Kansas votes to allow abortion access

[F1fan]

As a Kansas resident there was a lot of talk and advertising about the vote on August 2. It was a primary vote, so usually very low turnout. Republicans in the statehouse decided to put a decision on the ballot for a change to the KS constitution to restrict abortion access. It was controversial because the republicans knew conservatives were more likely to vote, and the language on the ballot was confusing. There was a lot of uncertainty about the results. Recent polls shoed the YES to change the constitution would win. One poll had YES at 47% and NO at 42%. Kansas is largely a red state but has been leaning moderate and even left.

The usual turnout is about 400,000 but today drew over 800,000. The results at 93% counted is YES at 40% and NO at 60%. So this tells us that citizens want abortion services to be available to women, and the "forced to give birth" movement is not acceptable.

What does this mean to the uber-conservatives who want to impose their religious control over women and their rights?

 

[danieldemol]

As a Kansas resident there was a lot of talk and advertising about the vote on August 2. It was a primary vote, so usually very low turnout. Republicans in the statehouse decided to put a decision on the ballot for a change to the KS constitution to restrict abortion access. It was controversial because the republicans knew conservatives were more likely to vote, and the language on the ballot was confusing. There was a lot of uncertainty about the results. Recent polls shoed the YES to change the constitution would win. One poll had YES at 47% and NO at 42%. Kansas is largely a red state but has been leaning moderate and even left.

The usual turnout is about 400,000 but today drew over 800,000. The results at 93% counted is YES at 40% and NO at 60%. So this tells us that citizens want abortion services to be available to women, and the "forced to give birth" movement is not acceptable.

What does this mean to the uber-conservatives who want to impose their religious control over women and their rights?

Do you have a source where I can read the results? (I could only find 91% counted but I do have Covid so bear with me) Great result though

 

[Heyo]

Republicans in the statehouse decided to put a decision on the ballot for a change to the KS constitution to restrict abortion access.

It's not often but I have to applaud the republicans for their dedication to democracy and their trust in the judgement of their constituency. I love direct democracy.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

It's not often but I have to applaud the republicans for their dedication to democracy and their trust in the judgement of their constituency. I love direct democracy.

I assume they thought it would pass or they may not have tried.
This is, if I'm right, a disconnect between the further right reaches of the Conservative Republicans and the average American, who doesn't side with Republicans on many things (such as abortion).

 

[crossfire]

I assume they thought it would pass or they may not have tried.
This is, if I'm right, a disconnect between the further right reaches of the Conservative Republicans and the average American, who doesn't side with Republicans on many things (such as abortion).

I would say that it exposes the so-called conservative faction that they have a strong desire to alienate inalienable (naturally inherent) rights.

 

[crossfire]

As a Kansas resident there was a lot of talk and advertising about the vote on August 2. It was a primary vote, so usually very low turnout. Republicans in the statehouse decided to put a decision on the ballot for a change to the KS constitution to restrict abortion access. It was controversial because the republicans knew conservatives were more likely to vote, and the language on the ballot was confusing. There was a lot of uncertainty about the results. Recent polls shoed the YES to change the constitution would win. One poll had YES at 47% and NO at 42%. Kansas is largely a red state but has been leaning moderate and even left.

The usual turnout is about 400,000 but today drew over 800,000. The results at 93% counted is YES at 40% and NO at 60%. So this tells us that citizens want abortion services to be available to women, and the "forced to give birth" movement is not acceptable.

What does this mean to the uber-conservatives who want to impose their religious control over women and their rights?

I heard that those seeking to change the Kansas Constitution to remove bodily autonomy engaged in deceptive practices--including sending out text alerts saying vote yes to preserve abortion access (or something to that effect.) Voting yes in this election would actually remove the Constitutional protections in this case.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It's not often but I have to applaud the republicans for their dedication to democracy and their trust in the judgement of their constituency. I love direct democracy.

I would agree, except that in this case they tried to pull a fast one. They knew that during the primaries that they had a huge advantage in the polls so they put an issue that was essentially a Republican one on the ballot. They still lost by a massive landslide.

This gives me some serious hopes for the midterm elections themselves. With the bad economy and the tendency of the uneducated to blame whoever is in power at the time it went bad it was looking rather grim for the Democrats. Now the Republicans may have started a Blue Wave thanks to the Supreme Court.

 

[Heyo]

I assume they thought it would pass or they may not have tried.
This is, if I'm right, a disconnect between the further right reaches of the Conservative Republicans and the average American, who doesn't side with Republicans on many things (such as abortion).

I would agree, except that in this case they tried to pull a fast one. They knew that during the primaries that they had a huge advantage in the polls so they put an issue that was essentially a Republican one on the ballot. They still lost by a massive landslide.

"Never attribute to malice what can be equally explained by stupidity." Hanlon's Razor

No matter whether they had bad intentions or were just unaware of the positions of their constituency, practising direct democracy should be lauded, anyway. Make it so popular that other states also try it.

 

[Estro Felino]

Vox Populi vox Dei.
The majority wins.

 

[Altfish]

As a Kansas resident there was a lot of talk and advertising about the vote on August 2. It was a primary vote, so usually very low turnout. Republicans in the statehouse decided to put a decision on the ballot for a change to the KS constitution to restrict abortion access. It was controversial because the republicans knew conservatives were more likely to vote, and the language on the ballot was confusing. There was a lot of uncertainty about the results. Recent polls shoed the YES to change the constitution would win. One poll had YES at 47% and NO at 42%. Kansas is largely a red state but has been leaning moderate and even left.

The usual turnout is about 400,000 but today drew over 800,000. The results at 93% counted is YES at 40% and NO at 60%. So this tells us that citizens want abortion services to be available to women, and the "forced to give birth" movement is not acceptable.

What does this mean to the uber-conservatives who want to impose their religious control over women and their rights?

Great news.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

"Never attribute to malice what can be equally explained by stupidity." Hanlon's Razor

No matter whether they had bad intentions or were just unaware of the positions of their constituency, practising direct democracy should be lauded, anyway. Make it so popular that other states also try it.

The intent should be questioned because many Republicans have turned their back on democracy and believe fraud is the only explanation for their defeats.
And, ultimately, rights of people regarding such matters should never be up to a vote by the people. This easily leads to a tyranny of the majority. No one's healthcare should be at the mercy of the general voting public.

 

[exchemist]

As a Kansas resident there was a lot of talk and advertising about the vote on August 2. It was a primary vote, so usually very low turnout. Republicans in the statehouse decided to put a decision on the ballot for a change to the KS constitution to restrict abortion access. It was controversial because the republicans knew conservatives were more likely to vote, and the language on the ballot was confusing. There was a lot of uncertainty about the results. Recent polls shoed the YES to change the constitution would win. One poll had YES at 47% and NO at 42%. Kansas is largely a red state but has been leaning moderate and even left.

The usual turnout is about 400,000 but today drew over 800,000. The results at 93% counted is YES at 40% and NO at 60%. So this tells us that citizens want abortion services to be available to women, and the "forced to give birth" movement is not acceptable.

What does this mean to the uber-conservatives who want to impose their religious control over women and their rights?

Haha, no other Republican state will dare risk a referendum on this issue, clearly!

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

It is, indeed, a powerful victory driven by a "monumental turnout." Let this serve as a harbinger of things to come!

 

[F1fan]

I heard that those seeking to change the Kansas Constitution to remove bodily autonomy engaged in deceptive practices--including sending out text alerts saying vote yes to preserve abortion access (or something to that effect.) Voting yes in this election would actually remove the Constitutional protections in this case.

Yes, there was some questionable acts by the Republicans from start to finish in this issue. The referendum was created before the Supreme Court overturned Roe, but the Republicans knew the decision was coming and they wanted to take advantage of changing the constitution. The republicans underestimated the public's attitude about abortion access. No doubt they will have some concern about their influence if their policies reflect more of the far right agenda.

 

[Revoltingest]

And, ultimately, rights of people regarding such matters should never be up to a vote by the people. This easily leads to a tyranny of the majority. No one's healthcare should be at the mercy of the general voting public.

Nearly everything is up to the mercy of the general
public. Consider how many (even liberals) want
government to force everyone into public servitude,
be it the military draft or other government run
program to make us do good & learn the values
of sacrifice for the hive we all belong to.

Forcing someone pregnant to carry the fetus to term.
Is it any different from taking a couple years of one's
life for forced labor just because the majority says it's
good for one & it benefits society?
Liberals need to re-think their commitment to bodily
autonomy. As do conservatives who oppose one's
right to die with dignity on one's own schedule,
even if assistance is necessary.

 

[F1fan]

The intent should be questioned because many Republicans have turned their back on democracy and believe fraud is the only explanation for their defeats.
And, ultimately, rights of people regarding such matters should never be up to a vote by the people. This easily leads to a tyranny of the majority. No one's healthcare should be at the mercy of the general voting public.

The fortunate thing is that the results are not close, so there is no question about the results. As SZ pointed out there was some trickery on the part of republicans and if the NO side lost some votes to the confusion it was still massive. The turnout was on par with general elections, so the tactics by republicans backfired. I think it illustrates how extreme issues will general passion and voter participation.

 

[Shaul]

As a Kansas resident there was a lot of talk and advertising about the vote on August 2. It was a primary vote, so usually very low turnout. Republicans in the statehouse decided to put a decision on the ballot for a change to the KS constitution to restrict abortion access. It was controversial because the republicans knew conservatives were more likely to vote, and the language on the ballot was confusing. There was a lot of uncertainty about the results. Recent polls shoed the YES to change the constitution would win. One poll had YES at 47% and NO at 42%. Kansas is largely a red state but has been leaning moderate and even left.

The usual turnout is about 400,000 but today drew over 800,000. The results at 93% counted is YES at 40% and NO at 60%. So this tells us that citizens want abortion services to be available to women, and the "forced to give birth" movement is not acceptable.

What does this mean to the uber-conservatives who want to impose their religious control over women and their rights?

Or not.

Some of the “No” votes could have been “when in doubt vote no” votes. That is, this was a proposed change to the state Constitution which both sides agree was worded in a confusing way. People hesitate to change Constitutions and less so when they aren’t clear about the proposed change.

Also, considering the huge amount of pro-abortion money that came in from out of state sources, this shows that the pro-abortion camp is facing a bleak future. As time passes they will face more and more costly fights with less and less resources. They are facing a war of attrition, and the suave among them know it.

In addition Kansas is still a conservative state and the Legislature there can still restrict abortion there in many ways, and they probably will. In the end this is likely to prove to be a pyrrhic victim for the pro-abortion side.

 

[Revoltingest]

Or not.

Some of the “No” votes could have been “when in doubt vote no” votes. That is, this was a proposed change to the state Constitution which both sides agree was worded in a confusing way. People hesitate to change Constitutions and less so when they aren’t clear about the proposed change.

Also, considering the huge amount of pro-abortion money that came in from out of state sources, this shows that the pro-abortion camp is facing a bleak future. As time passes they will face more and more costly fights with less and less resources. They are facing a war of attrition, and the suave among them know it.

In addition Kansas is still a conservative state and the Legislature there can still restrict abortion there in many ways, and they probably will. In the end this is likely to prove to be a pyrrhic victim for the pro-abortion side.

I see a different picture. Christianity is losing
ground. So the future bodes fewer fundies who
would deny abortion rights. We heathens are
patient, & will prevail over superstitions.

 

[F1fan]

Or not.

Some of the “No” votes could have been “when in doubt vote no” votes. That is, this was a proposed change to the state Constitution which both sides agree was worded in a confusing way. People hesitate to change Constitutions and less so when they aren’t clear about the proposed change.

The wording on the ballot was confusing. That is why there was a huge campaign by pro-freedom and pro-rights Kansans to make clear the vote was: Do you want to eliminate abortion access in Kansas, yes or no? 58% of Kansans said no.

Also, considering the huge amount of pro-abortion money that came in from out of state sources, this shows that the pro-abortion camp is facing a bleak future. As time passes they will face more and more costly fights with less and less resources. They are facing a war of attrition, and the suave among them know it.

There was more "forced birth" money spent. This illustrates that money doesn't buy elections when the people oppose the issue, banning abortion access and limiting freedom. The people like their freedom and healthcare options. There are too many negative stories coming from ban states that shows the far right do not have the moral position on this issue. Too many women being harmed by banning abortion services, and no acknowledgment by the far right extremists that their ideals are hurting women. That is immoral.

In addition Kansas is still a conservative state and the Legislature there can still restrict abortion there in many ways, and they probably will. In the end this is likely to prove to be a pyrrhic victim for the pro-abortion side.

It is a conservative state that is moving left. That is due to Kansans being moderates who recognize the far right as a threat to freedom and safety.

 

[Shaul]

I see a different picture. Christianity is losing
ground. So the future bodes fewer fundies who
would deny abortion rights. We heathens are
patient, & will prevail over superstitions.

I’m not sure what that has to do with this ballot question. Not being a Christian I have no problem if Christianity is losing ground. But then again, I don’t think heathenism is the way of the future.