Voters approve one of three pro-life amendments

Pro-life amendments in three states received mixed results Tuesday, with one win in Tennessee and losses in North Dakota and Colorado.

Tennessee voters approved an amendment that modifies the state constitution to allow more abortion regulation. In 2000, the Tennessee Supreme Court said the constitution guaranteed a “right to abortion.”

Brian Harris, president of Tennessee Right to Life, said the results demonstrate “God’s goodness to us and also the goodness of the people in Tennessee.”

While neighboring states like Alabama and Mississippi have passed more stringent abortion regulations, Tennessee struggled to keep up. As a result, many women travel to Tennessee abortion facilities that don’t have wait periods, admitting privileges, or informed consent requirements. A quarter of the abortions in Tennessee come from out of state.

Now that the amendment has reset the constitution, Harris said pro-lifers can work to pass legislation requiring informed consent, a short wait period, and licensure and inspection regulations for abortion facilities.

The coalition supporting the amendment, Yes on 1, faced formidable opposition. By Oct. 10, abortion proponents had raised $1.6 million, with a significant portion coming from Planned Parenthood affiliates. While abortion proponents raised $1.5 million between July and September, amendment supporters raised only $631,576.

The amendment’s success proves pro-life referenda can defy odds. “When abortion promoters come knocking, we can stand against them, and we must,” Harris said.

But Colorado’s Amendment 67, though more precise than the two previous personhood amendment attempts in the state, failed. Its authors tailored it to address Colorado’s criminal death code and wrongful death act, Jennifer Mason, a spokesperson for Amendment 67, told me.

The amendment drew about 37 percent of the vote—remarkable considering Planned Parenthood outspent the amendment’s supports 1300 to 1, Mason said. Despite the loss, the increase in support from 26 percent in 2008 to 36 percent this year encouraged proponents.

“With equal funding, I have no doubt that we can win a future attempt to protect pregnant women and their unborn children in Colorado,” Mason said.

Colorado’s campaign focused on Heather Surovik, who at 8 months pregnant lost her son in a drunk driving accident. Because Colorado state law doesn’t identify the unborn as people, the drunk driver wasn’t prosecuted for the death of Heather’s unborn son, named Brady. The amendment was nicknamed the “Brady Amendment.”

In March, Corey Gardner, who won his Senate bid in a tight race, withdrew his support for Colorado’s personhood amendment. Amendment 67 redefined “person” and “child” to include “unborn human beings” in state law. Gardner said he had concerns the law might limit access to contraceptives. In September, he announced his support for over-the-counter oral contraceptives.

As in Colorado, voters in North Dakota did not turn out to support a proposed pro-life amendment. The state’s pro-lifers previously attempted to pass a personhood amendment in 2013. But this year’s amendment, called the Human Life Amendment, or Measure 1, represented a strategic shift away from personhood amendments in the state. Unlike previous attempts, Measure 1 didn’t seek to define life at conception. Rather, it aimed to protect existing regulation.

Janne Myrdal, Concerned Women for America’s North Dakota state director, believes “personhood amendments” can carry negative connotations because the term “personhood” has been hijacked by the opposition to represent a radical, “anti-choice” movement. “[The abortion industry] is trying to vilify one part of the pro-life movement, and we’re not going to join them in that,” Myrdal said.

Last week, North Dakota’s Supreme Court narrowly decided to allow a law regulating the abortifacient RU-486 to take effect. The decision overturned a lower court ruling that struck down the law claiming it conflicted with the state’s constitution. Myrdal had hoped Measure 1 would prevent judges from interpreting a right to abortion in the state’s constitution.

"We are, of course, very disappointed with the results of the balloting tonight, but we are not deterred or dissuaded from the cause of life, nor will we give up the fight," Myrdal said. "We did not win a political battle tonight, but we have captured a great deal of ground as a result of the campaign, and we are well-positioned to win the war for life in North Dakota in the future."