|
A Majority of Voters Fear For Their Rights Post-Roe
Will Clarence Thomas ever let Americans have a moment of peace? In his concurring opinion in the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, the Justice wrote that SCOTUS “should reconsider” its past rulings codifying rights to contraception access, same-sex relationships, and same-sex marriage.
That threat has left a majority of voters concerned about losing their rights and freedoms in the future. Among voters:
-
64 percent are concerned about same-sex marriage becoming illegal
-
66 percent are concerned about transgender individuals losing access to medical care
-
78 percent are concerned about doctors, nurses, and other medical professionals facing lawsuits or criminal charges from providing necessary reproductive healthcare
-
79 percent are concerned about states restricting access to birth control and other forms of contraception
-
89 percent are concerned about victims of rape or incest being forced to give birth to their abusers' children
Voters aren’t wrong to be worried – taking away our rights and freedoms is basically the explicit position of the Republican party. Some health centers already had to temporarily stop providing emergency contraception, also known as Plan B, out of fear that doctors could be sued by the state. Seventy-seven percent of voters agree that doctors took an oath to protect patients and the government should not prevent them from providing care, especially in the treatment of victims of sexual crimes.
In response to Clarence Thomas’s opinion, Democrats in Congress are taking steps to codify these rights and freedoms into law. Even so, 157 Republicans voted against codifying gay marriage. And despite 70% of voters saying that they’re more likely to support a candidate who would expand access to birth control, 195 Republicans voted against advancing the access to contraception bill.
Americans are worried about losing more rights in the future — because Republicans are giving them a reason to be.
Read the full blog here.
Here are some other highlights from DFP this week:
Longtermism: Not Dying is Politically Popular
See, you’d think most politicians would be in the business of developing a better future. Alas, no. Longtermism is the view that positively impacting the long-term future is a key moral priority of our time. Advocates of longtermism focus on preventing worst-case scenario outcomes that could damage the world we leave to our children, our grandchildren, and all future generations — including global pandemics, climate change, emerging technologies, and nuclear war.
75 percent of voters, including majorities of both Democrats and Republicans, want greater funding for research and manufacturing to prevent future pandemics. Experts say there is a 50/50 chance of another global pandemic as devastating as COVID-19 occurring in the next 25 years and a substantial probability of a pandemic that is far worse.
Read more here.
Maggs is NOT in Trouble if New Hampshire Loses First Primary Status
New Hampshire’s status as having the first primary in the nation is at risk. A plurality of voters in New Hampshire (42 percent) would not blame anyone if the state lost its spot as the first presidential primary. Twenty-one percent of voters would blame the Democratic and Republican National Committees. New Hampshire voters are least likely to hold elected officials responsible if the state were to no longer be the first primary in the nation. Only 3 percent of voters in New Hampshire would blame Senator Hassan, which is largely driven by Republican voters.
While New Hampshire’s status as the first primary in the nation has recently become in jeopardy, likely voters do not associate the issue with elected officials. Read the full blog here.
|
