I’m heading to Missouri, which is kind of the opposite of Minnesota. This is what’s happening in my home state:
Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison Thursday announced that his office will not appeal the recent district court ruling that struck down most of Minnesota’s abortion restrictions.
On July 11, a Ramsey County judge ruled that Minnesota’s mandatory 24-hour waiting period before an abortion, and the two-parent notification requirement for girls under the age of 18 before an abortion, violated the state constitution.
Judge Thomas Gilligan — a Mark Dayton appointee — also lifted a state law that said only physicians can perform abortions.
We do rather stand out in the region.
Of its immediate neighbors, the state of Minnesota has by far the most liberal abortion laws. As a result, the state is set to become an abortion destination following the Supreme Court’s ruling.
Good to see you using Guttmacher data. My niece, Dr. Liza Fuentes, is a senior research scientist there. Very proud of her. A Ph.D. in Public Health and she has had her research presented at the Supreme Court.
As long as you annex a corridor between East and West, you can let the junk states secede.
…also, give the two Dakotas to Canada as reparation for the invasion during the war of 1815.
@3
Why would you think we want ’em? We’re having enough trouble with Alberta.
Excellent news, Bruce. I’ve loved Guttmacher for a long time.
What I don’t love is the merely “supportive” label for Oregon. I thought OR had done enough in the past few years to earn better than that. I wonder what data or deciding factors they used to distinguish OR from CA?
Ah, wait, never mind. A number of the Oregon initiatives were undertaken in 2019 and 2020. Since this data was compiled in 2019 (look at the bottom of the graphic) it’s likely that little if any of the reforms were in place by then. So, okay. But Oregon really has been kicking ass on reproductive rights in the past 3 years.
@3 do we really need TWO Dakotas? Is there really that much difference between the two? Merge them into one state and take away two of their senators. I’m so sick of minority rule in this country. Two senators per state sounded good in 1778 but it’s really fucking us over now.
Doesn’t surprise me that Wisconsin is hostile to reproductive rights. Despite our previous reputation as a “progressive” state, we have a large German/Polish Catholic population along with devotees of other conservative Christian sects (e.g. Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod). Over the decades all those union-card-carrying working class heroes and “sewer socialists” decided that their devotion to their filthy religions’ superstitions and sexism were more important than going “forward” as our now-deeply-ironic motto would have them. Now the state is run by GOP fascists while our useless Dem governor just sits and twiddles his thumbs.
They list Virginia as being hostile. I’m not so sure about that. Yes, we voted in a slimy, right wing turd as governor. But, Virginia is a term restricted state. Youngkin can’t run again. So far he’s been almost silent except for some questionable appointments. I believe the last election was an anomaly (CRT, parental rights, blah-blah) that will not stand. The legislature is divided. The odds of further restricting abortions here will be a herculean task for the republicans. NOVA is not about to turn red.
@5
I was surprised to see my state of Washington as “merely” supportive as well, so I looked up the criteria. https://www.guttmacher.org/sites/default/files/article_files/attachments/hostile_supportive_states_updated_12-30-2020_as_of_date.pdf
These criteria give you a negative point (each):
• Bans pre- or post-viability abortions in violation of constitutional protections (This is so 2021)
• Requires in-person abortion counseling followed by a waiting period before the procedure (thereby requiring at least two trips to the facility)
• Restricts Medicaid coverage for abortion
• Prohibits the use of telemedicine to provide medication abortion
• Limits access to abortion for those younger than 18 without parental involvement
• Imposes unnecessary and onerous abortion clinic regulations
These criteria give you a positive point (each):
• Affirms a right to abortion in the state constitution
• Establishes a legal standard that protects access to abortion
• Guarantees abortion coverage through Medicaid
• Allows advanced practice clinicians to provide abortion by law or Attorney General Opinion
• Mandates private health insurance plans cover abortion
• Protects access to abortion clinics
https://www.guttmacher.org/article/2019/08/state-abortion-policy-landscape-hostile-supportive#
Oregon is dinged for not affirming abortion as a right in the state constitution and (erroneously) for not allowing APC’s to provide abortions. Washington state is dinged for not affirming abortion as a right in the state constitution and for (technically) not mandating that private health insurance plans cover abortion. This is already way to long, but I am “ok” with how Washington state mandates abortion for private insurance. https://www.insurance.wa.gov/coverage-abortion-services It does remind me, however, to another threat as much of the health care here is run by the Catholic Church and they do not perform elective abortions. https://crosscut.com/news/2022/06/abortion-rights-wa-fall-limbo-religious-hospitals
The TLDR is that the Guttmacher criteria needs to change in a post-Dobbs world and that even in progressive(ish) states we have more to do.
It’s great growing up and living in the great LIBERAL state of Minnesota!
Just keep the amount of time you spend in Rochester to a minimum… There’s quite a few bible thumpers down there.
Ray Ceeya @ 7
Minnesota could follow the example of Putin and annex the two Dakotas as part of Greater Minnesota, you know, “heim zur Reich”.
.
Please explain a detail to a foreigner. Arizona has this big Phoenix metropolis surrounded by more or less arid land. Even if all smaller towns are run by bible-thumpers the demographics seem odd, as the Phoenix region must be so dominant. Does Arizona have a huge fertile farming-friendly climate zone full of rural folks that outweigh Phoenix? The city must have its share of conservatives but nothing like in the South.
birgerjohansson @12:
From what I know of Arizona (my mother grew up there back in the 1950’s) there are a lot of very conservative religious groups in the area (Catholics, Mormons, etc). (Like, conservative for their denomination.)
There are also a lot of retirees (snowbirds) who move there for cheap housing and heat. While some of those people might be liberals, they’re not all, and as retirees are past their reproductive years, so may be less personally invested in abortion rights.
The agriculture in Arizona tends towards ranching (cattle and sheep and goats) more than arable crop farming, so even though it is a very dry place there is still a lot of agriculture.
As for your assumption about Phoenix being more liberal due to being a city, well, it’s in Maricopa county, which for many years was infamous for the sheriff and his brutal and cruel treatment of people in the prison (the pink underpants, the tents where it got to be 110F, the abundant racism). So I wouldn’t assume that Phoenix is actually that liberal.
FWIW, New York State is in the process of putting the right to an abortion in the state constitution. IIRC, it will still take 2 years to have it actually in the constitution.
The New England states are all, at best, “leans supportive”, at worst unsupportive. Wonder how that’s going to play out.
birgerjohansson@12: I am not certain about Arizona, but the situation in Texas is that the cities (Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, Austin) tend to be liberal/progressive but the suburbs, which are quite extensive, are conservative/fascist and they, along with the rural areas, keep Texas red. (Well, that plus gerrymandering, of course.)
For what it is worth, Michigan, no longer leans hostile, it is hostile now after a court ruling today.
Let me add something here about a legislator who helped make Missouri into a land of forced births. Representative Mary Elizabeth Coleman is a Missouri legislator who works for law firm specializing in anti-choice. She’s a massive hypocrite, that stereotype of a fundamentalist who doesn’t hold themselves accountable. I wish that bigger news outlets would pick up on this.
https://twitter.com/annieschulte/status/1554251836596649985