There are no exceptions, not for rape or incest or for the life of the mother. And the Born Again ethicists who drafted the bill define life as beginning with conception. Enough Democrats voted for this travesty that it’s a bipartisan trashing of women’s reproductive rights.
Yet leading in the polls by 30 points in South Dakota’s June 1 special election for the state’s sole congressional seat is a pro-choice, thirty-something single woman, Stephanie Herseth. The contradiction between Alice in Wonderland legislating and real life as it is lived in the 21st century could not be better expressed.
South Dakota rarely captures the nation’s attention, but Karl Rove is watching this one closely. Herseth is running in an open seat to succeed Republican William Janklow, who is in jail on a manslaughter conviction. If the Democrats capture the seat, it will be the party’s second win this cycle in a special election, a harbinger that could bode ill for Republicans in November.
Democrats had not won a special election since 1991 when they picked up a seat in Kentucky last month, a sea change that could signal a shift away from the GOP and toward a newly energized Democratic Party. Determined to avoid another Kentucky, Rove himself is co-hosting a fundraiser in Washington for the Republican candidate for the South Dakota seat, farmer and state Sen. Larry Diedrich. Rove typically works behind-the-scenes, and the fact that he is lending his presence to the event underscores the importance he attaches to winning in South Dakota.
Rove is no fool. Aside from the psychological boost winning can provide, if Herseth gets into Congress, she’s likely to be there a long time. Think Tom Daschle. He was first elected to the House in 1978, and then the Senate in 1986. Watching Herseth work the room at a Women’s Campaign Fund dinner this week, she’s a natural. Smart, articulate and gracious in a way that balances her farm-family roots with her big-city education, Georgetown University and Georgetown Law, she’s a candidate with a future.
Politics are in her blood. Her grandmother served on the county board of commissioners in the 1930s. Her grandfather was governor in the 1950s, and after his death, her mother was elected secretary of state. Her father served in the state legislature for twenty years, and ran for governor in the eighties, “but came up short,” she says.
So did Herseth when she ran against Janklow in 2002, but only by a few thousand votes. The match-up raised her name identification in the state, and when Janklow resigned from Congress last month, she was well positioned to jump into the race. South Dakota has never sent a woman to Congress, but Herseth beat out several male rivals for her party’s nomination for the special election. Their attacks on her mirrored the retro thinking of the legislature. She quotes a newspaper reporter who summed it up this way: “Untested, unmarried, no children, for abortion.”
Abortion rights have taken a backseat to gay marriage as this season’s hot-button social issue, but that could change. Women’s groups are gearing up for what they’re billing as the “March for Women’s Lives” in Washington on April 25. It’s the first time since 1991 that women have turned to a protest march to educate women about what’s at stake when it comes to abortion rights. Since 1995, 400 state laws have been enacted to curb abortion, with the South Dakota law among the most far-reaching.
Publicity for the March points out that Roe v Wade, the 1973 court ruling that made abortion legal, “hangs by a thread.” A one-vote change in the Supreme Court could overturn the landmark legislation. “It takes a lot to get people involved in politics,” says Kate Michelman, who recently stepped down as head of NARAL Pro-Choice America. “They have to feel really threatened.”
This is the longest period in modern history where there has not been a vacancy on the Supreme Court. The expectation is that whoever is elected in November will have a minimum of two appointments to fill. It’s no secret which party is on the side of choice. The strength of the issue, and the strength of the Democrats as they sharply define themselves against President Bush in a way they failed to do in 2000, will be on display when the marchers arrive in Washington. John Kerry will be there. He phoned Michelman last week to confirm his participation.
Michelman promises a turnout of one million marchers. Do the math, she says. In 1986, pro-choicers mustered 200,000 on the mall; in 1989, it was 500,000; in 1991, 750,000. Success will be measured by the numbers. “We set our own bar high and we have to deliver,” she says. The April 25 march will be an early test of the fervor that Democrats are bringing to this election, with South Dakota a critical guidepost on the road to the White House.
