As Live Action News has previously reported, one of the abortion industry’s post-Roe strategies appears to be one of enshrining abortion as a so-called “right” in individual states’ constitutions by vigorously promoting pro-abortion ballot measures, while simultaneously opposing efforts to pass pro-life measures. When put to a vote, the abortion lobby’s efforts are succeeding, primarily because of deceptive sponsorship and misleading language.
FOLLOWING THE MONEY
Pro-abortion ballot measures are generally proposed and funded by groups which appear to be local grassroots organizations at first glance. But in reality, Big Abortion and its allies are footing the lion’s share of the bill for the promotion of pro-abortion ballot measures – and opposition to pro-life ones – in virtually every case.
These are the primary organizations and individuals promoting abortion at the ballot box across the country:
- The Sixteen Thirty Fund is a nationwide self-described “progressive” organization with over $191 million in total revenue for 2022. A substantial portion of its revenue is being devoted to advancing abortion in state elections. It provided over $6.7 million to the campaign to enshrine abortion as a constitutional “right” in Ohio and over $6 million to a similar effort in Michigan. It also provided substantial funding to the effort to pass the pro-abortion Proposal 5 in Vermont. In addition, it provided a large portion of the funding behind efforts to defeat pro-life measures in Kentucky ($585K) and Kansas (nearly $1.6 million).
- Planned Parenthood Federation of America and its various affiliates, which form the nation’s largest abortion chain, have spent millions promoting pro-abortion ballot measures across the country: $3.9 million in Ohio; over $2.7 million in California; over $4 million in Michigan; and over $71K in Vermont. It is sponsoring proposed pro-abortion ballot measures in Montana, New York, Nebraska, Florida, Nevada, and Arizona. In addition, it provided major funding to the efforts to defeat pro-life measures in Kentucky (over $1.8 million) and Kansas (nearly $2.1 million).
- The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is another national-level organization. It has launched an “Abortion Criminal Defense Initiative” which “is establishing and working alongside a network of experienced criminal defense attorneys prepared to defend those facing prosecution related to abortion care.” It is also bankrolling efforts to advance abortion in individual states. It funneled nearly $4.9 million to pro-abortion efforts in Ohio; spent over $9 million in Michigan; and was a top donor behind Proposal 5 in Vermont. It is sponsoring proposed pro-abortion ballot measures in Nebraska, Florida, Nevada, and Arizona. It also provided a substantial portion of the funding behind the campaigns to defeat pro-life measures in Kentucky ($519K) and Kansas (nearly $767K).
- The Open Society Policy Center, a project of pro-abortion billionaire George Soros, has provided major funding toward efforts to declare abortion a “right” in Ohio ($4 million) and Michigan ($4.5 million). It also donated $250K to each respective effort to defeat pro-life measures in Kentucky and Kansas.
- Reproductive Freedom for All, formerly known as NARAL Pro-Choice America, and its various affiliates have provided significant funding to pro-abortion efforts in Ohio ($100K) and Michigan ($48.2 million, much of which was donated by other major pro-abortion organizations and funneled through Reproductive Freedom for All). It is sponsoring proposed measures in Nevada and Arizona, and funded efforts to defeat pro-life measures in Kentucky and Kansas.
- Former New York City mayor and major Planned Parenthood donor, billionaire Michael Bloomberg, donated $2 million toward enshrining abortion as a “right” in Michigan. He also donated $1.25 million toward the effort to defeat Kansas’ pro-life measure, and $250K toward the pro-life defeat in Kentucky.
It is clear that the efforts to enshrine abortion as a “right” in state constitutions are not primarily locally based/grassroots-driven.
DECEPTIVE LANGUAGE
In addition to the fact that Big Abortion is outspending its opposition by tens of millions of dollars through its donations to umbrella organizations posing as grassroots coalitions, abortion is winning at the ballot box as a result of the vague and deceptive language of the measures themselves.
When examining the language of the various pro-abortion ballot measures, commonalities emerge:
- Most are worded in such a way as to insinuate that abortions committed past the point of so-called “viability” could still be regulated and limited. This is true of ballot measures which have enshrined abortion as a “right” in the state constitutions of Ohio, California, and Michigan. This language is also included in the proposed pro-abortion measures of Montana, Nebraska, Florida, Missouri, and Arizona. However, whether or not a pre-born child is “viable” is a subjective case-by-case determination made by the very abortionist being paid to kill that child.This renders the term meaningless, and effectively legalizes abortion throughout all nine months of pregnancy.The majority of Americans consistently and overwhelmingly oppose abortion past the first trimester, but do not seem to understand that these ballot measures enable the permanent legalization of abortion throughout pregnancy in their respective states.
- Another way in which most of the passed/proposed measures legalize abortion throughout pregnancy is by means of their built-in “health” exceptions. Amendments passed in Ohio, California, and Michigan contain “health” exceptions protecting abortions past the point of so-called “viability.” Proposed measures in Florida, Missouri, South Dakota, Arkansas, Nebraska, and Arizona also stipulate that abortions performed to protect the “health” of the mother cannot be regulated.So-called “health” exceptions have historically been broadly interpreted to include such things as emotional/psychological health, familial health, and even financial health; some ballot measures explicitly include mental health as a qualifying exception to post-“viability” regulations. Because “health” is vaguely defined in all cases, and because the determination of health-related “necessity” is left up to the abortionist’s discretion, abortion for any reason could be construed as “necessary.” In practice, therefore, abortion could be permitted for any reason at any point in pregnancy.
- Most of the passed/proposed ballot measures stipulate that the “right” to abortion is possessed by everyone – including minors. They do this by using the terms “individual,” “person,” or “patient” rather than “woman” or “adult.” Such language could essentially outlaw popular laws requiring parental consent/notification for abortions committed on minors.
- A majority of the passed/proposed ballot measures also group abortion in with other, completely unrelated items which are not prohibited by law in any state, including contraception, miscarriage care, childbirth, prenatal care, postpartum care, sterilization, and infertility care. Nevada’s proposed ballot measure was recently rejected in its current form by District Judge James T. Russell for this very reason – he ruled that the language was “too broad.” This over-broad language convices people who might otherwise oppose such measures into voting in favor of them, because it deceptively insinuates that these other, non-abortion-related services could be threatened.
- Some measures, like Michigan’s and New York’s, contain language prohibiting “discrimination” or “prosecution” of women based on their so-called “pregnancy outcomes.” This vague language has led even some legal groups to express concern that infanticide investigations could be prohibited, allowing women who murder their newborns to evade prosecution.
- “Reproductive freedom” and/or “reproductive autonomy” are also common catchphrases used in various passed/proposed ballot measures. This appeals to Americans’ traditional love of freedom generally; it is also misleading because abortions take place after reproduction has already occurred, and no state is attempting to regulate individuals’ freedom to sexually reproduce.
CURRENT BALLOT MEASURE LANDSCAPE
Ballot measures enshrining a so-called “right” to abortion have already passed in Ohio, California, Michigan, and Vermont. Similar measures are on the 2024 ballot in Maryland and New York.
Pro-abortion measures have been proposed, but are not yet officially on the ballot, in Montana, Nebraska, Florida, Virginia, Missouri, South Dakota, and Arizona. Proposed ballot measures have been rejected in their current form in Nevada and Arkansas due to issues with the language therein; however, if appropriate revisions are made, these measures could be resurrected.
Pro-life ballot measures which would have affirmed that the respective states’ constitutions do not confer a right to abortion have been defeated in Kansas and Kentucky.
Editor’s Note: This post will be updated if changes are made in states’ abortion legality.
