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