Let's start with the big news from The NYTimes:
Kansas voters resoundingly decided against removing the right to abortion from the State Constitution, according to The Associated Press, a major victory for the abortion rights movement in one of America’s reliably conservative states.
The defeat of the ballot referendum was the most tangible demonstration yet of a political backlash against the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark decision that had protected abortion rights throughout the country. The decisive margin — 59 to 41 percent, with about 95 percent of the votes counted — came as a surprise, and after frenzied campaigns with both sides pouring millions into advertising and knocking on doors throughout a sweltering final campaign stretch.
“The voters in Kansas have spoken loud and clear: We will not tolerate extreme bans on abortion,” said Rachel Sweet, the campaign manager for Kansans for Constitutional Freedom, which led the effort to defeat the amendment.
And this is redder than red Kansas. A state Trump carried 56% to 41.5% over Biden in 2020. Trump won all but five counties (there are 105 total, by the way).
59 to 41 percent to preserve abortion rights in Trumpville Kansas.
So what did the legislation look like?
You can see it here.
And this is the part to be amending the Kansas Constitution:
§ 22. Regulation of abortion. Because Kansans value both women and children, the constitution of the state of Kansas does not require government funding of abortion and does not create or secure a right to abortion. To the extent permitted by the constitution of the United States, the people, through their elected state representatives and state senators, may pass laws regarding abortion, including, but not limited to, laws that account for circumstances of pregnancy resulting from rape or incest, or circumstances of necessity to save the life of the mother. [Bolding in Original.]
While The NYTimes points out that the amendment would not, in itself, ban abortion:
If the amendment had passed, though, the question was not whether Republicans would try to wield their commanding legislative majorities to pass new restrictions, but how far they would go in doing so. Many Kansans who support abortion rights said they feared that a total or near-total abortion ban would be passed within months.
Why am I point this out?
Because of this from WHYY:
In the final days before their summer recess, Republicans in Pennsylvania’s House and Senate rushed a major constitutional amendment through its first phase of legislative approval. It would clear a path for them to dramatically restrict — or even ban — abortion in the commonwealth.
The amendment wouldn’t restrict abortion outright. If lawmakers pass it again, and voters approve it in a statewide referendum, it will add language to the constitution saying that the document does not “grant the right to taxpayer-funded abortion or any other right relating to abortion.”
And the legislation can be seen here. The pertinent part:
1) THAT ARTICLE I BE AMENDED BY ADDING A SECTION TO READ:
§ 30. ABORTION.
THIS CONSTITUTION DOES NOT GRANT THE RIGHT TO TAXPAYER-FUNDED ABORTION OR ANY OTHER RIGHT RELATING TO ABORTION. [Underlining in Original]
WHYY goes on:
The practical effect will be that if, in the future, a Republican legislature and governor pass a law restricting abortion in some way, abortion-rights advocates won’t be able to challenge the law in state courts.Now I know we're not in Kansas but Biden beat Trump 50% to 48.84% in Pennsylvania in 2020.
Does the state GOP not think that something like the turnout in Kansas would not be repeated here if the GOP's constitutional amendment came up for a vote?
How about a State Senator who wants to ban abortion entirely, with no exceptions for rape or incest or the life of the mother, who's now running for governor?
Any comments for the blog, Senator Mastriano?
