The personhood movement is likely to either collapse or ignite as a result of today’s midterm elections.
The most important question on the mind of most political insiders is the viability of 100 percent pro-life candidates who will be tested on the national stage on the questions of personhood.
Will Cory Gardner, the Senate candidate from Colorado, a man who has renounced his past support of personhood, fare better or worse than Joni Ernst, the Senate candidate from Iowa who did not renounce her support for personhood?
Will the literal dousing of money on the issue of the so-called “war on women” pay dividends for pro-abortion Democrats?
The mainstream media is replete with articles on the issue of personhood, but very little coverage that can actually pass for journalism.
Take for example an article just published on Politico this Monday.
In North Dakota this year the “personhood” movement may have figured out a back door for its quest: Intentionally vague wording. Here’s what North Dakotans will find on their ballots Tuesday: “The inalienable right to life of every human being at any stage of development must be recognized and protected.”
The reporter does not explain what exactly is vague about stating that the right to life has to be recognized and protected.
Both Personhood Initiatives are among The Washington Post’s top 25 ballot measures in the country.
What the media has failed to report, but something that is of crucial importance in order to understand the election results, is the relative amount of funding that has gone into these campaigns, and their source.
No mainstream media outlet has covered the fact that in Colorado the opponents of Amendment 67 have outspent the proponents by a ratio of close to 150:1.
At the very top of the list is of course, the government funded, abortion giant Planned Parenthood. Just in Colorado, the Secretary of State reports that Planned Parenthood has contributed $3,118,274.93. That is close to one dollar for each and every one of the state’s adult population. In addition, abortion advocates NARAL and liberal lawyers ACLU have chipped in another $200,000. Then there are the usual liberal businesses such as New Belgium Brewing Company, makers of Fat Tire beer, who also contributed $50,000. At the end of the day, the total money spent to defeat this personhood measure will be close to $4 million, whereas the local proponents, Colorado Right to Life and Personhood USA, will probably top off at around $50,000.
In North Dakota the campaigns have been more evenly matched, but there again there has been a gaping hole in the mainstream media reporting about the campaign finance. While both campaigns are looking to finish strong and be relatively evenly matched, as of October 10 the opponents had received 95 percent of their funds from out of state special interest groups, mainly from Planned Parenthood.
It is therefore extremely important that before anyone draws conclusions from the results of these campaigns these facts be taken into account.
That being said, here are my predictions and their significance:
On the Senate races, Cory Gardner is likely to strip Mark Udall of the Senate seat in Colorado by a very thin margin. The advantage for Gardner will come from low voter turnout among Democrat party line voters and frustration with President Obama. I believe almost no conclusion can be garnered from this result other than the realization that one can support or have supported personhood and survive in a purple state.
Joni Ernst on the other hand articulated her pro-life position better, did not renounce personhood, and as a result is likely to have energized her base and will win by a wider margin. Personhood will also not have been a determinative factor as much as poor Democrat turnout and voter discontent with the president.
Amendment 67 will likely fail to pass, but is likely to gain as much as 10 percent, and for the first time will win in some rural counties in Colorado. The conclusion here is unambiguous, no matter how much money is poured into disinformation and how much earned media the press gives to the already overfunded abortion advocates, a large number of people still do not wish to support the murder of preborn children or their total dehumanization. For Amendment 67 to get anywhere near 40 percent in Colorado can only be seen as a total victory in the face of the funding and media disparity. This will energize the movement nationwide.
Measure 1 is a toss-up. North Dakotans are cautious people and it is much easier to scare people into voting no, than to convince them to vote to introduce new language into the constitution. Whether it passes or not, it is going to be much closer than the Personhood Amendment in Mississippi and is also likely to show the strength of a movement that can not be simply ignored as “extreme.”
Already a dozen established state pro-life organizations under the banner of the Personhood Alliance are getting ready to launch local municipal ballots to establish personhood at the local level.
I believe that at the end of the day, Tuesday’s elections will show that it is better to defend one’s convictions openly (Joni Ernst v. Cory Gardner) and that it is much better to take the initiative and persist than to rely on other more reactive strategies (Personhood Amendments v. trying to change the Supreme Court etc.)