Democrats Muddy The Waters To Ensure Support For California’s Late-Term Abortion Amendment

Abortion is on the ballot in California next week, or at least that’s what Democratic leaders want voters to believe. Californians will vote on an amendment, Proposition 1, which would add the “fundamental right to reproductive freedom,” to the state constitution in a jurisdiction where abortion is already legal and widely popular. But that hasn’t stopped prominent Democrats from spending time and money on building support for the amendment.

Even though Proposition 1 adds no new protections to abortion, and abortion is and will remain legal in the state of California without passing the amendment, many of the country’s most prominent Democrats such as Gov. Gavin Newsom and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have rallied and raised millions for the “Yes on Prop 1” campaign. In addition to Proposition 1, Newsom is expected to sign more than a dozen abortion-related bills this year.

Democratic political strategist Robin Swanson told CapRadio, a Sacramento NPR affiliate, that the state’s leaders are banking on the issue not only as a way to boost voter turnout for tight races but to send a message to the rest of the country that California is an abortion “safe haven.”

“I think they’re trying to create a sense of urgency around it,” she said. “A lot of Californians feel sort of immune to these right-wing, conservative ideas affecting our lives. But seeing 50 years of precedent overturned should be a shock to our systems.”

Newsom, Clinton, and their ilk in the pro-abortion Democrat Party have warned about the disappearing “right to abortion and birth control” that would allegedly ensue if the motion fails to pass, but little has been clarified for voters on what it would look like for Prop. 1 to take effect — particularly for health care workers, court systems, and the unborn.

Expanding Late-Term Abortion

Proponents of the bill, such as California Attorney General Rob Bonta, say Proposition 1 does not lead to late-term abortions but simply enshrines the constitutional “right to abortion.” On the contrary, the language is vague and lacks specifics. In fact, one doctor who contributed to authoring the amendment is on the record explaining the vague language was “on purpose.”

Dr. Pratima Gupta, a San Diego OB-GYN who consulted on Proposition 1, told KQED they intentionally left out the word “viability” — the key descriptor in determining the limit, if any, at which point during gestation an abortion can legally be performed.

“Every pregnancy is individual and it’s a continuum,” Gupta said. “If I see a patient who has broken their bag of water at 23 weeks of pregnancy, that doesn’t mean that it’s viable or not viable.”

Under laws already on the books such as the California Reproductive Privacy Act of 2003, abortion is limited to “before the viability of the fetus.” The text of Proposition 1 would embed a “fundamental right to choose to have an abortion” without any limits or qualifications about the viability of the baby. California’s own Voter Information Guide states that

*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases