Press "Enter" to skip to content

Abortion Amendment Narrowly Ahead in Early Poll

By Cory Allen Heidelberger on 2023-12-20

South Dakota News Watch and the Chiesman Center poll 500 voters and find that, if we voted today, the initiated amendment to restore Roe v. Wade abortion rights in South Dakota would probably pass, but not by much:

The survey of 500 registered voters showed that 45.6% of respondents support the proposed measure, which would supersede a state abortion ban enacted when the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June 2022. That’s more than the 43.6% who said they oppose the change, but it’s within the poll’s margin of error of 4.5%.

…women surveyed in the poll oppose the measure 50.2% to 40.6%, with 9.2% undecided. A majority of men, 51%, said they support the proposed amendment; 36.9% oppose it and 12% are undecided.

…Democrats surveyed support the proposed amendment by a margin of 54.9% to 32.8%, with 12.3% undecided. Republicans oppose by a margin of 52.4% to 36.3%, with 11.3% undecided. For Independents/others, it was 54.6% support, 36.9% oppose, 8.5% undecided [Stu Whitney, “Abortion Amendment Draws Mixed Support: Poll,” South Dakota News Watch, 2023.12.18].

A two-percentage-point lead for abortion rights shows again that South Dakota voters are more liberal on real policy issues than their candidate votes suggest. That two-percentage-point lead is also why Representative Jon Hansen and his petition-blockers are desperate to portray the Roe v. Wade amendment as extreme and prevent it from coming to a vote. In a state where abortion rights should not be winning, in a state where even the two biggest purportedly pro-choice organizations, Planned Parenthood and the American Civil Liberties Union, are talking incomprehensible smack about it, this amendment is still coming out ahead in public opinion.

How do we turn this early narrow lead into the 55% Yes that killed abortion bans in South Dakota in 2006 and 2008? Simple:

  1. Get it on the ballot. Present it to voters as a reality, not a hypothetical.
  2. Blow Jon Hansen’s baseless “extremism” claim out of the water by reminding voters that this amendment is Roe v. Wade, the careful Supreme Court compromise that framed and protected women’s right to control their bodies for 49 years before the Trump theocrats took it away. The proposed amendment is a response to extremism and a return to the moderate balance that South Dakotans twice affirmed at the polls.
  3. Turn to the undecideds and say, “Yup, we hear you. Abortion is a complex moral issue. So who do you want ultimately deciding it: each pregnant woman, consulting with her doctor and her loved ones, or the state, run by Jon Hansen and his screaming street preachers and other politicians using women as political props?” Whom do you trust: women or the state? I suspect that line alone will pull three quarters of the undecideds to Yes on the amendment.
  4. Turn to the women, among whom this poll suggests the highest opposition, and say, “Yup, we hear you. We’d like to do more, and we will fight for more. But Roe v. Wade was a good, reliable foundation for abortion rights for 49 years. Right now, those rights are gone. Let’s use this amendment to put that foundation back in place, restore your rights to where they were for 49 years, and build on that foundation in years to come.”

Petitioners have until May 7 to collect 35,017 registered voter signatures and submit them to the Secretary of State.

Published in South Dakota

24 Comments

  1. sx123 2023-12-20 06:08

    Democracy shows it’s flaw when the majority decide on something that only applies to or affects a minority.

    Poll just those for which abortion applies, mainly women/girls that can have kids. I’m curious what these results would be.

    But then there is also a national stability problem: Too many abortions and bye-bye country. Every women must have 2.3 kids on average to keep things going. Math.

    In reality, I would guess most people get more uneasy with abortion the further along the developing baby is and there is a huge “it depends” factor affecting these polls.

  2. Cory Allen Heidelberger Post author | 2023-12-20 06:15

    Democracy is still far less flawed than having a minority led by Jon Hansen impose its religious decision-making on everyone else.

    There is an interesting Kantian point to be made that abortion is problematic in the sense that if every pregnant woman did it (if universalized a maxim), we’d go extinct. But that’s not the maxim or the prospect we’re asking people to vote on, and that’s not a realistic situation. We’re not asking, “Should every pregnant woman abort her pregnancy?” What we’re really asking is whether women should have the right to decide whether to carry out their pregnancies or whether any of us non-pregnant people have any say in dictating whether a woman should remain pregnant and bear a child.

    Even the question is complicated, but such is the nature of democracy: we are asked to deal with complicated questions. We must trust that an educated and moral populace can grapple with such questions and make wise decisions. And in this case, we must make a wise decision as a people to trust individuals to make wise decisions for themselves, decisions that non one else should make for them.

  3. Richard Schriever 2023-12-20 07:55

    Hey sx 123. It’s surprising to me to see that someone who uses numbers in their moniker not understand that women are NOT a minority in our human society. Just amazing really.

  4. Richard Schriever 2023-12-20 07:57

    Further – your “math” assumes stasis in the base population, I.E., zero immigration. Are you related to grudz?

  5. Richard Schriever 2023-12-20 08:01

    And finally, to cite the “conservative” perspective, to assert that an abortion has no effect on the male parent – OR the “unborn person”, or even the medical institution (people-wise) is also a flawed perspective. I suppose we can just assume that you will be voting against the measure.

  6. sx123 2023-12-20 08:27

    I am against people making medical decisions for others, and my point was that we have people voting on things that don’t apply to them. And we have people getting polled on things that don’t apply to them. And we have a lopsided legislature voting on things that don’t apply to them.

    Why should I be voting on what color of car (black) you must drive?

  7. Bob Newland 2023-12-20 08:56

    SX123, you have a really cute way of restating arguments into forms you can refute, even though what you refute is not what the argument is about.j

  8. Ryan 2023-12-20 09:16

    sx123 seems both wrong and right at the same time – love it.

    yeah, most people don’t have abortions, so this issue “applies” directly only to a minority of people…

    but, that’s true about pretty much everything we vote on. a minority of people smoke weed, but it’s been on the ballot several times. a minority of people would benefit directly from medicaid expansion, but we voted on it. a very small minority of people own meatpacking plants, but we all got our say. that’s how society works, sx123.

  9. sx123 2023-12-20 09:18

    Corey said that the polls indicate that SD is more liberal in practice.

    And I wanted a poll targeting only those for which abortion actually applies because I think it’ll show that that cohort thinks SD abortion law are draconian. Maybe not, but I’d like to know. The linked to article does not break down numbers by sex/age enough, imo.

    I also stated a mathematical reality that it’s possible to abort ourselves out of existence. Do I think that’ll actually happen? No.

    Not sure why you’e ganging up on me. But it’s fun.

  10. Ryan 2023-12-20 09:29

    sx123, individuals are commenting in response to your comments – there is no gang. you are just saying things that are opinions as if they are facts and not up for debate. people debate debatable things.

    it is also mathematically possible that humans become extinct through many of our own actions, such as nuclear war, radiation, global warming, famine, etc… each of those are more likely in my opinion than aborting ourselves into extinction.

    the polls don’t specify the categories you would like to see because they frankly don’t matter. one person, one vote – for better or worse. you suggest that you think potential-abortion-patients would find SD’s abortion laws draconian, but the poll suggested men are more likely to be in favor of allowing abortion than women are, and fewer men are opposed than women. so right off the bat, your most basic assumption appears critically flawed.

  11. John 2023-12-20 09:35

    sx123: democracy is flawed when . . .
    the minority leads the majority around by their nose.
    -when the electoral college invokes a president who didn’t win the popular vote;
    -when voter registration is not mandatory and easy;
    -when gerrymandering is rampant and ignored or encouraged by courts;
    -when laws and rules, like in the US senate, allow one dork to hold nominations;
    -when the political emphasis is not on cooperation, but rather the political emphasis is on winning;
    -when a nation ignores the plain meaning of its constitution and laws (rule of law), but rather becomes a nation of men.

    The US is a democracy in distress. The US is not among the world’s top 30 democracies for many good reasons.

  12. Ryan 2023-12-20 09:42

    John, i think i agree with a lot of what you are saying, but then i laughed out loud at the end with the suggestion that you have a running tally of at least the top 30 democracies on earth haha that’s gotta be a cool list

  13. e platypus onion 2023-12-20 10:01

    Wouldn’t it be a hoot if all ballot measures were aimed at men’s votes only and leave women out completely? I guess that is why all eligible voters have the right to vote, regardless of what magats and their ideologue friends on the courts have to say.

  15. bearcreekbat 2023-12-20 10:15

    The idea of essentially enslaving one group of individuals to assure the continuation of the human species is an interesting concept. The question for supporters of such an idea becomes: are you willing to become the slaves needed to assural the survival of the species?

    Forcing women to bear offspring against their will, no matter the theoretical reason, seems to me nothing more than another tentacle or form of slavery or involuntary servitude. Incidentally, what part of this language in the 13th Amendment permits this type of subjugation of pregnant women: “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude,. . . shall exist . . . .”

    And if the enslavement of women is necessary for human survival, then why isn’t the same of other groups be arbitrarily deemed necessary, such as agricultural workers since humans need food to survive, or construction workers since humans need shelter to survive, medical personnel for similar reasons, et al. Where, how and why is the line drawn, if not just by some arbitrary determination by those more powerful than pregnant women?

  16. All Mammal 2023-12-20 11:43

    Since a very young age, my loyalty lies with the good earth, not my race. Man can suck it, if it came down to choosing one or the other. Sorry. Good luck trying to take that choice away. Come up with some other method of keeping your Finkelstein sh¡t kind alive that doesn’t involve subjugating those that want no part of it. Or prove your species even deserves to enjoy the heavenly digs on this finite planet and that your posterity will not continue to waller her out. Put the burden on yourownselves.

  17. Arlo Blundt 2023-12-20 13:19

    Will South Dakota grant full citizenship to women??? In this century?? During the campaign it will be noteworthy to pay close attention to the men at the forefront of the anti constitutional Amendment campaign. What’s their agenda??

  20. Ryan 2023-12-21 08:45

    richard, you gotta share that list with john… his top 30 is different than yours… somebody’s methodology is suspect.

  22. Ryan 2023-12-21 12:44

    all mammal – lots of lists, it seems like! but each one being different makes me think there is a bit of proprietary guesswork, and the variables used are inconsistent or seemingly arbitrary. i guess it’s good that somebody is doing work to keep track tho…

Comments are closed.