Read the State Legislative Tracker. New edition available now!

Difference between revisions of "South Dakota Abortion Ban, Initiative 11 (2008)"

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Additional Reading)
Line 1: Line 1:
{|margin:0px -6px;" |style="width:100%"|
 
{|width="100%" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="5" style="vertical-align:top; background:#cef2e0; border:1px solid #cef2e0;"
 
|-
 
 
|<center><strong>Abortion-related Ballot Measures</strong><br />[[California Waiting Period and Parental Notification Initiative (2008)|California Parental Notification]] • [[Colorado Definition of Person Initiative (2008)|Colorado Definition of Person]] • [[Montana Right to Life Initiative (2008)|Montana Right to Life]] • [[Abortion-related ballot measures|Other abortion-related ballot measures]]</center>
 
|}
 
<hr>
 
 
<div style="float:right; margin:0 0 1em 1em;">__TOC__</div>
 
<div style="float:right; margin:0 0 1em 1em;">__TOC__</div>
 
An '''Abortion Ban Initiative''' will appear on the [[South Dakota 2008 ballot measures|November 2008 ballot]] in [[South Dakota]] as an [[initiated constitutional amendment]].  The ban measures is known as '''Initiated Measure 11'''. If the state's voters approve it, the [[South Dakota Constitution]] will henceforward ban all abortions in the state except for those performed because of rape, incest or to protect the woman's health. Doctors who perform an abortion in violation of this initiative's provisions could be charged with a Class 4 felony, which in South Dakota carries a maximum punishment of 10 years in jail and a $20,000 fine.
 
An '''Abortion Ban Initiative''' will appear on the [[South Dakota 2008 ballot measures|November 2008 ballot]] in [[South Dakota]] as an [[initiated constitutional amendment]].  The ban measures is known as '''Initiated Measure 11'''. If the state's voters approve it, the [[South Dakota Constitution]] will henceforward ban all abortions in the state except for those performed because of rape, incest or to protect the woman's health. Doctors who perform an abortion in violation of this initiative's provisions could be charged with a Class 4 felony, which in South Dakota carries a maximum punishment of 10 years in jail and a $20,000 fine.
  
The South Dakota ballot question is one of four [[abortion-related ballot measures]] headed for November ballots around the country.<ref>Chicago Tribune, [http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-oped0927kathamay27,0,391086.story ''Deja-vu in South Dakota''], May 27, 2008</ref>  The constitutionality of the measure has been called into question by South Dakota attorney general [[Larry Long]], who takes note that if the law is passed and then challenged as violating the federal constitution, lawsuit costs to defend it will be borne by the South Dakota government.<ref>[http://www.kxmb.com/News/242279.asp ''Ballot issues raise legal questions''], May 27, 2008</ref>,<ref>[http://www.stateline.org/live/details/story?contentId=328253 ''Stateline'', "Social issues crowd state ballots", July 24, 2008]</ref>
+
The South Dakota ballot question is one of three [[abortion-related ballot measures]] that will appear on November ballots around the country.<ref>Chicago Tribune, [http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-oped0927kathamay27,0,391086.story ''Deja-vu in South Dakota''], May 27, 2008</ref>   
  
 
==History==
 
==History==
Line 24: Line 17:
  
 
The stated reason behind their desire to ban abortion is to "stop abortion from being used as birth control". <ref>[http://www.voteyesforlife.com/petition.html ''Vote Yes For Life]'' website</ref> To that end, the [http://www.voteyesforlife.com/docs/Pastor%20Urgency%20Tour.pdf ''Pastor Urgency Tour''] scheduled for February 26 through March 1, 2008 has begun. The goal of the Urgency Tour is to "Rally 300 Pastors to collect signatures in their churches and get the people in their churches to collect signatures in their cities."
 
The stated reason behind their desire to ban abortion is to "stop abortion from being used as birth control". <ref>[http://www.voteyesforlife.com/petition.html ''Vote Yes For Life]'' website</ref> To that end, the [http://www.voteyesforlife.com/docs/Pastor%20Urgency%20Tour.pdf ''Pastor Urgency Tour''] scheduled for February 26 through March 1, 2008 has begun. The goal of the Urgency Tour is to "Rally 300 Pastors to collect signatures in their churches and get the people in their churches to collect signatures in their cities."
 +
 +
===Arguments for ban===
  
 
==Opposition==
 
==Opposition==
Line 31: Line 26:
 
A poll taken in 2007 by a Washington, D.C.-based polling company showed that 75% of South Dakotans believe there are alternative methods short of criminalizing abortion in order to reduce the abortion rate in the state.  The poll also showed that 52 percent do not support the issue being on the [[ballot]].<ref>[http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2007/11/16/is-south-dakota-gearing-up-for-another-abortion-ban ''Will South Dakota Attempt to Ban Abortion Again?''], RH Reality Check blog, Nov. 19, 2007</ref>
 
A poll taken in 2007 by a Washington, D.C.-based polling company showed that 75% of South Dakotans believe there are alternative methods short of criminalizing abortion in order to reduce the abortion rate in the state.  The poll also showed that 52 percent do not support the issue being on the [[ballot]].<ref>[http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2007/11/16/is-south-dakota-gearing-up-for-another-abortion-ban ''Will South Dakota Attempt to Ban Abortion Again?''], RH Reality Check blog, Nov. 19, 2007</ref>
  
==Status==
+
===Arguments against ban===
The [[initiative]] has collected more than twice the amount of signatures needed to put the measure on the ballot in November, and has been certified to appear on the November ballot.<ref>[http://www.argusleader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080331/NEWS/803310301/1001/news ''S.D. abortion ban going to vote''], Argus Leader, March 31, 2008</ref>
+
 
 +
Some arguments that have been made against the ban are:
 +
 
 +
* The state's medical community is opposed to the ban.
 +
 
 +
* It is "a dangerous government intrusion into the private medical decisions that affect how doctors treat women".<ref>[http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-10-26-south-dakota-abortion_N.htm ''USA Today'', "Voters split evenly on S.D. abortion ban", October 27, 2008]</ref>
 +
 
 +
* The constitutionality of the measure has been called into question by South Dakota attorney general [[Larry Long]], who takes note that if the law is passed and then challenged as violating the federal constitution, lawsuit costs to defend it will be borne by the South Dakota government.<ref>[http://www.kxmb.com/News/242279.asp ''Ballot issues raise legal questions''], May 27, 2008</ref>,<ref>[http://www.stateline.org/live/details/story?contentId=328253 ''Stateline'', "Social issues crowd state ballots", July 24, 2008]</ref>
 +
 
 +
==Polling information==
 +
 
 +
{|class="wikitable" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5" border="1" background-color:white"
 +
|-
 +
! style="background-color:#addfad" | Month of Poll
 +
! style="background-color:#addfad" | Polling company
 +
! style="background-color:#addfad" | In Favor
 +
! style="background-color:#addfad" | Opposed
 +
! style="background-color:#addfad" | Undecided
 +
|-valign="top"
 +
| October 2008 || Sioux Falls Argus Leader || 44 percent || 44 percent || 12 percent<ref>[http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-southdakota27-2008oct27,0,5945574.story ''Los Angeles Times'', "South Dakota to reconsider vote on abortion ban", October 27, 2008]</ref>
 +
|}
 +
 
 +
==Path to the ballot==
 +
 
 +
Supporters of the initiative collected more than twice the amount of [[South Dakota signature requirements|signatures required]] to put the measure on the ballot in November, and the measure was subsequently certified to appear on the November ballot.<ref>[http://www.argusleader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080331/NEWS/803310301/1001/news ''S.D. abortion ban going to vote''], Argus Leader, March 31, 2008</ref>
 +
 
 +
==Abortion on ballots in other states==
 +
 
 +
{|margin:0px -6px;" |style="width:100%"|
 +
{|width="100%" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="5" style="vertical-align:top; background:#cef2e0; border:1px solid #cef2e0;"
 +
|-
 +
 
 +
|<center><strong>Abortion-related Ballot Measures</strong><br />[[California Waiting Period and Parental Notification Initiative (2008)|California Parental Notification]] • [[Colorado Definition of Person Initiative (2008)|Colorado Definition of Person]] • [[Abortion-related ballot measures|Other abortion-related ballot measures]]</center>
 +
|}
  
 
==External links==
 
==External links==
Line 40: Line 68:
 
*[http://www.sdhealthyfamilies.org/index.php South Dakota Campaign for Healthy Families]
 
*[http://www.sdhealthyfamilies.org/index.php South Dakota Campaign for Healthy Families]
 
* [http://www.voicescarryblog.com/the-lampstand-project-a-coalition-of-south-dakota-churches-mobilized/ The Lampstand Project]
 
* [http://www.voicescarryblog.com/the-lampstand-project-a-coalition-of-south-dakota-churches-mobilized/ The Lampstand Project]
 
==See also==
 
*[[South Dakota 2008 ballot measures]]
 
*[[Petition drive deadlines in 2008]]
 
*[[South Dakota Initiative and Referendum Law]]
 
*[[South Dakota signature requirements]]
 
*[[Campaign finance requirements for South Dakota ballot measures]]
 
  
 
==References==
 
==References==
 
<references />
 
<references />
  
==Additional Reading==
+
==Additional reading==
 
* [http://www.argusleader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081015/NEWS/810150303/1003/BUSINESS ''Sanford: Abortion ban is unclear''], Argus Leader, October 15, 2008
 
* [http://www.argusleader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081015/NEWS/810150303/1003/BUSINESS ''Sanford: Abortion ban is unclear''], Argus Leader, October 15, 2008
 
* [http://www.kare11.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=526512&catid=2 ''South Dakota voters consider abortion ban once again''], KARE.com, October 10, 2008
 
* [http://www.kare11.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=526512&catid=2 ''South Dakota voters consider abortion ban once again''], KARE.com, October 10, 2008

Revision as of 07:12, 27 October 2008

An Abortion Ban Initiative will appear on the November 2008 ballot in South Dakota as an initiated constitutional amendment. The ban measures is known as Initiated Measure 11. If the state's voters approve it, the South Dakota Constitution will henceforward ban all abortions in the state except for those performed because of rape, incest or to protect the woman's health. Doctors who perform an abortion in violation of this initiative's provisions could be charged with a Class 4 felony, which in South Dakota carries a maximum punishment of 10 years in jail and a $20,000 fine.

The South Dakota ballot question is one of three abortion-related ballot measures that will appear on November ballots around the country.[1]

History

Pro-life measures have been attempted twice in the last two legislative sessions in South Dakota. The first attempt was in 2006 when the state legislature passed HB 1215, a bill that banned all abortion except those undertaken to protect a woman's health. Pro-choice organizers then collected signatures under the state's veto referendum laws, putting the new bill before the voters in the Abortion Ban Referendum. About 44% of South Dakota's voters agreed with the legislature's bill, so it was rejected and never took effect. The legislature's repudiated bill would have assigned criminal penalties to those that performed abortions outside of the new parameters.[2]

HB 1215 was introduced by the South Dakota Task Force to Study Abortions, which would "study and evaluate medical evidence, reporting findings, and make recommendations as to the need or any additional legislation governing medical procedures."[3] The task force included a total of four doctors and the husband of one of the HB 1215's proponents, Dr. Allen Unruh.

The study received negative media when several of the members walked out before it could come to a vote. Sen. Stan Adelstein, R-Rapid City, said that the report was filled with dishonest statements and that others input was being rejected.

"That's when I hit the ceiling," Adelstein said, "The report is theologically based, has patent untruths and misrepresentations, and no reasonable attention was paid to any amendments."[4]

Support

The same backers of the 2006 legislative bill are themselves now sponsoring a ballot measure for 2008. Supporters include Dr. Patricia Giebink, a Chamberlain obstetrician-gynecologist who preformed abortions in 1996 and 1997 before becoming a pro-life advocate. The other 12 sponsors of the petition are: Leah Anderson of Sioux Falls; Rep. Mary Glenski, D-Sioux Falls; Debra Hoy of Gregory; Karen Nelson of Elkton; Nicole Osmundson of Sioux Falls; Stacey Wollman of Rapid City; Allen Carlson of Rapid City; Robert Fischer of Rapid City; Dr. Donald Oliver of Rapid City; Dr. Ann Church of Spearfish; Kala Kickul of Sioux Falls; and Rory King of Aberdeen. [5] The group is known as Vote Yes For Life.

The stated reason behind their desire to ban abortion is to "stop abortion from being used as birth control". [6] To that end, the Pastor Urgency Tour scheduled for February 26 through March 1, 2008 has begun. The goal of the Urgency Tour is to "Rally 300 Pastors to collect signatures in their churches and get the people in their churches to collect signatures in their cities."

Arguments for ban

Opposition

The South Dakota Campaign for Healthy Families is the leading opponent of the measure. It is "a coalition fighting abortion bans in South Dakota. We are a political committee registered with the South Dakota Secretary of State and the IRS and formed in an effort to repeal HB 1215, the ban on abortions." [7] The Campaign is co-chaired by fourteen prominent South Dakota leaders. The group has successfully campaigned against the last two measures brought before the legislature.

A poll taken in 2007 by a Washington, D.C.-based polling company showed that 75% of South Dakotans believe there are alternative methods short of criminalizing abortion in order to reduce the abortion rate in the state. The poll also showed that 52 percent do not support the issue being on the ballot.[8]

Arguments against ban

Some arguments that have been made against the ban are:

  • The state's medical community is opposed to the ban.
  • It is "a dangerous government intrusion into the private medical decisions that affect how doctors treat women".[9]
  • The constitutionality of the measure has been called into question by South Dakota attorney general Larry Long, who takes note that if the law is passed and then challenged as violating the federal constitution, lawsuit costs to defend it will be borne by the South Dakota government.[10],[11]

Polling information

Month of Poll Polling company In Favor Opposed Undecided
October 2008 Sioux Falls Argus Leader 44 percent 44 percent 12 percent[12]

Path to the ballot

Supporters of the initiative collected more than twice the amount of signatures required to put the measure on the ballot in November, and the measure was subsequently certified to appear on the November ballot.[13]

Abortion on ballots in other states

Abortion-related Ballot Measures
California Parental NotificationColorado Definition of PersonOther abortion-related ballot measures

External links

References

  1. Chicago Tribune, Deja-vu in South Dakota, May 27, 2008
  2. Rape, incest, health exceptions in new ban, Argus Leader, Dec. 15, 2007
  3. South Dakota Task Force to Study Abortions
  4. Task Force Recommends Further Restrictions On Abortion, Yankton Press, Dec. 15, 2005
  5. Petition effort seeks to ban most abortions, Associated Press, 12/15/07
  6. Vote Yes For Life website
  7. South Dakota Campaign for Healthy Families website
  8. Will South Dakota Attempt to Ban Abortion Again?, RH Reality Check blog, Nov. 19, 2007
  9. USA Today, "Voters split evenly on S.D. abortion ban", October 27, 2008
  10. Ballot issues raise legal questions, May 27, 2008
  11. Stateline, "Social issues crowd state ballots", July 24, 2008
  12. Los Angeles Times, "South Dakota to reconsider vote on abortion ban", October 27, 2008
  13. S.D. abortion ban going to vote, Argus Leader, March 31, 2008

Additional reading