W
hen
the
Supreme
Court voted in June to
overturn Roe v. Wade,
all eyes turned to the states.
While states such as California
and New York have affirmed the
right to an abortion, many others
have banned the practice and, as a
result, put many women in harm’s
way.
Republicans argue that turning
abortion back to the states is
more democratic, as Roe v. Wade
was decided by the United States
Supreme Court, an unelected
body.
But
the
Republican
supermajorities are not acting
in accordance with the will of
the people by banning abortion,
as polling shows that 61% of
Americans believe that abortion
should be legal in all or most
cases.
The reality is that Roe v. Wade
has been overturned, and without
a 60-vote majority in the Senate
or the abolition of the filibuster,
there’s nothing Democrats can do
to protect abortion at the federal
level. But states can protect, and
have protected, abortion rights
through ballot initiatives and
constitutional amendments.
I want to emphasize that
turning to the states is neither a
perfect solution, nor a foolproof
one. States have radically different
laws regarding ballot measures.
California,
for
example,
has
seven measures on the 2022
ballot, while Michigan has only
one. There is also the risk of this
strategy backfiring, as states
could vote to abolish abortion.
But considering current federal
law (or lack thereof) regarding
abortion, placing initiatives or
constitutional amendments on
the ballot is one way to keep
abortion legal in states.
One important reason that
a state-based approach is a
strategy that Democrats should
embrace is that, as noted above,
abortion
is
supported
by
a
majority of Americans. While 61%
of Americans believe abortion
should remain legal in all or
most cases, 73% of Americans
believe abortion should be legal
in cases of health of the mother,
and 69% believe it should be legal
in the case of rape or incest, the
same poll shows. As pregnant
women in states with abortion
bans report difficulty accessing
a medically necessary abortion,
many Republicans are pushing
for laws that do not include rape
and incest exceptions. If abortion
votes are put before the people of
a state, it is likely that voters will
enact abortion laws that ensure
access to abortions in these cases.
In addition to the unpopularity
of total abortion bans, putting
abortion rights directly before
the people would eliminate the
problem of running candidates
who are pro-choice. In today’s
political climate, it is generally
true that Democratic candidates
support abortion rights, while
Republicans
want
to
restrict
abortion. Yet Republican voters
are often more supportive of
abortion rights than Republican
candidates.
According to the Pew Research
Center,
38%
of
Republicans
support abortion access, but,
based on their voting habits, it
seems that these people care
about
other
issues
that
are
important to them, such as cutting
taxes, supporting gun rights or
creating a strong southern border.
People who support such policies
are unlikely to vote for the
candidates who support abortion
access: Democrats. Putting ballot
initiatives directly before voters
eliminates the problem of getting
people to vote for candidates who
support other policies they don’t
agree with.
The state of Kansas gives an
example of this idea in action. In
August, Kansans voted against
removing abortion rights from the
state’s constitution by a whopping
18 percentage points, 59 to 41.
Kansas is a red state; former
President Donald Trump won
Kansas by about 15%, meaning
that a fair number of Trump
supporters voted in support of
this ballot initiative.
Other
conservative
states
would also vote to back abortion
rights, according to a New York
Times analysis. For example,
voters in Nebraska, Missouri and
Florida would support abortion
rights
in
a
ballot
initiative
similar to that in Kansas, the
NYT estimates. Not only would
expanding abortion access in such
states help the women in these
states, but it would also mean that
women who live in neighboring
states that might have abortion
bans wouldn’t have to travel as far
to receive an abortion.
This state-based strategy would
require
national
Democratic
leaders
to
listen
to
their
colleagues in state governments.
Because each state has a different
system for placing initiatives or
constitutional amendments on
the ballot, pro-choice advocates in
each state would have to run their
own campaigns. But the localized
effort will be worth it if abortion
access is protected in states where
it otherwise would not be. In
November, Democrats will see if
the strategy works; abortion is on
the ballot in five states, including
Michigan and Kentucky — which
are not solid blue states.
Placing abortion initiatives on
the ballot is a necessary strategy
that could lead to the expansion of
abortion rights in states where it
may not have been possible to vote
in a sizable number of pro-choice
officials.
Opinion
The power of states to protect
abortion access
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
6 — Wednesday, September 7, 2022
F
or months, pundits have
followed
with
close
scrutiny
Republican
primaries nationwide in an
attempt to parse out former
President Donald Trump’s hold
over the Republican Party.
Though all of these primaries
are relevant, no primary was
as
symbolic
and
reflective
of
political
reality
as
the
shellacking
Congresswoman
Liz Cheney (R-WY) received
at the hands of Trump-backed
Harriet Hageman.
Cheney has been the most
influential
Republican
to
push back against the former
president, most notably in her
work on the January 6th Select
Committee. She was ousted
from her position in GOP
leadership for her criticisms
of the former president and
had seen her political support
collapse as a result of Trump’s
attacks.
Cheney
wasn’t
expected to win, but her loss,
almost 40 points in margin,
was even worse than expected.
As an iron-clad conservative,
the idea that Liz Cheney would
lose a primary, let alone lose
a primary to someone who in
some ways is to her right, would
have been a foreign concept less
than two years ago. As Trump
and
Cheney
differed
over
made-up electoral fraud, and as
January 6th and its subsequent
impeachment and investigation
played out, Cheney’s support
among Republicans dwindled,
all at the hands of Trump and
his accomplices.
For Cheney, past is prologue.
Out of the 231 candidates
Trump
has
endorsed
this
primary season, 212 of them
have won. And while many of
these have been petty ways
to rack up wins, such as his
more than 60 endorsements
in uncontested races, many
races have been true contests
where Trump inevitably played
kingmaker.
In many of the biggest races
in the country, it’s Trump’s
handpicked radical candidates
carrying the banner for the
GOP. JD Vance in Ohio, Kari
Lake and Blake Masters in
Arizona, and Herschel Walker
in Georgia are some who have
won statewide. Former daytime
television host Mehmet Oz was
also carried to a tight victory in
Pennsylvania by Trump, as was
Dan Cox in Maryland, a radical
who, with the help of Trump,
overcame
establishment
figures.
And
down
ballot,
Trump has orchestrated almost
a complete erasure of the 10
House Republicans who voted
for his second impeachment.
While Cheney and others’
losses, and in turn Trump’s
wins, have helped to illustrate
a near-total changing of the
Republican guard, one can also
turn to multiple other aspects
that
have
shown
Trump’s
cemented support.
In
arguably
the
most
vulnerable moment for Trump
since January 6 and its following
impeachment, when the FBI
conducted a search warrant at
the Mar-a-Lago Club as part
of a sprawling investigation
into
egregious
mishandling
of top secret documents, the
near-unanimous
and
full-
throated defense
of Trump by
the GOP was quite astonishing.
Given a moment to once
again inch away from the
former president with at least
a little less political pushback,
prominent Republicans stood
by him. The party cast the
event as nothing more than a
political hit job; a belief purely
detached from reality, yet the
dominating sentiment within
the party.
It was no surprise that
the party that once asked for
prison for Hillary Clinton over
the supposed mishandling of
an email server had a much
different tone when it came
to
Trump’s
mishandling
of
documents.
But
GOP
politicians didn’t simply stay
silent or tip-toe the issue, they
ate up every bit of Trump’s
claims about the events at Mar-
a-Lago and ran with it. And
notably,
conservative
media
did the same.
Moreover, Trump’s support
among Republican voters has
remained rock solid beyond
the beltway, and perhaps even
more so at the grassroots level.
While it is true that polling
suggests many in the party
would rather Trump take a
backseat in 2024, when push
comes to shove, and he is
offered as a choice, he wins.
Polling has consistently shown
the former President receiving
2-3 times more support than
his leading competitor, Florida
Governor Ron DeSantis. All
other politicians seldom notch
double digits in polls where
Trump is included.
Similarly,
the
continued
attempt to will Ron DeSantis to
be the flag bearer of the GOP by
the media and some in the party
does not hold up to reality. Not
only is Trump beating DeSantis
by 2-3 times in polling, but he
is doing so without attacking
him. No one is better at labeling
political opponents than him,
and he has more control over
his base than any Republican
in the modern political era. His
treatment of his rivals for the
Republican nomination in 2016
demonstrated that clearly.
An unfortunate reality: it’s still
Trump’s GOP
DEVON HESANO
Opinion Columnist
puzzle by sudokusnydictation.com
By Catherine Cetta
©2022 Tribune Content Agency, LLC
09/05/22
Los Angeles Times Daily Crossword Puzzle
Edited by Patti Varol and Joyce Nichols Lewis
09/05/22
ANSWER TO PREVIOUS PUZZLE:
Release Date: Monday, September 5, 2022
ACROSS
1 Private stash
6 Pizza serving
11 Dell products, for
short
14 Approximately
15 Weighed down
16 Flamenco cheer
17 *Many an aria
19 Tiny
20 “Will I __ learn?”
21 Dark cloud,
maybe
22 Noggin
23 1950s sitcom
name
24 *Not quite
apologetic
27 Historic Nevada
city with a railway
museum
29 __ suey
30 Salon offering
33 Ore-Ida nuggets
38 Here, in France
39 Name better
left unsaid, or a
description of the
answers to the
starred clues
41 Syrup source
42 Unlikely winners
44 “Best before” kin
46 Tune for two
47 Campus URL
ender
48 *Persuaded with
flattery
53 Frosted, as a
cupcake
57 Periods of history
58 Horse rider’s strap
59 “Big Night” actor
Shalhoub
60 Buddy
61 *In the near future
64 __-at-ease
65 Strainer
66 Plentiful
67 Stubborn beast
68 Great-
grandparent, say
69 Big buttes
DOWN
1 Scoped out with
bad intentions
2 “Heavens __!”
3 Successfully
handles a rough
patch
4 Rushed
5 Greek letter
between zeta
and theta
6 Sports replay
type, briefly
7 Pointer or printer
lead-in
8 “__ have a clue”
9 Cartoon frame
10 Music producer
Brian
11 Confident stance
12 Blue-skies
forecast word
13 Far from swanky
18 Like a busybody
22 YA novel by Carl
Hiaasen about a
threatened owl
habitat
25 Unreturnable
serves
26 Hide from view
28 Red-ink amounts
30 Zip
31 __-friendly
32 Unexpected
moments of good
fortune
33 “__ Te Ching”:
philosophical text
34 Unwelcome
picnic guest
35 NFL six-pointers
36 Bar bill
37 James Bond, for
one
40 “__ Be in Love”:
Kate Bush song
43 “No __, no glory”
45 “I’m good with it”
47 Poet St. Vincent
Millay
48 Old photo tone
49 Face-to-face
exams
50 __ Forces Day
51 “Pet” annoyance
52 Pillow feathers
54 Henhouses
55 “__ Holmes”:
Netflix film
starring Millie
Bobby Brown
56 Units of force that
make up newtons
61 NNW opposite
62 Olive __
63 Orange tuber
SUDOKU
SUDOKU
MEDIUM
5
3
6
5
3
8
7
3
4
5
8
4
9
1
5
7
8
4
5
1
8
9
3
2
6
7
2
5
© sudokusolver.com. For personal use only.
Generate and solve Sudoku, Super Sudoku and Godoku puzzles at sudokusyndication.com!
Sudoku Syndication
http://sudokusyndication.com/sudoku/generator/print/
1 of 1
3/30/09 10:03 AM
WHISPER
“Go Blue!”
“The sprinkler
tent outside the
Big House is
more fun than
the game”
WHISPER
By Fred Piscop
©2022 Tribune Content Agency, LLC
08/29/22
Los Angeles Times Daily Crossword Puzzle
Edited by Patti Varol and Joyce Nichols Lewis
08/29/22
ANSWER TO PREVIOUS PUZZLE:
Release Date: Monday, August 29, 2022
ACROSS
1 Threaded
fastener
6 Grilled sausage,
for short
10 “__ the night
before
Christmas ... ”
14 Slacks fabric
15 Lasso
16 “How
disappointing”
17 John Steinbeck
novel set in the
Salinas Valley
19 Algebra, trig, etc.
20 Suffix with neat
or beat
21 Whacks with
an ax
22 Numerical
relationship
23 Make an attempt
at
25 Delta Sigma __
sorority
27 Fourth film in a
series starring
Bob Hope, Bing
Crosby, and
Dorothy Lamour
32 “If the __ fits ... ”
35 Loewe’s partner
36 Post-op recovery
area
37 Iron-rich meat
39 Girl of the fam
40 Wild West film
42 Sailor’s yes
43 Cover stories
46 Supermodel
Banks
47 Epic poem by
John Milton
50 Feature of italic
letters
51 Principality on
the French
Riviera
55 Provide food
service for
57 Prom couple’s
ride
59 Parking area
60 Actor Sharif
61 Grammy-
nominated
Keyshia Cole hit
song
64 Baseball glove
65 Apex
66 Evade skillfully
67 Poetic tributes
68 A++
69 Helicopter blade
DOWN
1 Potpourri
emanation
2 Part of a dinette
set
3 Full of uncertainty
4 Sinus specialist,
for short
5 “Yippee!”
6 Make, as coffee
7 Drapery holders
8 Big galoot
9 Low card in a
royal flush
10 Gazpacho
ingredient
11 “That’s too bad”
12 __-lock brakes
13 Nabe in London
and Manhattan
18 Like many an
alley cat
22 Fashionably
nostalgic
24 Available for an
appointment
25 Throat tissue
26 Shade on a paint
color strip
28 Cease and __
order
29 Native American
group
30 Cake prettifier
31 Subtle glow
32 High-five sound
33 “How’s it goin’?”
34 Exaggerate
38 Storm tracker
41 Mailing label
abbr.
44 “Hamilton”
creator
__-Manuel
Miranda
45 French river
to the English
Channel
48 Tips off
49 “__ rather than
later, please”
52 Alaskan native
53 Time-share unit,
typically
54 Playful river
animal
55 “¿__ está usted?”
56 Bunched in with
57 Reading light
58 Currier’s partner
61 Fez or fedora
62 Green prefix
63 __-pitch softball
The pollution paparazzi
LYDIA STORELLA
Opinion Columnist
T
his
summer,
social
media was abuzz with
information about the
widespread private jet usage
by many celebrities despite
the negative environmental
impact of private jet travel.
Celebrities like Kylie Jenner
were criticized for extensive
private
jet
use,
especially
on short flights. Jenner had
been
documented
taking
a
17-minute
private
flight
between
two
California
cities, instead of a 40-minute
car ride, which would have
produced significantly fewer
emissions.
Jenner
likewise
drew ire for an Instagram post
that critics said made light of
her and her boyfriend Travis
Scott’s private jet use.
Taylor Swift’s private jet
use was also critiqued after
it was revealed that a plane
she owned had the highest
amount of emissions when
compared to other celebrity
private jets. Swift’s publicist
addressed this issue, claiming
that Swift herself was not
solely
responsible
for
the
significant private jet use as
she frequently loans her plane
for others to use. However,
this does not change the fact
that regardless of who is
flying, Swift’s plane still had
a larger carbon footprint last
year than over 1,000 average
people combined.
The
topic
of
celebrities
refusing to take action to
help protect the environment
has
also
been
discussed
surrounding a situation in
California,
where
multiple
celebrities have come under
fire for their excessive water
usage in the drought-stricken
state. California is currently in
the midst of the catastrophic
drought, with the drinking
water of more than 350,000
Californians
having
been
imperiled in the last few years.
However, it was recently
revealed that many celebrities
have exceeded their water
allocation
by
significant
amounts. Sylvester Stallone,
Dwyane Wade, Kevin Hart
and
Kourtney
Kardashian
all
received
a
“notice
of
exceedance”
from
the
water
authority
for
using
substantially more water than
they were allocated. Kourtney
Kardashian’s
property
exceeded
its
June
water
allocation by over 100,000
gallons, and her sister Kim
Kardashian was reported to
have used nine years’ worth of
water in just one month.
The typical recourse for
water
over
usage,
fines,
is likely to be a much less
effective
deterrent
against
celebrities for whom a weighty
fine is a mere slap on the wrist.
Another possible consequence
is the installation of water flow
restrictors, which can reduce
the amount of water supplied
to the houses. However, it is
unclear if any celebrities have
faced these repercussions.
The impotence of fines as a
deterrent against the wealthy
speaks
to
fundamental
inequalities of the climate
crisis. The impacts of the
climate
crisis
will
almost
certainly
have
a
more
pronounced impact on low-
income people — the vast
majority of whom bear little
culpability for the present crisis
— with a recent Environmental
Protection
Agency
study
finding that “the most severe
harms from climate change
fall disproportionately upon
underserved communities.”
There is an understandable
feeling
of
frustration
and
disappointment
from
many
people about how wealthy,
famous individuals do not
use their resources for good.
Many
of
these
celebrities
have immense followings and
the money and connections
to help make a difference on
climate issues. Even some
celebrities who have spoken
out about climate issues have
been accused of a double
standard
for
their
private
jet
use.
Actor
Leonardo
DiCaprio and Prince Harry
and Meghan Markle, who have
all supported environmental
causes, have been criticized
for
taking
private
plane
flights. Instead of using their
power and privilege to help
the environment, we see far
too many celebrities setting
the wrong example with their
actions.
ISABELLE SCHINDLER
Opinion Columnist
Read more at MichiganDaily.com
Read more at MichiganDaily.com
Read more at MichiganDaily.com