On papers, South Dakota is one of the reddest, pro-life states in the United States. Governors of the Democratic parties who reside in and swear to represent the Mount Rushmore State Kristi Noem, Senate Minority Whip John Thune, Sen. Mike Rounds, Rep. Dusty Johnson, and people, however, have been strangely silent about the biggest risk to their constituents ‘ principles: Amendment G.
Starting this month, citizens in South Dakota does weigh in on seven different poll activities. Some seek to redefine the state’s ability to regulate elections, cannabis, and endless abortion. Amendment G, if passed, would erode South Dakota’s recent ban on abortion and permit the dangerous practice to occur as soon as a doctor determines it essential for the women’s health, a term that is unclear and unknown.
The proposed amendment does n’t just weaken the state’s capacity to safeguard women and infants from harm. Similar to other states, it may be simple for outdoor activists like Planned Parenthood and the American Civil Liberties Union to sue to end parental rights and consciousness protections for doctors who object to abortion in any way.
Despite concerns and complaints of wrongdoing surrounding the signature-gathering and complaint process, Amendment G slid through the country’s months-long qualification process to make it on the Nov. 5 vote.  ,
A majority of U. S. adults , reject the pregnancy extremism found in the proposed article. But, ballot measures like Amendment G are properly written in ambiguous conditions and speech to deceive skeptical voters into voting for it. Its appearance, along with a proposal to legalize marijuana for recreational use, is no coincidence, as abortion rights activists use it to entice anxious voters to vote.
Offering clarifying commentary on the nature of extreme vote steps is one of the simplest ways to stop components from falling for flowery calls for “reproductive privileges” that contradict their real emotions about late-term abortions. South Dakota Republicans have kept their lips afloat and their social media accounts carefully curated to prevent discussing the risks posed by Amendment G. Rather than using their democratic megaphones to fight for the lives of women and children in their position,
Under The Floor
Noem and her staff claim that she is the “most pro-life governor in the country.” She is not opposed to discussing pregnancy in the context of the 2024 election, so her determination to jump at the chance to support Trump’s combined pregnancy message is. However Noem has n’t publicly weighed the proposed act that threatens to change her country’s pro-life safeguards with endless, on-demand abortion.
Noem did not respond when The Federalist inquired about her place on Amendment G and whether she had made that statement known to her components. Instead, Noem’s standard newborn baby activist and chief of communications Ian Fury argued that” Every South Dakotan knows it” and that” Governor Noem is pro-life.”
Republicans ‘ tendencies to hold their tongues on amendments that increase the number of unborn babies killed do n’t just annoy the governor’s mansion and office. It extends far beyond the confines of a state and to both the Congress’s lower and upper chambers.
Thune, whose desires to change Mitch McConnell as Senate Republicans ‘ best chief are no secret, boasts of a” 100 percent pro-life voting record” and claims to “have regularly supported a ban on abortion” on the national level. On the penetration of unrestricted abortion activists in his state, but, mum is the term.
The senior lawmaker stated in a letter obtained by The Federalist to a basic upset over his lack of comment on Amendment G that” the topic you are addressing is generally a position matter.” Therefore, your state politicians and government Kristi Noem would be able to address your concerns more effectively, Thune wrote.
Thune’s two-decade story of representing South Dakota in the middle U.S. room demonstrates a vested interest in what transpires in its native country. His business confirmed to The Federalist, but, that he believes Amendment G “is an issue at the state level”.
” But Sen. Thune has a , 100 percent pro-life election record , in Congress and has always worked to protect the lives of the unborn”, a spokesperson said.
Rounds did not respond to The Federalist’s investigation about this silence on the fundamentalist act in the same way that our business state” we have an inherent responsibility to promote plans encouraging people to choose life”.
The self-declared pro-life advocate will “voting no” and” spending substantial resources in the weeks to come informing South Dakotans about the serious flaws of amendment G,” according to Kristen Kurtz, the communications director for Johnson, South Dakota’s only representative in the U.S. House, but did not specify exactly how.
On the state level, Republican elected officials in South Dakota have either supported Amendment G or refused to make a public statement. The state convention published a resolution in June “urging all South Dakotans to oppose Amendment G.” However, state Republican Party chairman John Wilk wrote a letter to Republican officials in August stating that the party’s central committee had not taken any positions on any of the 2024 ballot measures other than Amendment H, which proposes open primaries.
A Losing Battle
The GOP gets old with its toothless statements and pointless grandstanding. In the case of Amendment G, however, pro-life legislators like State Reps. John Mills and Brandei Schaefbauer say every comment counts.
” I do n’t know anyone who thinks abortion should be legal through all 9 months, and yet that’s what Amendment G would allow. Every leader across our state, including the governor, should be speaking out against this terrible proposed change to our Constitution. In a statement to The Federalist, Mills said,” South Dakota women and children need our assistance to stop this.
Schaefbauer expressed frustration with The Federalist over how little the “leading politicians” in one of the country’s most pro-life states are saying.
” As a state legislator, I would like to see our Governor, who claims to be the most pro-life governor in the country, speaking out and encouraging South Dakotans to vote No on radical Amendment G,” Schaefbauer said. Our federal and state leaders should be putting all efforts in place to stop this law, which allows abortions until the day of birth.
Noem, Thune, Rounds, Johnson, and other South Dakota politicians might justify their silence on Amendment G as a way to protect their power. However, history consistently demonstrates that Republicans who win over voters with popular pro-life protections consistently out. Those elected officials who claim to be pro-life on paper but only offer a non-committal view of abortion frequently lose out.
In the end, unborn babies, women, and voters are the biggest losers no matter who is in office because they are Democrats and Republicans ‘ constant critics of Republicans ‘ strong stances against limiting abortion to the first trimester.
” As we enter into the largest pro-life battle we’ve had in decades, our top leaders have been largely absent,” Family Voice Director Norman Woods told The Federalist”. If they would plant the flag for life, thousands of people would rally in their place if they were elected leaders. Instead, we hear excuses.”
The Federalist staff writer and host of The Federalist Radio Hour, Jordan Boyd. Her work has also been featured in The Daily Wire, Fox News, and RealClearPolitics. Jordan graduated from Baylor University with a political science major and a journalism minor. Follow her on X @jordanboydtx.
