Lessons From the Kansas Abortion Vote
By Sean Evans, Chair and Professor of Political Science
Aug 8, 2022 -
On Tuesday, Kansas voters overwhelmingly rejected a constitutional amendment that would have allowed the state to regulate abortion. Pro-choice advocates are rejoicing while pro-life supporters are disappointed. What are the lessons we should learn from the Kansas vote?
First, the Dobbs decision that allows states to regulate abortion has changed the political environment. While public opinion consistently supports abortion rights and restrictions, Dobbs changed how people view abortion legislation. Prior to Dobbs, all abortion referenda and laws took place against the backdrop of Roe which meant that any vote would restrict abortion but not ban it. Post Dobbs, an abortion ban is possible, so the public is leery of new abortion laws. In both instances, the public pushed against an extreme position – abortion on demand or a ban on abortion.
Second, messaging is important for pro-life supporters because abortion bans are very unpopular. The vagueness of the Kansas amendment allowed opponents to depict the amendment as a total ban which is a problem when over 20% of Republicans and 60% of Independents oppose a ban. Instead, pro-life groups should support specific restrictions that opponents will struggle demonizing and puts pro-choice groups on the defensive. They should also consider incremental changes so they can repeatedly present their case to the “persuadable public” to create more pro-life voters.
Pro-life messaging should go on the offense by pointing out the unpopular, extreme position of abortion advocates in supporting abortions post-viability, if the child will be mentally disabled, or because the woman doesn’t want the child. On defense, the pro-life movement needs to inoculate itself from attacks as uncaring by advertising the financial, medical, and job training help they provide women with unwanted pregnancies. They also need to consider supporting exceptions for rape and incest, though only about 1.5% of all abortions, because forcing these victims to bear the child is very disturbing to most Americans and undermines support for the pro-life position.
Third, how pro-life the state is will determine the restrictiveness of the abortion regime. Polling shows that Kansas is evenly split between pro-life and pro-choice supporters which makes an abortion ban more unlikely than greater abortion restrictions. Overall, there are only 11 states with a pro-life majority which means outright bans are unlikely in most states. Instead, pro-life groups should seek legislation that limits the most abortions considering the political circumstances.
Fourth, referenda differ from candidate elections. The referendum in Kansas saw 181,000 more votes than the gubernatorial primaries which indicates abortion motivated a lot of voters. However, the ability to vote for or against abortion was easy to understand. This November, voters will consider multiple issues and control of Congress when selecting candidates. It is unlikely that Republican and Independent voters will vote Democratic when they rate inflation, the economy, poor leadership in Washington, crime, and immigration as their main concerns. Even if voters consider abortion, they will weigh the candidates’ competing positions against the probability of enacting those views. This calculation is more complex than an up-or-down vote.
The pro-life movement has won the constitutional battle but now must win the “hearts and minds” of fellow Americans by increasing and improving their educational and political efforts. Otherwise, abortion law will reflect public opinion resulting in a heavily regulated abortion regime which advances the sanctity of life but not what pro-lifers want.
This column appeared in The Jackson Sun