August 06, 2012 11:28 PM UTC

"Personhood" Campaign Heads For Ballot; Will GOP Candidates Back It?

•  
• by: Colorado Pols

UPDATE: A press release moments ago from Personhood Colorado:

Personhood Colorado submitted signatures to the Secretary of State’s office today for the Colorado Personhood Amendment. The signatures submitted totaled 112,121, although only 86,105 were required. All signatures are pending validation by the Colorado Secretary of State’s office.

“Once again, we are amazed at the tenacity of our nearly fifteen hundred volunteers,” remarked Rosalinda Lozano, Amendment Sponsor. “We had seven fewer weeks to petition due to another failed lawsuit from Planned Parenthood, yet we are turning in over thirty thousand signatures more than in 2010. Thousands of hours of work over this very hot summer have gone into collecting these signatures, and we are so thankful for the hard work of everyone involved.”

—–

From a press advisory Friday:

The Colorado Personhood Coalition will hold a press conference Monday to make an important announcement regarding the number of signatures gathered to place the personhood initiative on the ballot.

“We won’t be certain of the number of signatures until Monday,” stated Rosalinda Lozano, ballot sponsor. “We do know that our volunteers have had to work much harder this year after a 7-week delay in the signature process. On Monday morning, when we have our final total, we will announce the number collected at the press conference.”

“There should be no question about what this personhood amendment will and will not do,” continued Lozano. “The 2012 personhood amendment will recognize the personhood rights of every human being; and by doing so, will ensure a safer Colorado for women and children. We are eager to get our final signature count and complete the signature phase of this campaign.”

The rumor we’ve heard is that Personhood Colorado got many more signatures than last time in favor of placing an abortion ban on the Colorado ballot, for the third consecutive general election in a row. It’s expected that the press conference this afternoon will announce a total number of signatures well in excess of the requirement, and backers sincerely hope enough to survive validity checks by the Secretary of State. Meaning it’s likely a go.

From there, it’s anybody’s guess what will happen, with the exception of the final outcome in November. The “personhood” abortion ban failed in both 2008 and 2010 by over 70% of the vote, and there’s no reason to assume they will be any more successful this time. In 2010, “Personhood” proved quite harmful to defeated U.S. Senate candidate Ken Buck, who flip-flopped late in the campaign under pressure, helping ubiquitize the expression “Buckpedal.”

Suffice to say, it will be interesting to see what Republican candidates, in many cases prior supporters of the “Personhood” ballot measure, decide to do with it in 2012.

Here is video of Rep. Cory Gardner from his 2010 election campaign, proudly declaring his support for the amendment and describing how he personally circulated petitions for “Personhood” in his own church. Gardner’s district became substantially more conservative in redistricting last year, so why should he be anything but loud and proud in 2012?

Jason Salzman sought out Rep. Mike Coffman’s difficult-to-find position from 2010:

I asked Colorado Right to Life Vice President Leslie Hanks how her organization knew that Coffman supported personhood two years ago.

“Our blog reports on our candidate survey results,” she emailed me. “Congressman Coffman answered all our questions correctly to reflect he is a no exceptions pro life elected official who supports the personhood of the baby in the womb.”

I asked what “no exceptions” means in the context of the survey, and she said, among other things, that abortion would not be allowed in the case of rape and incest.

“Babies are persons, not ‘exceptions,'” she emailed me. “No innocent baby should be punished for the crime of his or her father…”

And finally, GOP CD-7 candidate Joe Coors, Jr.:

Coors donated $1,000 to the “Personhood” campaign during the 2010 election cycle. Note that this wasn’t a donation from one of the Coors family’s foundations, but from Joe Jr. personally. That implies a level of support for “Personhood” greater even than Cory Gardner’s.

The present views of Coffman and Coors will be particularly worthwhile to ferret out; in both cases there are very good political reasons why they would not want to publicize their prior support for a total ban on abortions as candidates in swing suburban districts. But in both cases, we don’t really see how they can walk this back without severe political damage. Why did they ever support a ballot measure twice rejected by over 70% of Colorado voters?

In Coors’ case, what motivated him to go a step further and write that check?

Bottom line: with Buck’s example as a guide, it’s easy to see why many Republicans would be just fine if “Personhood” did not make the ballot again. But since it probably will at this point, all of the questions about it, and the candidates who have backed it, are back on the table.

Now they’d better start working on their justifications (or as the case may be, flip-flops).