Clinton is grasping to score points with young females
HILLARY Clinton’s campaign is struggling to attract strong support from young, liberal women — much to Clinton’s surprise — so she’s now grasping at any straw to prove her feminist bona fides.
Perhaps that’s understandable from a political perspective, but it doesn’t mean Clinton isn’t making herself look silly in the process. Just consider her campaign’s comments regarding a potential ballot question in Oklahoma.
On Jan. 27, Norman resident Thomas Hunter filed the paperwork to launch an initiative petition. He wants to give voters the chance to amend the Oklahoma Constitution to prohibit abortion.
In response, Maya Harris, a senior adviser to the Clinton campaign, announced that Clinton “believes Oklahoma women have a constitutional right to safe, legal abortion and to contraception, and they deserve to be able to make their health care decisions without interference from government or extreme special interest groups.”
Yet Hunter’s proposal is highly unlikely to reach the ballot. The ACLU has already announced it will challenge the proposal in court to keep signatures from even being collected, since the proposal may conflict with the U.S. Supreme Court’s prior rulings regarding a constitutional right to abortion.
Another obstacle, which may be just as daunting, is that Hunter says he hasn’t raised any money for a petition process. Without an organized, funded effort, it’s unlikely his petition would ever gather the number of signatures required to place the issue on the ballot.
And, just as importantly, Hunter’s tactic is one that may not be embraced even by many Oklahomans who oppose abortion. Public polling shows a broad majority of voters across the country, including women, are supportive of many abortion restrictions, such as banning abortion after 20 weeks (other than cases where the life of the mother is at stake).
But those same polls generally show much less support for outlawing all abortion. The victories of abortion opponents in recent decades have been achieved by emphasizing areas of public consensus. Gradual gains over time have produced a notable shift against abortion in public attitudes. Hunter’s all-or-nothing proposal rejects that successful approach.
So Clinton is taking a fly-by political stand against a proposed ballot question that may never clear legal hurdles to even start gathering signatures, is apparently so underfunded that backers may never get the signatures required to place the issue on the ballot, and involves a ban so sweeping it may not be embraced even by many anti-abortion voters.
In other words, Clinton’s campaign hopes women will mistake an empty gesture for a profile in courage.
But the inanity of Clinton’s focus on this obscure Oklahoma initiative goes further. Set aside all the logistical challenges noted above and assume this proposed constitutional amendment winds up before Oklahomans. To pass, the measure would have to receive majority support — something that’s highly unlikely without the support of Oklahoma women.
In most elections, female voters outnumber their male counterparts. If a constitutional amendment focuses on abortion, it would not be surprising if the share of women voters increased above typical turnout levels. So it’s virtually impossible for a state constitutional ban on abortion to pass without the support of a significant share of Oklahoma women.
Put another way, Clinton’s message is that she wants to protect Oklahoma women from themselves. That says a lot about the state of liberal feminism and Democratic views of women in general.