very out-in-the-country district. My people do not have a vote,” Gragg said. “This will make the people in my district count, because right now they don’t.”
State Rep. Peter Merideth, a Democrat from St. Louis, said under the current framework of one person one vote, Gragg was flat-out wrong.
“If he thinks that it was St. Louis and Kansas City that elected our governor or elected Josh Hawley, I’m sorry he’s not paying attention,” Merideth said. “Or he’s just lying.”
On Thursday, state Rep. Maggie Nurrenbern, a Democrat from Kansas City, brought the conversation back to abortion. The issue has been an undercurrent in this year’s initiative petition debate.
She recalled the end of session last year, when House Speaker Dean Plocher, a Republican from Des Peres, said his party expected an attempt to legalize abortion would land on the ballot and pass.
So far, Plocher has been right. A campaign to legalize abortion up until fetal viability in Missouri has raised millions of dollars as they race toward a May 5 deadline to gather the 171,000 necessary signatures to end up on the statewide ballot.
The main champions of the legislation seeking to change the initiative petition process have been anti-abortion groups.
Democrats remain adamant voters will see through the “ballot candy” if the initiative petition legislation makes it to the ballot.
“Mark my words, this will be defeated. Missourians will say no to minority rule,” Nurrenbern said of the initiative petition bill. “Our folks in suburban districts are going to be coming out in record numbers to make sure that all of you know that they’re not going to be tricked.”
In the meantime, Nurrenbern said she hopes that when the bill reaches the Senate floor, “it just all implodes.”
This story was updated at 9:20 a.m. to reflect that citizen-led initiative petitions currently require signatures from 8% of voters in six of the state’s eight congressional districts.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Anti-abortion groups say more aggressive approach necessary to stop Missouri amendment • Missouri Independent
Missouri could be the first test of a more aggressive strategy to keep abortion off the ballot and out of the state constitution, with organizations shifting from trying to dissuade people from signing petitions to encouraging them to withdraw their name if they have signed
By: Anna Spoerre - May 2, 2024 5:55 am
Students hold up anti-abortion signs at the Midwest March for Life on Wednesday at the Missouri State Capitol (Anna Spoerre/Missouri Independent).
Wednesday’s Midwest March for Life at the Missouri Capitol had a different tone this year. It was about fighting.
Nearly two years ago, the crowd celebrated Missouri becoming the first state to ban abortion after Roe V. Wade was overturned. But on Wednesday, a new worry loomed over the annual event: Abortion could soon be enshrined in the Missouri Constitution.
“If God doesn’t intervene in this process,” Paul Shipman, with the Christian radio program Bott Radio Network, said at a rally on the statehouse steps Wednesday, “it just kind of shows you the direction where the nation is going and the direction where the state of Missouri is going.”
After recent losses in states like Kansas and Ohio, anti-abortion activists say they must take a more aggressive approach in Missouri, using a low-budget grassroots strategy to convince Missourians not to sign the initiative petition that would put a constitutional right to an abortion in the hands of voters.
They enlisted elected officials to publicly decry the ballot measure. They set up a hotline to report the location of signature gatherers so volunteers could show up and hand out “Decline to Sign” materials. And they stoked unsubstantiated fears about the initiative petition process, such as the notion that it could result in widespread identity theft.
And with a Sunday deadline to turn in signatures for proposed initiative petitions, their message and strategy is transforming from “decline to sign” to “withdraw your signature,” with fliers distributed Wednesday hoping to reach those “who regret signing – or who mistakenly signed.”
After signatures are turned in, anti-abortion advocates plan to pour over them to make sure anyone who opts out isn’t counted.
Anti-abortion organizers interviewed by The Independent, both in Missouri and nationally, say the biggest lesson they learned from a series of defeats across the country over the last two years is that they have to engage their supporters earlier in the process.
Missouri could be the first test of the new strategy, even as abortion-rights supporters are raising millions more to get the issue on the November ballot.
“It is the work that is being done on the ground in Missouri that has not happened in any other state across the entire nation,” said Brian Westbrook, CEO of St. Louis-based Coalition Life. “It doesn’t require tens of millions of dollars to get that ground game. That groundwork is already happening.”
Missourians for Constitutional Freedom, the campaign behind the abortion-rights initiative petition, has until Sunday to turn in more than 171,000 signatures from 8% of registered voters across six of Missouri’s eight congressional districts.
Mallory Schwarz, executive director of Abortion Action Missouri, which is a leader in the abortion initiative petition coalition, said she remains confident the campaign will hit its signature goal. She didn’t share where their numbers currently stand ahead of the deadline, but Schwarz said the tactics from the anti-abortion side boost her confidence that abortion is a winning issue.
“If they were confident that people were aligned with them,” she said, “they wouldn’t resort to tactics like blatant lies, disinformation and harassment.”
‘Our track record has not been good’
Anti-abortion groups interviewed by The Independent are focused on communicating three main points to voters: They believe the constitutional amendment goes farther than Roe; they say the amendment would harm health and safety protections for mothers; and they argue it will eliminate parental consent laws.
Abortion-rights groups have said these claims have no merit whatsoever. The decision to move forward with an amendment including viability limit, often considered to be around 24 weeks, rather than no ban at all was considered a compromise position rather than an extreme one.
Susan Klein, executive director with Missouri Right to Life, said her organization has teams across the state who will file requests under the state’s open records laws to obtain copies of all the signatures obtained by Missourians for Constitutional Freedom. They plan to make sure any names she says were scratched out by people who regretted signing are not counted.
Missouri’s messaging is consistent with the strategy being deployed in six other states with abortion measures heading for the ballot, said Kelsey Pritchard, state public affairs director at Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America.
Jamie Morris, executive director of the Missouri Catholic Conference, said the results in other elections made it clear that anti-abortion groups needed a new strategy. The Catholic dioceses in Missouri are helping spread the movement’s message and encouraging parishioners not to sign the abortion-rights petition.
“Our track record has not been good,” he said. “From the pro-life side, we’ve always kind of been used to making one particular argument. And obviously, that was not resonating in some of the other states.”
Morris said the movement isn’t changing its position, but rather it is rethinking its messaging to focus increasingly on mothers as well as the “unborn child.”
“We’ve done a good job of trying to limit the supply of abortions in the state, but what can we do to limit the demand?” Morris said.
In neighboring Kansas in 2022, the Catholic church donated hundreds of thousands of dollars in a failed attempt to pass an amendment that would remove the right to abortion from that state’s constitution.
So far, the Missouri Catholic Conference has been one of the main donors to Missouri Stands with Women, the only campaign focused solely on actively opposing the abortion initiative petition, contributing $5,001.
Morris said Missouri’s dioceses so far have not fundraised on this issue, but if the measure lands on the ballot, he imagines there will be more serious conversations about financial contributions.
Decline to sign
On a recent Saturday in late April, Republican state Sen. Mary Elizabeth Coleman stood outside her hometown library in Arnold and asked constituents not to sign the abortion-rights initiative.
Connie Doty, 74, a longtime Arnold resident and an escort with Abortion Action Missouri, was volunteering to collect signatures that day.
Doty said library staff eventually asked her and the other volunteers to stay on the sidewalk. When Doty stepped into the parking lot at one point to let someone take a picture of the ballot initiative, she says Coleman followed her and told the person in the vehicle not to sign it.
A short time later, after Doty refused to leave for stepping off the sidewalk, she said three police vehicles showed up. They told everyone to “be nice and be safe,” Doty recalls, then left.
Doty said she was not phased, thanks to her decade of experience as an abortion clinic escort encountering protesters who try to stop women from getting abortions. But she said she was alarmed to see her own state senator among the two anti-abortion protesters who showed up.
“Considering that Sen. Coleman was doing this to her constituents,” Doty said, “I found pretty deplorable.”
Doty said despite the interruption, they collected 143 signatures in a couple hours.
“They’re very much afraid that the issue will get on the ballot,” Doty said. “And if it gets on the ballot, people will pass it.”
Coleman could not be reached for comment Wednesday.
Kellie Copeland executive director of Pro-Choice Ohio, said anti-abortion advocates used similar tactics during their 2023 campaign, including instances where police were called on signature collectors.
“Everything about that frankly shows they know that they don’t have the will of the people,” Copeland said. “Why else would they do that?”
A more aggressive strategy
Sam Lee doesn’t want to talk about November. The longtime Missouri anti-abortion lobbyist has his sights set on May 5.
He said other states where anti-abortion groups have taken the approach of only trying to beat abortion measures at the ballot box have lost. That’s why in Missouri, efforts began much earlier.
“The Decline to Sign (strategy) overall has just been more aggressive in Missouri by a variety of groups,” Lee said. “Not just one group or even one church. It is THE strategy.”
Lee said Missouri’s approach has been much more grassroots, spread through social media, sermons and at dining tables.
“Tell your family member not to sign,” he said. “Tell your neighbor not to sign.”
When Lee is asked by some what he’s afraid of, he said it’s simple: “I just don’t think this should be on the ballot. I think it’s wrong. Why should you give people an opportunity to vote for something that is bad?”
Missouri Stands with Women, of which Lee is president, has been distributing messaging, including through paid Facebook ads, encouraging people not to sign.
One in particular depicts a man portrayed in a mugshot offering a pen in his hand. The word “felonies” is in quotes beside the drawing.
“It’s a pretty clever ad, actually,” Lee said. “Is there a guarantee these signatures cannot be duplicated and used for identity theft? Is it a real issue or not? Well I don’t know. It’s been raised elsewhere.”
JoDonn Chaney, a spokesman for the Missouri Secretary of State’s office, said he’s not aware of any threat of identity theft during the signature gathering process at this point. He said the office’s larger focus is ensuring people know and understand what they’re signing.
Lee said his campaign is leaning into a 2005 California law that prohibits the sale or transfer of voter data collected through initiative petitions to other countries after concerns were raised when an initiative petition campaign outsourced signature verification to a firm in India.
So far, Chaney said, the office has received “a handful” of applications to withdraw signatures from the abortion initiative petition.
According to records obtained by The Independent through Missouri’s Sunshine Law, the Secretary of State’s office has received about 140 requests for signature withdrawals from the abortion ballot initiative.
Most did not provide an explanation for why they changed their mind, but one Columbia resident wrote: “I let a very pushy person with a petition make me feel like I needed to sign. Immediately after, all the reasons not to sign flooded my head. Someone needs to speak for the unborn.”
On Wednesday morning, the crowd of at least several hundred people gathered on the front lawn of the Capitol, including many high school students, were encouraged to stall signature gatherers if they encounter them on a sidewalk or at their door in a final push to defeat the measure before it gets to a vote.
Michael Merchant, 31, based in St. Louis and with Students for Life, said it would be easier if the threshold to pass a constitutional amendment was more than a simple majority. Legislation seeking to increase the threshold for amendments to pass through the initiative petition process has cleared the House and Senate, but dysfunction in the Senate has put its chances at risk.
“As much as I like to be optimistic, I’m not 100% confident that we can get 50% (in opposition),” Merchant said. “The main thing we would have to do is convince people that it’s an extreme thing.”
Merchant said he may be able to sway more people who are on the fence by pointing out to them how few limits on abortion would exist under the amendment. Advocates of abortion rights have said limits on abortion access often harm those who are most in need of the procedure, including those with medically-complicated pregnancies.
Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft, who attended Wednesday’s rally, said he believes his party can defeat an abortion ballot measure whether a higher threshold for passing citizen-led ballot measures is ultimately passed or not.
“I’m not a political consultant,” Ashcroft said, holding an anti-abortion sign at Wednesday’s march. “I just want to make sure that people know what this amendment will actually do. That it’s abortion from conception until the very last second that the last toenail leaves the birth canal.”
No comments:
Post a Comment