Banning Abortion Six Ways From Sunday

5 Comments

by: Colorado Pols

As the Denver Post’s Anna Staver reports, it’s on ~~off~~ on again:

Two women who want to ban abortions past 22 weeks in Colorado aren’t giving up after their first stab at language for a proposed ballot initiative was rejected by the Secretary of State’s Office for a procedural error.

Erin Behrens and Giuliana Day are in the process of submitting six new proposals for statewide initiatives that would ban abortions past 22 weeks except in cases where the woman’s physical life was at risk. Performing an abortion for any other reason would be a class 3 felony, on par with second-degree murder or vehicular homicide and punishable by up to a dozen years in prison.

The draft initiatives have a lot of similarities, but they do have a few important differences. One of them contains a “provision for survival” that would require any approved abortion past 22 weeks be performed in a way that “provides the best opportunity for the fetus to survive.”

Colorado has repeatedly rejected abortion bans in recent years at the polls, and in the last few elections the measures have been increasingly viewed by Republicans as politically self-injurious beyond any benefit in terms of rallying conservative voters to the polls. It’s relatively easy for supporters of these measures to collect the required signatures to make the ballot by circulating their petitions at church.

The political question for these measures has always been whether they hurt Republicans more than they help, and the consensus after the last few attempts has been that they aren’t worth the blowback Republicans suffer at the polls–not to mention that base trouble these measures invite if Republicans don’t pay sufficient lip service.

There’s an apparent belief among some Republicans that this measure’s ban on so-called “late term” abortions may fare better, but given that almost all such abortions are performed out of dire medical necessity and are a tiny percentage of the total number of abortions performed, the countermessage that this is just another intrusion into decisions that should be entirely between doctor and patient should be very effective.

With abortion rights facing a high-profile threat nationally, we think the voters who crushed the “Personhood” ballot measures in Colorado in election after election can be counted open to turn out in force against any anti-abortion measure that makes the ballot. Under that scenario, in our pro-choice state, this helps Democrats.

5 thoughts on “Banning Abortion Six Ways From Sunday”

JohnInDenver says:

July 29, 2019 at 11:03 am

Getting the issue on the ballot will also further the conflict between the "social issues" Republicans and the libertarian Republicans. Or put another way, between the right-to-life crowd who want to rally in front of Planned Parenthood and the small government leaders who want people to show up to the local Chamber of Commerce or Downtown Development meetings.

Soon, it will be after noon, and we enjoy adult beverages and reprise a favorite toast of the British navy: "Confusion to our enemies."

Log in to Reply
RepealAndReplace says:

July 29, 2019 at 11:53 am

Actually, second degree murder is a class two felony. Manslaughter may be a class three felony depending upon the circumstances. But your point is well taken: class three felony classified as a crime of violence carries a range of 10 to 32 years in prison.

Log in to Reply
Benita Phillips says:

July 29, 2019 at 12:04 pm

This is NOT a SOCIAL issue. This is a human rights issue. Not just the right to ones body and the decision of how it is used or abused. But the right to decide ones lifetime.
In all my years of Nursing, I never a saw any woman make a health decision as deeply effecting as an abortion decision, without quizzing all available medical personnel in desperation. For ANYONE to think they are better suited to make this determination other than the effected party is shear ego. No one is "Christ-righteous" enough to interfere in such an intimate decision.

Log in to Reply
Conserv. Head Banger says:

July 29, 2019 at 4:28 pm

I want to know if Erin Behrens and Giuliana Day support full and open access to all forms of birth control, including the morning after pill. Or, are they among the religious zealots that also want to restrict access to contraception. How about it, ladies?

Log in to Reply
Pseudonymous says:

July 30, 2019 at 11:41 am

NARAL Email Instructs Field Staff Not to Say Abortion Should be Safe and Legal

– Do not say/write “Abortion should be/is safe and legal”

– Do not say/write “Abortion is healthcare”

– Do not say/write “Abortion is normal”

– Do not say/write “Abortion rights are human rights.”

The email also instructed staffers to “follow NARAL on Twitter and Facebook for real-time approved messages you can use.” It said that “extensive trainings” would be rolled out “in the coming months” and asked the field team to “take a quick scan of our public facing material to see if we need to change anything,” like phone scripts, training materials, and even their signage and merchandise.

A spokesperson for NARAL described Ballie’s email as a “mischaracterization” of NARAL policy and said he “spoke in a way that was not entirely accurate.” The spokesperson said the messaging document was shared “with lead volunteers in an attempt to provide them with some messaging guidance,” and that the message Ballie received, which they claimed he misinterpreted as an edict to ban these words, was: “We’ve been conducting this research for a number of years, and this is the latest and greatest in terms of our findings.”

Log in to Reply