'Nuanced' Campaign By Abortion-Rights Supporters Key To Defeat Of South Dakota Abortion Ban, Editorial Says

Main Category: Abortion
Article Date: 03 Dec 2008 - 2:00 PDT

email to a friend   printer friendly   view / write opinions   rate article

After the 2006 and 2008 defeats of two "bitterly fought" South Dakota ballot initiatives that would have banned nearly all abortion procedures, it is "time to acknowledge that South Dakota voters have spoken -- twice," a Minneapolis Star Tribune editorial states. According to the editorial, opponents of this year's proposal -- which would have banned abortion except in cases of rape or incest or in narrowly defined life and health exceptions -- "ran a different and highly effective campaign." The campaign "not only connected with voters, but it suggests that future debates in South Dakota and elsewhere can and should move beyond absolutes and old rhetoric," the editorial says. The editorial continues that the South Dakota Campaign for Healthy Families -- the coalition of groups opposing the measure -- "smartly targeted the majority of people that polls routinely find are in the middle on this issue. Its welcome, nuanced message acknowledged abortion is problematic for many, but emphasized that a far-reaching ban would encroach too far into the decision-making best made by a family." Sarah Stoesz -- president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of Minnesota, North Dakota and South Dakota -- "has particularly pushed to move beyond old rallying cries about reproductive rights toward acknowledging the moral ambiguity the issue presents for so many people," the editorial says.

The editorial adds, "Unfortunately, ban proponents appear to be mulling their options for yet another ballot fight." However, "The 2008 ballot measure failed by ... about the same margin as the 2006 measure, suggesting that a future ban is unlikely to succeed," the editorial states, adding that voters' "response to ban opponents' nuanced campaign should signal the need to set aside ballot measures and step up efforts to achieve what both sides want: fewer abortions." The editorial concludes, "The money spent fighting for and against this ban would have gone far to prevent unplanned pregnancies and help women grappling with them. Another ballot fight in South Dakota would only divert attention and more resources away from those who truly need help" (Minneapolis Star Tribune, 11/30).

Reprinted with kind permission from http://www.nationalpartnership.org. You can view the entire Daily Women's Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery here. The Daily Women's Health Policy Report is a free service of the National Partnership for Women & Families, published by The Advisory Board Company.

© 2008 The Advisory Board Company. All rights reserved.