The session ends on Friday, the question is just on which of the next 3 days the decision will be released.
If was “accidentally” uploaded why pull it down when it’s going to be out the next 72 hours anyway? Are they expecting to change it or was it going through final edit check and someone hit publish by mistake?
Probably didn’t pull it out in time.
A major factor in many abortions.
5 Likes
They want to hold it b/c it’s abortion related and the justices don’t want to be around for any fall out. Likewise, the Trump immunity ruling has surely been finished for a while but is being held until Friday because they want to delay as long as possible and the justices don’t want to speak to each other after it comes out.
Alito’s throwing a temper-tantrum.
1 Like
https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/4756779-abortion-access-ballot-arkansas/
Arkansas gets reproductive healthcare rights added to the election ballot.
I’m having trouble sourcing this, but I’m reading claims that ahead of this ballot initiative, Arkansas changed the rules to make it harder to qualify, and still the pro-choice side managed to get enough signatures just by the day of.
They’re about 10% over the required number of signatures and have 30 days to gather additional signatures if somewhere between 75% and 100% of the signatories are found to be valid when checked.
Edit: Is it still the case that every abortion referendum posed to the citizenry has passed? I’m prety sure it is.
I found this, from last year (caution: auto-plays video):
1 Like
Incredible. The populace voted for medical marijuana and for Medicaid expansion, and the legislature said “nope, we don’t want you to have representation, shut it down.”
1 Like
Assuming you are correct about this, and it certainly seems quite plausible that you are, that bodes really well for the future. Because if they make it harder to change the rules from pro-life to pro-choice and the pro-choice wins anyway, it’s essentially impossible for pro-life to ever beat pro-choice down the road.
Like if the threshold to pass an initiative goes from 50% to 60% and they get 60% on the pro-choice side then it’s forever. Because you’ll never get 60% on the pro-life side.
I mean, they could theoretically change it again, but that doesn’t always go over well. (Like when Ted Kennedy got sick and Mitt Romney was governor of Massachusetts they put in an initiative so the vacancy would be filled by special election, NOT gubernatorial appointment… because they didn’t want Mitt Romney appointing Kennedy’s replacement. Then by the time Kennedy actually died Romney was out of office and replaced with a Democrat and it was looking like a Republican might win the special election (in order to filibuster Obamacare) they tried to change it back to gubernatorial appointment. That did NOT go over and the Republican DID win the special election… leaving the Democrats with no option but to have the House pass the previously passed Senate version of the bill in tact.)
1 Like
The “making it harder to get a measure on the ballot” is definitely true, as @Maphistos_Sidekick posted. You must submit a minimum number of signatures from at least 50 counties rather than 15. Sanders almost explicitly stated via her spokesperson that the point was to boost GOP representation:
Sanders "wants to ensure all Arkansans, especially rural residents, have a voice in this process.
Nobody can in good faith deny that rural is code for Republican here, the same way that inner-city urban thugs is code for Black.
That action being directly or in large part to block access to reproductive healthcare was a claim I read by people online, who I can’t vouch for, which is why I thought it important to say I couldn’t source it within a few minutes of searching.
But you have a good point. This is a state Constitutional amendment, not just some law that the Legislature can rewrite. Assuming this passes, they’ve made it very hard to put anti-choice laws back into place.
2 Likes
The only change is, apparently, making it more difficult for voters to submit amendments to the state Constitution by initiative.
The legislature retains the ability to propose consitutional amendments.
In both cases, in Arkansas, proposed amendments still have to be submitted to voters and be approved by a supermajority to be enacted.
There is no change to the relative ease with which the state legislature could override an initiative-based pro-choice (or pro-Marijuana, or pro-Medicaid expansion) constitutional amendment. It’s just more difficult to get the initiatives before voters in the first place.
BTW, if anyone else was wondering which states have initiative processes, I found this at Ballotpedia:
Link: States with initiative or referendum - Ballotpedia
1 Like
Thanks, this is a very useful correction. So they’re solely making it harder for the citizenry to effect changes, but their ability to effect change is unaffected.
Still, enshrining this in the AR Constitution is a great step.
1 Like
I was proud of my previous company. For all its flaws, shortly after Roe was overturned, they added a policy allowing a small amount of PTO and something like up to $500 compensation for “expenses incurred when necessary to travel to another state for medical procedures.”
2 Likes
‘pro life’
3 Likes
1 Like
Well, yeah. Republicans are captured by the anti-choice/Evangelical bloc. They can’t afford to vote for the “Stab to Death Ensouled Pre-Born Human Infants in the Womb Act” in an election year.
Studies with obvious results imo.
6 Likes