ChrisWeigant.com

Please support ChrisWeigant.com this
holiday season!

One Year After Roe Was Overturned

[ Posted Thursday, June 22nd, 2023 – 16:03 UTC ]

One year ago, Roe v. Wade was overturned by the Supreme Court's Dobbs decision, which will likely go down in history alongside Dred Scott, Korematsu, and Plessy v. Ferguson as one of the worst decisions the high court has ever made. But that's a gradual process involving a consensus of legal historians, which could take years. In the meantime, the issue has become extremely politically potent. And if the next few years is anything like the first, it is going to become a gigantic albatross around the neck of the Republican Party, since they are now held captive by their most extreme wing on this particular issue.

To state it bluntly, Republicans are trying to outdo each other in state after state by passing the most restrictive abortion laws they can think up. These laws are wildly unpopular. One big issue at the center of the 2024 election is going to be whether Republicans rally behind an effort to impose their strict forced-birth laws on the entire country at once, rather than just state by state -- and both sides are going to be talking about it. The supporters of such a move are going to try to make it paramount to the Republican primary process, while opponents of a national abortion ban are going to be warning voters that this is indeed exactly what the Republican Party wants to do.

The polling shows that the issue is incredibly lopsided against the forced-birth stance. The numbers aren't even close. A whopping 69 percent of the public opposes banning abortion nationwide, including 87 percent of Democrats, 73 percent of independents, and 48 percent of Republicans. When asked whether abortion should be legal, 79 percent of all Americans said it should be, with just 13 percent saying it shouldn't. And the more Draconian laws Republicans pass at the state level, the worse things get for them. A new poll showed that "one in four Americans say state efforts that have followed [the Dobbs decision] to impose strict limits on abortion access have made them more supportive of abortion rights." Of those who said their views on abortion have changed over the past year, four times as many said they have become more supportive of abortion rights than those who have become less supportive.

That is a losing formula for Republicans. The biggest mass defection the party has experienced in the age of Trump has been disaffected suburban women who could not bring themselves to vote Republican while Donald Trump was in charge of the party. Republicans attacking abortion rights is only going to exacerbate this trend -- and perhaps even make it a permanent realignment. These are all women who grew up with the protections of Roe and most of them have either gone through an abortion themselves or at the very least had a friend of theirs do so, probably when they were younger. Now they are worried about their daughters' rights (and the rights of their sons' girlfriends as well). And they see one party standing up for those rights and one party trying to take them away.

It is somewhat ironic that we are going to see what is already being called the "most overtly abortion rights platform of any general election [presidential] candidate in political history" coming from President Joe Biden, who is only the second Roman Catholic to ever hold the position. The first, John F. Kennedy, had to reassure voters that he would not be taking direct orders from the Pope as president. With Biden, there is no question he is charting his own path. He was never a strong pro-choice politician before becoming president, but he is going to run on a very simple idea. As former president of Planned Parenthood Cecile Richards summed it up: "Look, thank goodness people evolve. And I will say [President Joe Biden] has come a long, long way. And I think he's done it in such a responsible way. In many ways, his voice at this moment is singularly important because of his own faith, and his recognition that people of different faith traditions can have different attitudes and opinions about pregnancy, but fundamentally, it's not the role of government to decide."

On the other side, even Donald Trump is finding out how more-reasonable attitudes on the issue are simply not welcome any more within the Republican Party. Trump, unlike most Republicans, accurately realized how detrimental the extremist positions on abortion were for the party in the midterm elections. Trump tried to get the GOP to be a little more reasonable and not so harsh, but he received immediate pushback for this stance. He has now taken to mostly bragging about naming the three Supreme Court justices who made the overturning of Roe v. Wade a reality, while not talking so much about how many weeks he'd allow or what exceptions to the forced-birth laws the red states are passing he would support.

The hardliners had their own alternate take on the midterm disappointment for their side. According to them, Republicans did badly on abortion because they didn't get out and fight hard enough for the most Draconian laws imaginable. They just didn't explain the extremist position well enough. If the voters saw Republicans championing such laws (instead of refusing to talk about them, as many GOP candidates tried to do), then Republicans would win.

This is jaw-droppingly laughable, when considering the national polling on the issue, but this is precisely what the hardliners are still pushing for. And they've got their sights set on a national law now. "Give us the House, the Senate, and the White House, and we can ban abortion even in blue states like California and New York!" is their rallying cry.

And all Democrats have to do is point this out.

Let's go to the polling, once again (emphasis in original):

Voters across party, gender, and racial lines don't want politicians interfering with decisions about abortion care: When reminded of recent rollbacks on access to abortion, 73% of voters agree that things have gone too far and that politicians should stop interfering with decisions about abortion care. Even a majority (51%) of those who voted for Donald Trump in 2020 agree.

That last one is worth repeating: even a majority of Trump voters think Republicans have already gone too far.

Republicans' forced-birth laws are so Draconian that they're now having to restrict democracy to protect them. In Ohio, a ballot measure which would cement abortion rights in their state constitution is being fought in a rather underhanded way. The GOP moved to put a new ballot measure before the voters -- in a special and unnecessary election before November -- which would up the majority necessary for such ballot measures to pass as well as make it harder for such measures to even qualify to be on a ballot. If you fear what the voters are going to say, just rig the game so that it won't matter, in other words. And this is merely one example of such antidemocratic efforts.

The reason the GOP is resorting to such measures is that they have been losing at the ballot box. In Kansas, a strict anti-abortion measure failed by a whopping 19 points, which was a real wakeup call for the forced-birth side. Similar results have happened in other states -- red, blue, and purple. When people are given the choice, women's rights have won. Which scares Republicans -- as it should.

The more Democrats make this a central issue to the 2024 campaign, the better they are going to do. In previous elections, the pro-choice issue was mostly an afterthought for Democratic candidates -- one good applause line in stump speech about "protecting the right of a woman to choose," and that was it. The threat of Roe being overturned was nothing more than theoretical, and most voters (especially Democratic voters) simply believed that it would never happen. That is no longer true. It isn't theoretical any more. It is reality, for tens of millions of American women.

Women (and the men who support them) don't like to see their freedoms taken away. They don't like moralizing politicians making the most intimate decisions for them. They want such decisions to be made between themselves and their doctors, period.

The harder the Republicans push, and the more extreme the positions the forced-birth crowd goads them into, the easier it is for Democrats to make the case that the entire GOP will stop at nothing less than banning abortion nationwide. And the more that case is made -- from both the Democratic side as well as the hardliners on the Republican side -- the easier it is going to be for Democrats to win elections in 2024. Politically, at least, that is the legacy after the first year of post-Roe life in America.

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

14 Comments on “One Year After Roe Was Overturned”

  1. [1] 
    andygaus wrote:

    Here's how the Democrats might phrase it:Imagine a ten-year-old girl is raped by her stepfather. She's a little reluctant to say, "Mommy, Daddy raped me," so she just hopes for the best. And after six weeks she is still hoping for the best. Then she realizes she's pregnant. In her state there's an exception for rape or incest, but only if the rape or incest has been reported to the police. Her stepfather is a large, strong man with anger issues, and she's still living with him, so she might be reluctant to go to the police, especially since they might not believe a 10-year-old girl if the stepfather strongly denies it. If there was an exception for the health of the mother, it would be obvious that carrying the pregnancy to term could kill her or, if not, cause gruesome injuries. But the exception is only for the life of the mother, so the doctors must wait and watch her deteriorate till she's at death's door and then make a last-ditch effort to keep her from going through death's door. And if she suffers gruesome injuries but doesn't die, well that's just what's supposed to happen, in order to be truly pro-life. Now, [name of Republican candidate], is that what you support?

  2. [2] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Women (and the men who support them) don't like to see their freedoms taken away. They don't like moralizing politicians making the most intimate decisions for them. They want such decisions to be made between themselves and their doctors, period.

    Hear! Hear!

    That right there is the bottom line and what I'd love to hear all Democrats repeating ... along with things like 'so-called pro-Life Americans are essentially anti-Woman, anti-human sexuality and, well, anti-sexual pleasure and well-being not to mention anti-democracy and pro-theocracy in the manner of such autocratic states and entities as Iran, ISIS and al-Qaeda for crissakes and as such should have no standing on this matter in the United States of America! Period!'

    There, I feel a lot better now that I got that off my chest. Heh.

    Very nice column!

  3. [3] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    andygaus,

    I think we may have had this conversation before but I still believe that narrowing the debate by focusing on the extreme consequences of the most draconian abortion bans and restrictions can tend to cloud the issue and make it murkier than it needs to be.

    This is such basic stuff - a woman - any and ALL women, in fact - being in control of their own bodies insofar as making safe, legal and medically advised decisions about whether to bring a pregnancy to term.

    But, this is war! Ahem. So, any and all methods of combat should be used to prevail ...

  4. [4] 
    andygaus wrote:

    IF this was an exercise in pure logic, you would be right. But people vote with their emotions. I'm suggesting the right way to get an emotional response that will impel people to vote. The most exact logic is not always what will have the desired effect.

  5. [5] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I thought I was being pretty emotional about it. In any event, your tack and mine can work together!

  6. [6] 
    Mezzomamma wrote:

    There are already plenty of stories of wanted pregnancies which go wrong but the woman is denied essential healthcare--a risky early delivery or an abortion--until she is judged to be starting to die. Many will be miscarriages, but there's also eclampsia among other dreadful complications of pregnancy. Insurance companies in forced-birth states won't cover the emergency care, and doctors are afraid that if a non-medic decides they acted a day too early they will be prosecuted.

    I'd bring these up. Oh, and ask why they're not advocating full free pre-natal care, if they love the unborn so much.

    And then ask why they won't protect 5 year olds from gun violence.

  7. [7] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    There are so many paths to Republican oblivion ... without even mentioning the Republican cult of economic failure!

  8. [8] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    And, yet, despite all of those paths to oblivion, Trump beats Biden by six freakin' points in the latest non-partisan poll results ... sigh.

  9. [9] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    it's one thing to argue fetal personhood theoretically, but when it comes to actual impact on people's lives, freedom from forced-birth is a winning issue.

  10. [10] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @liz[fpc],

    Right. Forever war is the better option. ;)

    better than ceasing to exist as a nation? absolutely. right now, those are the only two options on the table. it takes two to make peace and only one to make war; literally nothing zelenskiy or biden could have done (or can do right now) would make one iota of impact on putin's intent to eliminate ukranian nationhood.

    israel has been under siege in one form or another for seventy-five years, and every time they've tried to make peace it's been rejected by nearly the entire arab world (egypt in 1979 was the sole exception). their choice has been fight or cease to exist, and ukraine faces the same choice.

    JL

  11. [11] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Well, it appears that Z and Biden agree with your assessment.

  12. [12] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Joshua,

    israel has been under siege in one form or another for seventy-five years, and every time they've tried to make peace it's been rejected by nearly the entire arab world (egypt in 1979 was the sole exception). their choice has been fight or cease to exist, and ukraine faces the same choice.

    Well, as you know, Israel tried to mediate a negotiated political settlement to this war last year. The effort was essentially ignored by Biden.

    And, now, as you've probably already read, Israel will reprimand the Ukrainian ambassador for making comments that betray an ignorance about how Israeli national interests don't always align with Ukraine's national interest.

  13. [13] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    At the time i wondered at the irony.

  14. [14] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Indeed.

Comments for this article are closed.