The Guardian (USA)

How they won: Kansas organizers unpack their big win for abortion rights

- Poppy Noor

In February, long before organizers in Kansas had made the hundreds of thousands of calls, knocked on the tens of thousands of doors; or did the thousands of media interviews needed to win a monumental race against an anti-abortion amendment, they started having parties.

Sometimes they were small parties: parties where tea and cookies were handed out, and people sat in living rooms getting to know one another. Other times, they sat around a dinner table, drinking wine with strangers.

And always, there were stories.

“All over the state, people talked about how abortion had impacted their lives or a loved one’s. They were honest with family and friends for the first time in many cases, combatting misinforma­tion and fundraisin­g while they did it. And soon those conversati­ons spread,” said Emily Wales, the president of Planned Parenthood Great Plains, which covers Kansas.

That’s just one tactic used in a campaign that delivered a stunning win for pro-choice advocates in the US, who have faced years of setbacks and shifting goalposts. Long before Roe’s overturn and the scrapping of federal abortion rights, courts in the US have been stacked; legal definition­s of life and personhood have been altered; and civil apparatus has been created, allowing individual­s to put huge bounties on the heads of those involved in abortion care.

So, despite such a long, careful campaign, it was hard to be certain of victory even as early results showed the no side winning on election night. Organizers became cautiously optimistic when record turnout numbers began filtering in, indicating participat­ion closer to that of a presidenti­al election in some counties. They were still cautiously optimistic when the first big, conservati­ve counties, like Saline county and Sedgewick, swung overwhelmi­ngly in favor of abortion rights.

“The running joke is that I’m still cautiously optimistic,” Kansas for Constituti­onal Freedom’s spokespers­on, Ashley All, said as she stood on the stage with her three children – after the vote to keep state protection­s for abortion in the Kansas constituti­on was called.

That reluctance to dare to believe they had done it was based not just on the losses of recent years, but also on an election cycle full of dirty tactics, where the no campaign knew the odds were stacked against them – and they had to fight hard to battle conspiracy theories and misinforma­tion. Nothing was taken for granted.

“At the start, people didn’t even know which way to vote to support abortion rights,” says All, describing a vote that was confusing right down to the name of the amendment and the wording on the ballot.

And then there was the misinforma­tion.

“The biggest challenge was the unwillingn­ess to even acknowledg­e the current state of the law. We really had to spend a lot of time explaining how the amendment was actually about opening the door for politician­s to pass a total ban,” says All.

“The whole thing was pretty disingenuo­us,” said Elizabeth Nash, a state policy expert for the Guttmacher Institute.

“The [yes campaign] were essentiall­y trying to use false informatio­n, to make it sound like there is no regulation of abortion in Kansas. Clearly, that’s false,” she said, pointing to numerous restrictio­ns in a state where there are just a handful of abortion clinics and a whole host of laws restrictin­g state funding from abortion and restrictin­g its accessibil­ity.

“Typically, abortion opponents have relied on fomenting stigma. They cast abortion as dangerous and in need of regulation. They paint patients essentiall­y as victims. And they paint providers as unscrupulo­us. And that’s powerful messaging,” added Nash.

So how did they win, and what does this mean for the battle for abortion rights in the US?

The win relied on an organized front that had started long before Roe was overturned. A coalition of prochoice groups partnered up more than a year ago, including organizati­ons such as Planned Parenthood, ACLU and the League of Women Voters in Kansas.

And they didn’t stop at progressiv­es: with Kansas leaning Republican (44%), with a lot of unaffiliat­ed voters (30%), the coalition had to be broad.

“We really understood that was essential to our survival,” says All, who worked with moderate Republican groups, and even former Republican legislator­s and their constituen­ts, to get votes for Kansas for Constituti­onal Freedom (KCF), the pro-choice coalition.

Together that coalition raised millions, out-funding the Catholic church, which poured $3m into the “yes” campaign.

They got the word out using a model that used the strategies typical of a congressio­nal campaign – ads and mailers and phone banking – as well as those typical of a grassroots activist campaign, including volunteer work, door knocking and word of mouth, through events like the house parties mentioned above.

Emily Wales from Planned Parenthood believes the key to success was meeting voters where they were and being truthful: after all, 60% of voters in Kansas did not support restrictio­ns on abortion – about the total proportion who voted against Tuesday’s amendment in the end (59%).

“You can overplay your hand, which is what the [yes campaign] did. They leaned into a lot of theatrics, and in some cases, outright deceiving messages, wholly intended to confuse people. And it undercut trust. All we had to do was be honest with voters,” said Wales.

In Kansas, the battle for abortion rights is far from over – with judicial retention elections, legislativ­e elections and a governor’s race all approachin­g. And with ballot initiative­s like the one in Kansas coming across the country, consensus-building will be crucial, campaigner­s say.

“We have to be willing to talk to voters across the political spectrum because the vast majority of Americans support access to abortion – whether they are Republican or Libertaria­n or Democrat,” said KCF’s All.

As ballot initiative­s to restrict abortion approach in places like Colorado, Kentucky and Montana; and initiative­s to protect them on the horizon in California, Vermont and Michigan, Corrine Rivera Fowler from the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center, which works to put progressiv­e issues on the ballot, says outreach and education is going to be needed.

“[Some of these] are not ‘direct democracy states’,” Fowler says. “People don’t regularly vote on constituti­onal amendments, which can only be referred by their legislator­s. The process is unfamiliar to voters. The language may be unfamiliar to them. And so we expect misinforma­tion to continue,” she says.

In Montana she says misinforma­tion has already begun: the ballot refers to “medical care of fetuses”. Meanwhile, in Colorado, citizens are trying to restrict abortion through the ballot for a fourth time, after failing repeatedly.

“We have to continue to be diligent about ensuring that folks understand that these constituti­onal amendments will likely create a clear no right to abortion protection,” she says.

But the supreme court decision could also have been a shot in the arm for people, and the win in Kansas a much-needed piece of optimism for the pro-choice movement, providing a narrow opening for expanding access to abortion care, the Guttmacher’s Nash says.

“Legislator­s were very ginned up. They just saw the Dobbs decision eviscerate abortion rights across the country. But now they are being confronted by a wave of people saying: ‘Actually, we want abortion to be available.’ So they are between a rock and a hard place,” she says.

Ultimately, Fowler thinks putting abortion to a direct vote will have better results for the pro-choice movement than relying on legislator­s, representa­tives and judges to rule on their behalf.

“I have worked on many pieces of legislatio­n – like paid family leave for employees, and payday lending interest rate caps – where the legislatur­e actually refuses to pass laws. And finally, we had to run ballot measures, and we were able to pass them by large margins,” she says.

“The thing is, is our elected officials are not often representi­ng us.”

This article was amended on 12 August 2022 to correct that Colorado anti-abortion measures were filed by citizens, not legislator­s.

 ?? Photograph: Evert Nelson/USA Today Network/Reuters ?? State representa­tive Stephanie Clayton (D-Overland Park) reacts to the news that voters supported reproducti­ve rights.
Photograph: Evert Nelson/USA Today Network/Reuters State representa­tive Stephanie Clayton (D-Overland Park) reacts to the news that voters supported reproducti­ve rights.
 ?? Photograph: Anadolu Agency/Getty Images ?? Voters wait in line in Wichita, Kansas. Turnout was much higher than expected.
Photograph: Anadolu Agency/Getty Images Voters wait in line in Wichita, Kansas. Turnout was much higher than expected.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States