[The strategies that worked in Kansas – countering
misinformation, building a broad coalition – offer lessons for other
ballot measures ]
[[link removed]]

HOW THEY WON: KANSAS ORGANIZERS UNPACK THEIR BIG WIN FOR ABORTION
RIGHTS  
[[link removed]]


 

Poppy Noor
August 12, 2022
Guardian
[[link removed]]


*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

_ The strategies that worked in Kansas – countering misinformation,
building a broad coalition – offer lessons for other ballot measures
_

Why don't you value our lives?, JoLynne Martinez (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)

 

In February, long before organizers in Kansas
[[link removed]] 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.

Voters wait in line in Wichita, Kansas. Turnout was much higher than
expected. Photograph: Anadolu Agency/Getty Images

“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
[[link removed]] and
the wording on the ballot.
[[link removed]]

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 pro-choice 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.

Representative Sharice Davids hugs other supporters of abortion rights
at the election watch party in Overland Park, Kansas, on 2
August. Photograph: Dave Kaup/AFP/Getty Images

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
[[link removed]] –
about the total proportion who voted against Tuesday’s amendment in
the end
[[link removed]] (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
[[link removed]], 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.

_Poppy Noor_ [[link removed]] is the
Deputy Features editor for Guardian US. Twitter @PoppyNoor
[[link removed]]. 

_Scroll less and understand more about the subjects you care about
with the Guardian's brilliant email newsletters, free to your
inbox._ [[link removed]]

* abortion
[[link removed]]
* Reproductive rights
[[link removed]]
* Kansas
[[link removed]]
* Grassroots Organizing
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web
[[link removed]]

Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]

Manage subscription
[[link removed]]

Visit xxxxxx.org
[[link removed]]

Twitter [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 




[link removed]

To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]