By Z. E. Kendall
Pro-choicers and the billionaires that back them have been emboldened by their success in Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, California, and other states on abortion ballot initiative battles, and they stand poised to swing the pendulum back to a pro-choice America on abortion.
Make no mistake. Most of these abortion ballot initiatives that pro-choicers have gotten on the ballot in 2024 would increase the number of abortions that occur.
From the time of the Kansas abortion ballot initiative battle to the Ohio one, pro-choicers spent $120 million and won every single one of those contests.
This year, pro-choicers have ballot initiatives in all of the following states:
Arkansas
Arizona
Colorado
Florida
Maryland
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
New York
Nevada
South Dakota
Arkansas so far has not been in the limelight, as some doubt exists that it will pass. The reported funding for and against that amendment so far has been small.
In Arizona, pro-choicers have spent over $23 million in order for more abortions to happen in that state. Over $2 million of that money came from Planned Parenthood's political action committee. Planned Parenthood stands the most to gain from the passage of Arizona's pro-choice proposed constitutional amendment. A CBS YouGov poll has stated that 65% of Arizona likely voters support the pro-choice initiative. So, it is likely that it will pass.
In Colorado, billionaire Lynn Schusterman has donated at least $500,000 for the pro-choice amendment. Cobalt Advocates has donated over $600,000 for it. In all, pro-choicers have spent more than $4 million on it. We expect that amendment to pass. Pro-lifers have very little money to oppose that ballot initiative in that state.
The polling in Florida suggests that pro-choicers could win in Florida and expand abortion access to include anything prior to fetal viability outside of the womb (presumably around 22 weeks of pregnancy). This would make Florida a moderate pro-choice state on abortion, with most typical elective abortions being legalized. Their state requires 60% vote to approve in order for a new amendment to be added. The polling has been as follows, per ballotpedia:
Mainstreet Research 1500 Registered Voters Poll: 56% in favor, 23% undecided, 21% opposed
Suffolk 500 Likely Voters Poll: 58% in favor, 7% undecided, 35% opposed
University of North Florida 774 Likely Voters: 69% in favor
Maryland's abortion ballot iniative is expected to pass. That state is so thoroughly Democrat, and Democrats so throughly support the pro-choice position, that pro-lifers don't stand much of a chance there.
Missouri pro-choicers are active in campaigning for the right to kill fetuses in the womb. They have spent more than $5 million in favor of their amendment. The Fairness Project, which is a leftwing LGBT group, has donated over $787,000 of that money.
In Montana, pro-choicers have spent over $3 million. Their ballot initative is also a fetal viability standard and so would defend legal abortion access up to around 22 weeks of pregnancy. Back in 2022, Montana voters rejected a Born Alive Infant Protection Amendment with 53% of the vote being against the pro-life amendment. So, we should consider Montana to lean pro-choice. It is likely that pro-choicers will win in Montana.
In Nebraska, the situation is a bit complex. Pro-choicers have an amendment proposal for establishing a right to abortion up to fetal viability outside of the womb (roughly 24 weeks pregnancy).
However, another amendment proposal would ban elective abortions after the first trimester of pregnancy (around 12 weeks) with the exceptions of incest, sexual assault having happened, or the life of the mother being at risk. That amendment would defend the status quo in Nebraska, keeping things as they already are. There is the strange yet possible scenario in which both of those contradictory state constitutional amendments pass, which would cause an implicit constitutional crisis in that state of two different standards (approximately 12 weeks and 24 weeks in pregnancy) for abortion legality operating simultaneously.
In New York, pro-choicers want to pass an anti-discrimination amendment that would make it unconstitutional to discriminate against women who have had elective abortions, based on their past abortion history. New York is such a thoroughly Democrat state, and the amendment is not very politically charged. So, it is likely to pass. Pro-choicers have spent more than $2 million on that ballot initiative.
In Nevada, pro-choicers are also striving for a fetal viability standard, which in their case would defend the status quo. Nevada is already a moderately pro-choice state by law. Their constitutional amendment, if passed, would simply enhance the legal status of their public policy position on abortion. Pro-choicers have spent more than $4 million to enhance the legal status of their own already established legal position on abortion. At least $400,000 of that money has come from Planned Parenthood's political arm.
In South Dakota, the pro-choice ballot initiative's wording is a bit more complex in how it treats abortion legality. At the last report, both sides of the issue spent more than $300,000. In a poll of 500 registered voters by South Dakota News Watch, 53% of people supported the pro-choice ballot initiative. So, pro-choicers have a decent likelihood of getting it passed, but the margin of error and the fact that it is a poll of registered voters rather than likely voters makes it an open question whether or not pro-choicers will succeed.
In 2024, pro-choicers have taken advantage of the fact that these states allow for citizen-initiated Constitutional amendment ballot initiatives. Democrats can thus mobilize their own voter base on the abortion issue, get them to sign petitions to put the amendment on the ballot, and then vote for that amendment to get it passed.
By contrast, states like Kentucky have a legislature-initiated Constitutional amendment ballot initiative process. In order for a Constitutional amendment to appear on the ballot, the state legislature has to approve of it first. This means that pro-choicers, in order to get a pro-choice constitutional amendment on the ballot, must first get politicians elected across the state that support their own viewpoint.
Republican party politicians in states that have citizen-initiated ballot processes should reconsider allowing more such initiatives to go on. The Democrat political machine has gotten powerful enough to put their own wishlist items on the ballot in various states, whether that be marijuana amendments or abortion amendments, in recent years. Republicans continue to risk winning elections but losing on the issues for which they elected their politicians in the first place.
If pro-choicers get their way, then they will in effect reinstate Roe v. Wade across the vast majority of the country via state law and ballot initiative wins.
The coordination that pro-choicers have made on a national level does not seem to have been matched by pro-lifers. The Tides Foundation, billionaires like Stacy Schusterman, Planned Parenthood, the ACLU, and other groups have been spending money on multiple ballot initiative battles. Yet, state-level right-to-life groups seem to be fighting on their own for each individual battle, without substantial support from pro-life groups from out-of-state.
Pro-lifers are going to need more coordination on the national level if they want to remain as a powerful movement in the country. 2024 could end up being a dark year for unborn life in America.
Comments