Becker1999 from Grove City, OH, CC BY 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons
.jpg){kind=link}
By Dave S., Mark Mamerow, Mark Orlowski, Dennis Curley, and Geoff Carter
Dadbots,
After this week’s arguments over abortion in front of the SCOTUS, both the Washington Post and the NY Times ran articles discussing the potential political impacts if the Court decides, as it well may, to scrap the Roe -v- Wade precedent on abortion. This would not immediately outlaw abortion nationally but would throw it back to the states. Justice Brett Kavanaugh referred to this as court “neutrality” on the issue.
Democrats are pounding the lectern on this. A woman’s right to choose is endangered by this illegitimately selected Court! We need to elect Democrats to protect poor women!
I understand and agree with their concerns. There are a number of states that have trigger laws in place. The minute Roe -v- Wade is overturned, it’s back to the back-alley coat hanger operations in these states. Wisconsin itself has pre-Roe legislation on the books. If Roe is overturned, those laws, banning most abortions, will once again be in effect.
My question is: How much of a political impact would overturning Roe really have? Is this enough to send Democrats to the barricades (and the polling places) in droves, counteracting the slow drip, drip, drip of inflation, Covid, and supply chain issues that seems to be paralyzing Brandon? Er, Biden.
I tend to think no. The Democratic BASE is up in arms. But they’ve been up in arms about abortion since forever. Will disconnected Democrats, moderates, and Independents really care about the fate of poor women? After all, that’s mostly what this is about. If you’re in the middle class, you will have the financial means to get to Illinois or California or Washington or New York or Massachusetts, for example, to get a legal abortion. Those states are blue enough that they’ll keep abortion legal. So, the middle class is ok, at least financially. The hassle factor of leaving the state will remain a huge problem. But the change in law is really going to hammer the poor. And guess what? They don’t vote in very large numbers. In fact, if you’re struggling to make ends meet and getting an abortion to keep your life from completely falling apart— the chances are that you have NEVER voted.
Support for abortion rights and Roe -v- Wade do poll well. But there are a lot of liberal fantasies that poll well. Hell, something like 67% of REPUBLICANS think that corporate taxes should be raised. Do those polls ever translate to concrete action?
Suburban women are the wild card. They proved that they are susceptible to being pulled into the blue columns. They rejected Trump in large numbers. But will they respond to a threat to women’s reproductive rights? First, they would need to be distracted from the horrible damage being wrought in their kids’ psyches by CRT! And even if they’re not down that rabbit hole, I don’t think that suburban moms (and women in general) are of one mind about abortion rights.
But I could be wrong. My own adult daughters reacted viscerally to Trump’s election—one of them cried for a week, and the other broke out in “Trump hives”.
Overturning Roe would really highlight the corruption of the Republicans in denying Merrick Garland a court hearing and rushing through Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation hearing. But I’m not seeing that as a huge motivator outside the Dem base.
Any thoughts from the suburban trenches, or elsewhere (such as the serene diamond white beaches of Costa Rica)?
-Mark
A cynical Blue State resident might say that the Supreme Court reversal of Roe vs. Wade is a Red State problem, that abortion will still remain legal and available locally for us. Sorry Wisconsin, Mississippi, Texas, …
I don’t see this as a national politics game changer.
Cheers from MN,
MO
Good question, Mark. Will the challenge and possible overturn of Roe v. Wade get more democratic voters to the polls? I’d like to make this an action-packed point-counterpoint debate, but I have to say I agree with you guys, I don’t think it will be much of a game changer.
Have you noticed that stridently pro-choice candidates seem to be a dying breed? Why is that? I think it’s because people struggle with the whole concept of abortion; candidates can get people fired-up about “jobs” or “change” a lot easier than they can for abortion rights. Most Democratic candidates seem to visibly cringe a little when asked about their views on abortion—and most pro-choice people view legal abortion as kind of a bleak necessity that they’d rather not think about.
Also, minority groups that traditionally vote Democrat are not at all keen about abortion rights. High School kids that I worked with from Black and Latino families often argued that abortion should be illegal and weed should be legal. As for suburban moms—like Mark M. says, they are not all of one mind—except maybe for suburban moms with pregnant 15-year-old daughters.
So, yeah, the white liberal base of the Democratic party might be up in arms about this, but they’re going to have a tough uphill battle convincing others under the Democratic Party’s big umbrella to march to the polls on this based on the pro-choice issue.
–Dennis
Abortion is a bleak necessity that we’d rather not think about. I’ll put the consummation of gay marriages into that same bucket. We’re all in favor of equal rights, as long as we’re sheltered from the *** HOT GAY SEX ***!!!!
Listen, pro-choice politicians aren’t the only ones who will be getting uncomfortable. I saw Senator Mike Braun(R-Indiana) on Meet the Press expressing his desire that the Court throw abortion regulation back to the states. But he was extremely careful NOT to define any specifics of a possible new Indiana state law. Oh, no. He wasn’t touchin’ that with a 10-foot-pole.
One of the MTP panelists pointed out that anti-abortion politicians have been able to dodge these questions for 50 years. They haven’t needed to grapple with specifics, because the Roe & Casey cases set the parameters of abortion law.
Once we get specific laws being proposed and debated, it may be easier for pro-choice advocates to raise some political support. Isn’t it usually Republicans who are opposing terrible new laws that tear apart the very fiber of our communities and our nation? Of course! That’s their jam! But this time, liberals will be able to sit back and shoot darts at the proposed laws.
Let’s see now. Will Republicans be pushing laws that allow them to prosecute women seeking abortions? Lock up the doctors & nurses & clinic directors? Force girls raped by family members to carry the baby? Do the same to rape victims? How about forcing women to carry a fetus with unsurvivable defects to term? Force 14-year-olds to carry babies full term? After all, life is life. It’s not the baby’s fault if it was created by a criminal act.
You can bet your bottom dollar that the new laws in state legislatures will do all this and more. The pent-up demand on their side is huge. Republican politicians will be, ahem, not really familiar with all the gory details. BUT they will continue to assure us that they support “life” 100%.
Once the details start coming out, Democrats can pound on them and possibly even make some gains in the suburbs. It’s too late for the 2022 midterms. A Republican House is baked into the cake already. But over the longer term, some of the flagging pro-choice enthusiasm, as ably described by Dennis, may get a fire lit under it.
-Mark
Mark,
If choice does go back to states, I think many of us could be experiencing incredibly regressive and punitive extremes. The newly minted abortion law in Texas states anyone performing, encouraging, abetting, or conspiring to help someone get an abortion can be sued—by any citizen—not only Texas citizens, but anyone. A Florida man can sue a Texas anesthesiologist who assists in performing abortions—which, by the way, are still (technically) legal.
This is nothing more than a posse of vigilantes ready to give up their neighbor for what? Talking to someone about an abortion? Reading about one? This not only smacks of Old West justice (let’s hang that doctor from the nearest tree) but of the worst sort of betrayal and treachery. Neighbor informing on neighbor. Family snitching out family. We used to joke about the thought police—but it’s not funny anymore.
I think this issue goes much deeper than the law itself. The “arming” of citizens with the legal power to intimidate anyone they choose reeks of mob rule. Point your finger. She’s guilty—of wanting to control her life. Point your finger. These new laws are designed to do nothing but bully and coerce women and medical professionals into submission. It’s a tool that will not only be used for controlling abortion rights. I can see it making the rounds with the Second Amendment, or BLM.
These tactics are already being used to harass and terrorize election officials across the country. Many are leaving, afraid for themselves and their families.
I’m reminded of the last scene of the 1979 version of Invasion of the Body Snatchers when Donald Sutherland points at Veronica Cartwright and yells for his comrades, giving her up.
Geoff
Geoff,
You paint a stark picture of abortion access once Roe is overturned and the law is returned to the states. I don’t argue with that. But the question was, will there be a major political impact? Will Democrats and abortion rights advocates be able to turn this into a salient issue that will attract enough voters to stave off the 2022 Republican midterm backlash?
I have my doubts.
Abortion is such an “icky” topic that the average voter, even if in favor of abortion access in a theoretical sense, doesn’t want to think about the details. Meanwhile, anti-abortion activists are going to be extremely active and aggressive in pushing for abortion restrictions. This is going to be a demonstration of the Pareto Principle. As wiki eloquently captures it, “The Pareto principle states that for many outcomes, roughly 80% of consequences come from 20% of causes.”
(How do you think Wisconsin got 2 major sports arenas built, using state money? Via the Pareto Principle. The 20%—or less—that cared about teams were able to lobby the legislature. There’s no way that 51% of Wisconsin residents care enough about the Bucks or the Brewers to spend a plugged nickel of their own taxes on stadiums. Hell, the Packer referendum in Brown County just barely passed, and the Packers are a stronger religion than even the most fundamental Christianity.)
And thus, it’s going to be, I predict, for abortion legislation. Multiple states have Gilead-like restrictions cued up and ready to go. Hand wringing about vigilantism and the free choice of women over their bodies is not going to cut it, faced with the overwhelming crusade for “life” that’s about to descend on the middle of the country.
-Mark
Yep.
–Dave
Mark,
You’re probably right that abortion—reproductive rights—will not be a banner issue for rallying centrist Democrats or moderate Republicans. I think pro-lifers have (once again), as you point out, framed the issue to their advantage and that middle-class moms will not side with the pro-choicers. Their bread has already been buttered.
My worry is that extremist Republicans are well on their way to co-opting the entire electoral process. If they succeed in subverting elections and placing their own candidates on the ballot, voter sentiment might not matter anyway.
But, if things don’t go sour, the electorate still might surprise us; I keep thinking back to the way gay marriage suddenly became a non-issue. Maybe the moms will surprise us.
Geoff
Perhaps a wave of moderate voters could be enticed to vote Democratic in upcoming elections based on the advance of right-wing extremism. That would require effective messaging on the part of the Democratic Party, something in which they have not demonstrated competence recently. Let’s consider a few recent Presidential campaign slogans. Build Back Better (mildly nostalgic but hardly inspirational). Hope and Change (no longer credible to a cynical electorate). These slogans were used by Democratic winners. Who can remember the prime slogans of recent losers, like Hillary and Kerry? I can’t. Political messaging is of course more than just a slogan, but in both the narrow and broad context, it seems the Republicans are much more effective than the Democrats. The Republicans are always on offense and the Dems are always on defense. Who will win the long game with such dynamics?
As for the abortion battle, the religious right smell blood and are “all in”. I don’t remember what political operative said it, but for much of middle America, the motivating issues are: God, Guns and Gays. Conservatives won on Guns and lost on Gays. Abortion is the definitional issue that is currently in play. Being pro-life is definitional to a Christian identity for lots of folks, regardless of race and class. That kind of motivation of a political base is hard to beat.
Cheers.
Mark O
….What Dennis said…
News the other night: Oxford High Shooting, Omicron, Roe v Wade on the brink…. Yeesh! Gail and Bret echoed that nadir Sunday (Collins and Stephens…left vs moderate right NY Times). Wuz thinking it’d be a funny SNL skit.
(A.) First of all, do a Mary Louise Kelly and Ari Shapiro—rip job.
(B.) Do it via nothing but a bubbly, effervescent, good news, (think All Things Considered segment): cancer research progress, scouts helping the elderly, former extinct species found (alive), Flint water now clean, ice cap growing, Trump dies in sleep, etc… They could have a lot of fun with it.
Mary Louise is always dour…maybe they keep her dour…deep sympathetic sighs, despite the glad tidings…. Seriously this is untapped territory: Ream NPR a new one…but all in good fun. Don’t get me wrong, I’m an NPR frequenter, if not addict…though I do note their unprofessional bias all too often. Ailsa Chang is a great radio journalist—IMO.
I’ve skewed way off track…sorry, but like I said—”What Denny said”—agree wholeheartedly with his insights. There’s so much bad news right now, it’s the perfect time for ‘pubs to sneak this through…stick it to women once again and uneducated young minority mothers once again. Puts them in the dungeon for another couple decades. One of history’s more bitter ironies—RBG not being able to hang on. F!
-Dave.