Pro-life supporters have received yet another dose of negative media after losing all seven position pregnancy elections since Roe v. Wade was overturned. In ruby- dark South Dakota, a latest poll found that 53 percent of voters, including 46 percent of Republicans, support a ballot measure that would set up a trimester system for legalizing abortion ( related to Roe ), while only 35 percent oppose it, a significant shift from the 46- 44 advantage the pro- abortion side had in November. However, pro-lifers never abandon this race at this point.
South Dakota, along with Florida, has the best chance of a success in the near future, despite the fact that amendments in the Sunshine State must go with a majority of the population. Despite the bad surveys, there are real reasons for enthusiasm.
If calculated using former President Donald Trump’s vote margin in 2020 ( a simplistic measure, but adequate for this analysis ), South Dakota will be the reddest state yet to have an abortion referendum. Now, that name belongs to Kentucky, which has a Trump ratio of about 0.2 percentage less than South Dakota. In 2022, the pro- contraception side won by about 5 points in Kentucky’s election, suggesting that politics alone will not have the pro- career side to victory. But, Kentucky’s vote was in a midterm time, and participation was about 70 percent of what it was in 2020.
In a national season, the pro-choice party will have a higher share of voters to split their ballots to secure a victory. In a state as dark as South Dakota, higher voter turnout may benefit the pro-life movement, and immediate attention needs to be paid to boosting Republican support. While she may never become pro- existence when it comes to pups, Gov. On this subject, Kristin Noem has been very vocal. She might be able to recover her reputation with a strategy opposed to the amendment that is kind-hearted. Sen. John Thune of South Dakota, who wants to get the party’s head, might use some political maneuvering and political acumen to help conservatives win.  ,
Status Quo Bias
In addition to political trim, the pro- existence side should gain from” little c” conservatism on this referendum. Status quo discrimination is a strong political phenomenon. Individuals are more receptive to change, and the one who keeps the status quo tends to outperform voting. Essentially, this means it is usually better to be the “no” area in a vote. In Kentucky, the pro- contraception side benefited from standing status discrimination. The referendum’s passage would have changed the Kentucky Constitution to state that “nothing in this Constitution may be interpreted to secure or defend a right to abortion or require the financing of contraception,” but the outcome did not. Kentucky’s abortion restrictions remained in effect, though pro- slackers are concerned about possible potential court cases.
In South Dakota, the pro- living area may benefit from standing quo bias. A “yes” win would change the South Dakota constitution, establish a trimester system, and impose restrictions on the mother’s health in the third trimester. A “no” win would change nothing. Although South Dakota’s abortion ban would continue, the state legislature could theoretically implement any system it wanted.
Other Factors in Favor
Finally, the pro- abortion side has generally outspent the pro- life side by vast margins. This has occurred in both red and blue states, and it has also occurred in Kentucky, where the pro-life side was outspent by about 6: 1. As of now, this has n’t happened yet in South Dakota, with the two sides running fairly even. Pro-life advocates should n’t be caught flat-footed once more because South Dakota is not a state that requires a sizable amount of funding. The days of 6: 1 ( or even sometimes 10: 1 ) spending deficits should be over, especially in a small red state like South Dakota. Between partisanship, status quo bias, and fundraising parity, the structural elements of a referendum have never been better for pro- lifers.
Worth Trying to Win
South Dakota is a small state, but it is worthwhile for pro-lifers to go all in to win there.  , The referendums in Maryland and Colorado are already lost, and Florida will be an uphill ( and expensive ) battle, even with the 60 percent threshold for amendments. This election is easily funded and unlikely to receive too much national Democratic attention. It also may be the only thing between pro- lifers and a 0- 11 record on ballot measures ( or worse, if more states add abortion referendums ).
Another winless year could make political support even more difficult to come by in the future because the GOP is already wriggling about abortion. The most significant outcome of a win in the referendum is of course the thousands of lives that will be saved, but the symbolic value of a much-needed victory also matters.  ,  ,  ,
Matthew Malec is Echelon Insights ‘ Coordinator for Special Projects. His articles have appeared in the New York Post and the City Journal.
