2024 Ballot Issues Analysis
Introduction
The Progressive agenda on the questions of life, identity, family, and human sexuality is best described in the word "deconstruction". Since the early 2000's the Progressive movement and their strategic allies have worked on litigation and legislation at the state and federal level to break down the traditional definitions of human identity and family. Their latest work on the issue of abortion, post-Dobbs, is a continued extension of the same agenda. In 2024 the Progressive/Abortion agenda is on the ballot in 10 states. Each of the measures has a strategic purpose that fits into the larger agenda of the Progressive movement.
First, a word about Constitutional Amendments
When the abortion industry crafts constitutional amendments, they cleverly seek to hide the real meaning and consequences of the amendments from the voters. Pro-abortion lawyers seek to capitalize on what voters do not know about the abortion industry and the legal power of words and definitions placed in state constitutions. This is the serious risk of permitting special-interests, such as the abortion industry, or any commercial industry, to write their own agenda and business plans into state constitutions.
For example, very few Americans have knowledge of the actual practice of abortion and that approximately 93% of all abortions occur in the first trimester of a pregnancy. Therefore, when the abortion industry crafts an amendment that "permits abortion up to fetal viability" they are securing their ability to perform abortions in almost all circumstances.
The deception continues in the details. The language of all these amendments hinges on certain clauses such as who it is that determines viability. In most cases it is a "medical provider”, but no further definition is given. Does this person have to have a medical license or be a certified physician?
Another key question involves defining the term “viability”. Who decides what that term means and what are the exceptions that permit an abortion of a fully viable child? The following are the most often seen exceptions where a fully viable child’s life can be ended. These include:
The life and physical and mental health of the patient, which at first look may appear reasonable and compassionate. On further review, these words are not uniformly defined in the Amendments and are solely determined by the abortion provider or attending medical professional. In addition, viability is not to be afforded to the unborn child if any extenuating treatments would be required for survival. Of course, this is denies the obvious fact that a viable child born before full-term is going to require additional care. And finally, the medical professional making these decisions is not held to any form of legal accountability for their judgements.
The language used in these amendments results in a bait and switch technique. The words of these amendments sound like they are affording some degree of protection for the life of a viable human child in the womb but those rights can disappear in a moment if the right words are used to define the pregnancy. And since there is no method of accountability defined in these amendments, any legislative attempts to create an enforceable legal definition risk being struck down in the Courts as unconstitutional interference with the "enshrined right" to legal abortion.
Several legal experts have attempted to sound the alarm on the dishonest and dangerous construction of these amendments. Unfortunately, the American media has stonewalled attempts to "fact-check" the legal construction and consequences of these amendments.
Here are links to the legal presentations by two Professors of Law who have fact checked these pro-abortion amendments. One concerns a measure from Ohio which voters passed in 2023 and one is from Montana regarding a ballot issue for 2024.
Here is how each of the 10 Pro-Abortion Constitutional amendments fits into the bigger picture of the national Abortion/Progressive agenda.
Arizona – The Right to Abortion Initiative
The Arizona measure takes up the familiar theme of using "viability" as a mask for abortion on demand through all nine-months of pregnancy. The bigger purpose of the Arizona Amendment is to create voter turnout to impact the outcome of the Presidential Election.
Colorado – Right to Abortion Initiative
This Colorado measure advances the Progressive abortion agenda to a critical point. This measure will force all citizens of Colorado to fund abortions with their tax dollars. This forced taxation strips Coloradans of their civil rights of conscience and religious liberty. Once this form of compulsion is established in one state, the abortion industry will seek to enforce it in every state possible by legislation, more constitutional amendments and most certainly by litigation and Court orders.
Florida – Florida Amendment Four
This measure is primarily for economic gain. The abortion industry is working to turn Florida into the abortion destination of the Southeastern United States resulting in many more clients for Planned Parenthood and their affiliates.
Maryland – Right to Reproductive Freedom Amendment
The abortion industry can pass whatever amendment they choose in Maryland. They have chosen more expansive language to set more state precedent. "The right to reproductive freedom" and "The right to make and carry out decisions" is much more expansive and undefined than the right to abortion. This is by design and is planting language for future expansive litigation.
Missouri – Right to Reproductive Freedom
"What is reproductive freedom"? How can such an undefined term be considered a fundamental human right when no common, self-evident definition is established in law or culture? The Missouri law is another "seed planting" enterprise for further expansion of the Progressive agenda.
Montana – Right to Abortion Initiative
Another example of unbridled language including: "the right to make and carry out decisions about one's own pregnancy, including the right to abortion". What other rights are implied but not specifically cited. Such language is a platform for judicial activism in years to come. Equally important, this measure is designed to drive voter turnout toward the pro-abortion candidate in the US Senate race. This single Senate seat is widely reported as being the key race to Progressives holding onto control of the US Senate in 2024.
Nebraska – Two opposing Amendments
One amendment permits abortion to be established as a fundamental right to abortion until fetal viability. Again this language is filled with exceptions. The other competing amendment states that "unborn children shall be protected from abortion in the second and third trimesters".
This is different. However, this battle of opposing issues in a Presidential election year points out the critical electoral votes in the state of Nebraska. Because Nebraska has a law that delegates two electoral votes to be assigned based upon which candidate wins in specific Congressional districts, both Presidential candidates will be battling for a single electoral vote in Nebraska's second congressional district. That district is the home of Warren Buffet, who is one of the richest men in the world and one of the largest contributors to pro-abortion causes in the world.
New York – Equal Protection of Law Amendment
This amendment is an example of where the Progressive movement is heading regarding human and civil rights. This is the most expansive language yet attempted at the state level and will assuredly pass in the state of New York. The new constitutional language will, “… provide that people cannot be denied rights based on their "ethnicity, national origin, age, and disability" or "sex, including sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, pregnancy, pregnancy outcomes, and reproductive healthcare and autonomy."
The scope of how these words will be defined as the years unfold is staggering to consider. Equally staggering are the potential legal enforcement actions against the civil rights of individuals who disagree with the Progressive/Abortion industry agenda. Is the day soon to arrive in New York when a schoolteacher will be prosecuted for teaching human anatomy and the biological science of reproduction? Or will taxpayers in New York be forced to fund state grants to Planned Parenthood for “gender affirming care and procedures”?
Nevada – Right to Abortion Initiative
The Nevada amendment, much like the amendment proposals in Nebraska and Arizona, is designed to produce voter turnout for the Presidential Elections. The Nevada language adds the term “mental health” (without definition) to the constitution as an exception to permit the abortion of a fully viable child.
South Dakota – Constitutional Amendment G
This measure adds a trimester provision to the state constitution. Why a state would choose to re-enact language created by the failed decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court in the Roe v. Wade era is a worthwhile question. The language basically gives more room for abortions than a formula based on specific weeks since the trimester formula is open to medical interpretation as to the length of the three specific trimesters.
SUMMARY
In the 2024 Election, abortion is being used at the state level as a wedge issue to promote voter turnout, maintain Democrat control of the U.S. Senate, elect a President and build out the agenda of the Progressive/Abortion movement. In each of these proposed amendments the legal definition of viability is poorly defined and highly subjective providing a wide berth for the legalization of abortion throughout all nine months of pregnancy.
In addition, charting the language provisions of the 10 pro-abortion amendments on the ballot reveals the expansive legal strategy of the abortion industry. For example, the New York proposed amendment goes far beyond the Supreme Court edicts of the Roe v. Wade era. Studying the New York proposal reveals a strategy that is much broader than the question of the legal access to abortion and the preservation of the health of women.