Go to HHH home page.
Smart Politics
 


Abortion Policy: An Upper Midwestern Snapshot

Bookmark and Share

In South Dakota a landmark petitioned referendum will be on the ballot this November, asking voters whether or not to uphold the recently signed State House Bill's abortion ban. Mid-summer polling on the referendum—which does not provide exceptions for rape and incest—suggests the referendum may not pass, with those inclined to vote 'nay' holding an eight-point advantage (KELO-TV / Argus Leader). So, just how supportive is the Upper Midwest of a woman's right to choose?

South Dakotans equally self-identify as pro-life (48%) as pro-choice (48%), followed by Iowans (41% / 54%), Minnesotans (40% / 55% ), and Wisconsinites (39% / 56%) (SurveyUSA). But how do these labels 'pro-life' and 'pro-choice' translate into policy positions?

It appears many Upper Midwesterners who are pro-life still view abortion as a personal choice. The vast majority of residents of each state feel the state and federal government should not have the final say on the matter (72% in Iowa, 70% in Wisconsin, 66% in Minnesota, and 59% in South Dakota) (SurveyUSA).

Still, despite being outnumbered, the power of the 'pro-life' movement can be felt at the ballot box: in June four republican members of the South Dakota state legislature who voted against the abortion ban were ousted in the primary. The extent to which social conservatives—especially religious conservatives—turn out to vote may not only spell victory or defeat for South Dakota's abortion referendum, but also close district-level races throughout the Upper Midwest.

Previous post: Bush Drag Not Affecting All Republicans
Next post: MN: The Decline of Independents?

Leave a comment


Remains of the Data

Kevin McCarthy Becomes Least Tenured Floor Leader in US House History

At less than four terms, McCarthy has served 423 fewer days in the chamber than any floor leader in U.S. House history and almost 10 years less than the average leader.

Political Crumbs

The Second Time Around

Former Republican Congressman Bob Beauprez became the seventh major party or second place gubernatorial candidate in Colorado to get a second chance at the office when he narrowly won his party's nomination last month. Two of the previous six candidates were successful. Democrat Alva Adams lost his first gubernatorial bid to Benjamin Eaton in 1884, but was victorious two years later against William Meyer. Democrat Charles Johnson placed third in 1894 behind Republican Albert McIntyre and Populist incumbent Governor David Waite but returned as the Fusion (Democrat/Populist) nominee in 1898 and defeated GOPer Henry Wolcott. Gubernatorial candidates who received a second chance but lost both general elections include Democrat Thomas Patterson (1888, 1914), Progressive Edward Costigan (1912, 1914), Republican Donald Brotzman (1954, 1956), and Republican David Strickland (1978, 1986).


How Are the Plurality Winners Doing?

Nearly 40 percent of plurality winners of U.S. Senate elections lose their seat in the next election cycle. Will that happen to any of the three such incumbents on the ballot in 2014? Recent polling suggests Democrats Al Franken of Minnesota, Mark Begich of Alaska, and Jeff Merkley of Oregon all currently have an advantage over their nominated/frontrunning GOP opponents, but each is flirting with plurality support once again. Franken led endorsed GOPer Mike McFadden 48 to 42 percent in a new SurveyUSA poll while the polling group showed Merkley with a 50 to 32 percent advantage over Monica Wehby. Begich led each of the three major GOP candidates in last month's PPP survey: 42 to 37 percent over Daniel Sullivan, 41 to 33 percent over Mead Treadwell, and 43 to 27 percent over Joe Miller.


more POLITICAL CRUMBS

Humphrey School Sites
CSPG
Humphrey New Media Hub

Issues />

<div id=
Abortion
Afghanistan
Budget and taxes
Campaign finances
Crime and punishment
Economy and jobs
Education
Energy
Environment
Foreign affairs
Gender
Health
Housing
Ideology
Immigration
Iraq
Media
Military
Partisanship
Race and ethnicity
Reapportionment
Redistricting
Religion
Sexuality
Sports
Terrorism
Third parties
Transportation
Voting