CNA Staff, Nov 7, 2024 / 16:30 pm (CNA).
Here is a roundup of abortion policy-related news this week.
Americans reject Democrats’ abortion agenda
Pro-life advocates are calling attention to the significance of the defeat of a 2024 Democratic presidential candidacy that was largely centered on abortion.
“Americans have rejected the Democrats’ no-limits abortion agenda,” Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser said in a post-election press release.
In the run-up to this year’s election, Vice President Kamala Harris amplified claims that women are dying from Republican abortion laws, though no state prohibits life-saving care for a pregnant woman. Harris vowed to restore Roe v. Wade-era standards and firmly rejected religious exemptions in federal abortion laws.
Harris’ running mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, is known for the late-term abortion law he signed in Minnesota that has no limits on abortion at any stage of pregnancy. Dannenfelser noted that for her organization, its “paramount goal” in this election was “to deny Democrats the chance to pass a national all-trimester abortion mandate and wipe out protections for babies and women in all 50 states.”
Meanwhile, during the campaign now-President-elect Donald Trump repeatedly pledged not to institute a national ban on abortion. He also emerged as an outspoken advocate of in vitro fertilization (IVF), a process designed to help infertile couples have children but creates many embryos that are discarded during the process.
During the two candidates’ sole presidential debate, Trump said abortion laws should be left up to the states. He also pledged to consider reimplementing a ban on taxpayer funding for abortion overseas and providing religious exemptions related to any government program requiring health insurance coverage of IVF treatments.
Live Action attributes pro-life success to ‘effective education’
Pro-life forces prevailed in Florida and Nebraska in this week’s election despite being heavily outspent by their pro-abortion opponents in both states. In Florida, supporters of an abortion amendment had a campaign war chest of more than $118 million. In contrast, the principal pro-life campaign committees that organized in opposition to the amendment had only $12 million in funding.
Nebraska was the only state to have two competing abortion ballot measures. According to Ballotpedia, the organizing campaign in support of the pro-abortion amendment had $13 million total in funding, while campaigners for the pro-life measure received $11 million in contributions.
Lila Rose, founder and president of Live Action, cited “resources” to provide “effective education” as reasons for the success of pro-life causes in Florida, Nebraska, and South Dakota.
“Life wins when there are enough resources to ensure voters know the truth and when we have political leadership that boldly leads,” Rose said Wednesday.
Exit polls: Abortion was not a top issue in this election
Exit polls revealed that abortion was less of a priority than other issues for voters in this week’s election. Vice President Kamala Harris ran heavily on the abortion issue and lost her bid for the presidency.
Among five issues (foreign policy, abortion, the economy, immigration, and the state of democracy), exit polls by NBC News indicated that only 14% chose abortion as the most important issue to them in voting for the president.
Of that 14%, 74% were Democrats while 25% were Republicans. Top issues were the economy (32%), mostly for Republicans, and the state of democracy (34%), mostly for Democrats.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
I’m surprised that there was no mention of Amendment 3, a pro-abortion measure that passed (barely) in formerly pro-life Missouri. Catholics and other people of faith and reason in this state worked tirelessly to educate the public about the potential dangers of Amendment 3, which essentially opens the door for abortion through all 9 months, possibly with no consent needed for minors to have abortion. (There are other evil possibilities that this new policy may bring about.) But all the work failed to prevent the passage of this heinous amendment. Many of us in Missouri are glad that Pres. Trump won decidedly over VP Harris, even if he isn’t 100% pro-life, he isn’t 100% pro-abortion as VP Harris is. But we are grieving the failure to defeat Amendment 3. I hope that our battle and the methods we used to fight it will be studied by Catholics and other people of faith who are opposed to abortion, and that in the future, evil laws and amendments will fail to pass because of what is learned from the Show-Me State.
Yesterday you ran the article with this title: “3 states reject pro-abortion ballot measures while 7 other states expand abortion.”
Now, today, you ran this article with this title: “Pro-life advocates on election: ‘Americans have rejected Democrats’ abortion agenda’.”
I think the real state of things is this:
The American majority has rejected the extreme Democrat abortion agenda (elective abortion freely available for all 9 months for any reason).
But the American majority also rejects the extreme Republican abortion agenda (no exceptions for rape, incest, or not-immediately-life-threatening health conditions of the mother).
In most states of the USA, for the foreseeable future, the extreme Republican abortion agenda will never be enacted or maintained so long as the will of the majority is allowed to rule.
To me, the sad reality is the famous Dobbs decision did overthrow the evil Roe vs. Wade, but the Dobbs decision also implicitly upheld the view that the U.S. Constitution does not protect the lives of unborn children. In that sense, the Dobbs decision itself is evil, much as the Dred Scott decision was evil.
It seems it would take a dictatorship to really ban abortion in America. But I don’t want that.
So, I am left sad. How about you?
But please, stop the unjustified celebrations.
Dobbs does mean that there will be fewer abortions. But Dobbs fundamentally uphold the prochoice philosophy, except it allows the “choice” to be made by state legislatures instead of by mothers.
So, in my view, we’re still in a big mess, and I don’t see any solution.
We read: “Pro-life advocates are calling attention to the significance of the defeat of a 2024 Democratic presidential candidacy that was largely centered on abortion. [AND] Exit polls revealed that abortion was less of a priority than other issues for voters in this week’s election. Vice President Kamala Harris ran heavily on the abortion issue and lost her bid for the presidency.”
Translation: Harris was simply unable to rearrange voter priorities.
So, instead of an implied referendum on “reproductive rights” versus fetal infanticide, the election was more about Stock-Market politics versus rainbow-coalition politics. The coalition has eroded, but this is a far cry (the Silent Scream) from a political culture centered more on the natural law, and maybe the primacy of the family versus the Beltway.
But, yes, some strategic but mixed good news at the state level, and including at least a possible national “ban on taxpayer funding for abortion overseas and…religious exemptions related to any government program requiring health insurance coverage of IVF treatments.”
The real issue is that deep down, a majority wants abortion on demand, but is still uncomfortable talking about it like a sacrament the way the Democrats are doing. Even in relatively conservative Florida, a majority voted for the abortion amendment to the state’s constitution– only the supermajority requirement barely kept it from passing. And as long as pro-lfe voters refuse to hold Republicans accountable, the pro-life movement will go absolutely nowhere politically. It should also be noted that Trump barely received a majority of the popular vote; this is hardly a resounding rejection of anything. Pro-life people should not be deceived in the slightest about where things stand today– they stand firmly in the abortionist camp. The only debate is about how many abortions should be allowed and under what conditions, not whether human life begins at conception and should be entitled to the equal protection of the law. The undeniable conclusion is that what needs to be overthrown is the entire sexual revolution and all the fruit of that rotten tree. We need a sexual counterrevolution; nothing less will suffice. There is little cause for celebration this week– make no mistake about it.