What the Kansas abortion vote means for a constitutional amendment effort in Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania Democrats are pointing to this week’s victory for abortion rights in Kansas as a harbinger for the Keystone State, where a similar ballot question could be considered by voters as early as next year.

The proposed constitutional amendment in Kansas that would have eliminated a state constitutional right to the procedure generated unusually strong turnout for an August primary election — and the resounding rejection of it showed that abortion is a motivating issue, even in deep-red Kansas.

And activists said it was an affirmation of public polling that has long showed a majority of Americans favor some abortion regulations but, when faced with the potential for blanket restrictions, have opinions more complicated than party affiliation might suggest.

“It really just proved what we have already known,” said Lindsey Mauldin, director of coordinated programs at Planned Parenthood’s political arm in Pennsylvania. “We hope this will motivate extremists in the legislature to think twice about trying a similar amendment here.”

Kansas was the first electoral test of abortion as a major issue since the U.S. Supreme Court in June overturned Roe v. Wade, and Democrats have cast the outcome as an indication that antiabortion Republicans are out of step with the electorate. They are aiming to sustain the energy around abortion rights through the midterm elections in November, when the political and economic environment is expected to favor the GOP.

» READ MORE: What the Kansas abortion vote might mean for Pennsylvania’s key 2022 races

The results in Kansas may be even more illuminating for Pennsylvania, one of a half-dozen states where abortion-related ballot measures are pending. The electorate in the Sunflower State is much more conservative, with nearly twice as many registered Republicans than Democrats. In the swing state of Pennsylvania, party affiliation is more evenly split.

It is far from a perfect comparison, though, and Republicans in Harrisburg have showed no signs of backing away from legislation that would amend the state constitution to explicitly say that there is no right to abortion or to taxpayer funding for abortion care.

The proposed amendment, which cannot be vetoed, passed the General Assembly last month largely along party lines. It must be approved in the next consecutive legislative session before a ballot question can go to voters.

Its text is almost identical to the amendment that was proposed in Kansas. But the effects would be different.

In Kansas, there is existing legal precedent holding that the state constitution protects the right to abortion. The amendment would have overturned that — a message Democrats and activists there used to motivate Kansans to vote against it.

But in Pennsylvania, there is no precedent finding a right to abortion in the state constitution, meaning the proposed amendment wouldn’t end an existing right.

» READ MORE: The latest battle over abortion rights in Pa. is all about the state constitution

It’s why State Sen. Judy Ward (R., Blair), a champion of the amendment in Harrisburg, has said repeatedly that if the constitution were amended, state law that currently allows for abortion through about 24 weeks into a pregnancy would not change as a result.

“To no one’s surprise, this issue has elicited consternation from abortion rights activists who wield passionate and misleading rhetoric to convince the masses that my bill will lead to widespread bans,” she said in a statement after the July passage. “Nothing could be further from the truth.”

Ward’s office didn’t respond to a request for comment Thursday.

Still, the amendment has been seen as a way to inoculate future abortion restrictions against legal challenges. Members of the GOP-controlled General Assembly have floated a variety of measures, including a ban on abortion after about six weeks into a pregnancy. A prime sponsor of that legislation is State Sen. Doug Mastriano, the Republican nominee for governor, who has said he believes life begins at conception and “I don’t give a way for exceptions.”

A handful of Republicans have been clear about the effect the amendment could have. After legislators passed the amendment, Rep. Kathy Rapp (R., Warren) — who cochairs the Pro-life Caucus — said its approval by voters would afford lawmakers “the freedom to consider future proposals.”

There are hurdles that could keep the question off the ballot.

For one, Gov. Tom Wolf sued the General Assembly over the proposed amendment, saying that it violates privacy protections. Wolf, a Democrat who has vetoed abortion restrictions several times, claims the process Republicans used to pass the amendment — it was bundled with four others — breaks a rule against passing legislation that groups together unrelated topics.

» READ MORE: What the Pa. constitutional amendment package could mean for abortion and elections

At the same time, Republicans are this fall defending their majorities in both chambers of the General Assembly, and the amendment process underscores the gravity of those state legislative races.

Democrats say they’re optimistic that new legislative maps adopted through redistricting — which slightly favor Republicans but are more evenly split than the old maps — give them a shot to win control of the House. If they flip a dozen seats to do so, the fate of the constitutional amendment would be in jeopardy.

State Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta (D., Philadelphia), who railed against the proposed amendment when it was under consideration in the House last month, said that while abortion won’t explicitly be on the ballot in November, the midterm election is “a yes-or-no question of whether or not you want to protect abortion rights in Pennsylvania.”

“Democrats winning the state House,” he said, “would be a Kansas-like response to this very real threat of abortion being banned.”