The voters have spoken. Oregon is a pro-choice state.
The AP does a round-up of abortion politics in Oregon, noting that things look bleak for the folks trying to take away rights from women - since voters are in no mood to do their bidding:
Reeling from an exceptionally disappointing Election Day, Oregon's anti-abortion movement faithful are left to plot out their future course in a state that places essentially no restrictions on the abortion procedure, and where voters show no inclination to change the status quo.Anti-abortion advocates thought they had a winning issue in parental notification, which would have required doctors to notify parents if their 15, 16 or 17-year-old daughter was seeking an abortion without their knowledge. ...
Oregon Right to Life, the state's most prominent anti-abortion group, poured about $725,000 into the parental notification campaign, only to see a spirited campaign waged against it, spearheaded by the local Planned Parenthood chapter, which argued that the initiative could place young girls in danger.
The measure was soundly defeated, with 54.7 percent of Oregonians voting against it. Even in conservative-leaning counties like fast-growing Deschutes in Central Oregon, only a bare majority of voters supported the measure.
Anti-abortion groups also lost their staunchest allies at the Capitol when House Republicans lost control of the chamber. Victorious Democrats have spoken magnanimously of bipartisanship, but that apparently does not extend to any legislation designed to curb abortion rights. ...
Gail Atteberry, the executive director of Oregon Right to Life, also acknowledged that her group does not expect to gain any traction in the upcoming session, which starts in January.
Discuss.
|
Nov. 20, 2006
Posted in in the news 2006. |
More Recent Posts | |
Albert Kaufman |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
Kari Chisholm |
Final pre-census estimate: Oregon's getting a sixth congressional seat |
Albert Kaufman |
Polluted by Money - How corporate cash corrupted one of the greenest states in America |
Guest Column |
|
Albert Kaufman |
Our Democrat Representatives in Action - What's on your wish list? |
Kari Chisholm |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
connect with blueoregon
Nov 20, '06
Well, the 2007 session will give us an opportunity to see if ORTL isn't just about electing Republicans. If they are really dedicated to reducing the number of abortions, they'll support efforts to increase access to, and use of, contraception. No doubt, contraceptive parity, which has been blocked every session by the Republican House leadership, will be on the House Democrats' agenda this session.
Will ORTL support it or oppose it?
What about working to increase access to pre-natal care in Oregon?
Please prove us cynics wrong.
Nov 20, '06
Well, the 2007 session will give us an opportunity to see if ORTL isn't just about electing Republicans. If they are really dedicated to reducing the number of abortions, they'll support efforts to increase access to, and use of, contraception. No doubt, contraceptive parity, which has been blocked every session by the Republican House leadership, will be on the House Democrats' agenda this session.
Will ORTL support it or oppose it?
What about working to increase access to pre-natal care in Oregon?
Please prove us cynics wrong.
Nov 20, '06
Yes, we will find out of RTL is truly "pro-life" or merely anti-abortion.
A pro-life person cares about hunger, about people who depend on the state for life-saving medication they are too poor to afford if not insured, about access to contraception, about access to pre-natal care, about infant and child nutrition.
As for the RTL ballot measure, perhaps they should research the "Abortion Prevention and Family Responsibility Act of 1985" from Wisconsin. I had a pen pal there then and was able to get a copy of that bill (9 pages of details) after hearing about it on the radio.
This year's ballot measure was basically SB 1126 of about 11 years ago. A large coalition defeated it back then due to the wording. The 1985 Wisconsin bill had a more intelligent parental notification provision which I would gladly support.
Hopefully the 2006 election marked the end of "If you support the concept, you will support our wording or we will tell everyone you don't even agree with the concept" bullying on a large number of issues.
Independent voters and those registered to parties but who think for themselves are the folks who control election results in this state, not those who want to force everyone to choose a label and then require them to unquestioningly follow the dictates of that label.
Nov 20, '06
From 1992 to 2000, the total number of abortions performed nationwide declined every year for eight straight years.
Since GWB took office, abortions nationwide have increased every year for five straight years.
So if Gail wants to truly decrease the number of abortions performed in the US, she needs to work very hard for the next two years to get a progressive democratic in the White House in 2008.
Oh and another thing, with the neocons and reich-wingers controlling the Congress for 12 years and the executive branch for six, I wonder why they haven't been able to at least introduce legislation to limit or outlaw abortions nationwide? Could it be that the right just wants to use Choice as a national wedge issue to rally their base?
Nov 20, '06
I am noticing a welcome sea-change in the rhetoric coming from those defending abortion rights. Namely, there is less talk about defending abortion rights and more talk about keeping government out of the most personal decisions anyone will have to make. The latter is an argument that can be sided with even by those who are squeamish about abortion. It also plays well in the strong libertarian streak that still runs strong here in the west.
Nov 20, '06
Maybe GOP gurus Donny Mac and Billy Bob Sizemore would be willing to adopt the THOUSANDS of unwanted children born every year in America because, heck, they don't have anything else to do these days after GETTING THEIR CLOCKS CLEANED on Election Day!
Gee, I wonder how many beautiful children Oregon Right to Life could adopt, school and house for the $750,000 they threw down the drain this election cycle.
Hundreds? Thouands?
Nov 21, '06
Gee, I wonder how many beautiful children Oregon Right to Life could adopt, school and house for the $750,000 they threw down the drain this election cycle.
A good snark, and not too far off the mark, except for the $$$.
Conservatively estimating spending $6,000 per year ($500/month, a very tight budget) on a child for housing, food, basic medical care, insurance, clothing, toys, educational books and supplies, baby sitters and day care, etc., equals $108,000 to raise a child to adulthood, no college, and not counting initial adoption costs.
So ORTL's $750,000 would raise about 7 kids, give or take, not hundreds or thousands.
12:44 a.m.
Nov 21, '06
It's not quite that bad, Bob.
If you put $750,000 in a nonprofit foundation endowment, you would spin off (by conservative estimtes) about 5% a year in income. That's $37,500 a year.
Given your estimate of $6000 a year, that's six kids at a time, for perpetuity. In other words, six kids for 18 years, then another six kids for 18 years, etc.
And, presuming that ORTL has the capacity to raise $750,000 every two years, you'd be able to add another six every two years.
After just a decade of that kind of fundraising, they'd have 30 kids adopted, housed, and fed into perpetuity.
Of course, if they were real smart, they'd actually spend that money providing assistance to adoptive parents who have the ability to provide, say, 80% of the funds themselves - and just need a little help, $100/month, to bridge the gap. If they did that, it'd be five times as many kids -- 150 kids, forever and ever. And that's just with a decade of fundraising.
But no, ORTL prefers to spend their money on direct mail and TV advertising pursuing an agenda that Oregon voters have made clear is not welcome.
2:29 p.m.
Nov 21, '06
I hope the anti-abortion nuts whither on the vine. Same with the religious-"right" which often overlaps with the anti-abortion fetus worshipers. The sooner the GOP jettisons these whack-a-doodles, the sooner the GOP can be engaged to find bipartisan solutions on substantive and legitimate issues.