Democrats Face Uphill Battle: Abortion Ballot Measures May Not Secure Election Wins

As the November elections approach, several states, including Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Maryland, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New York, Nevada, and South Dakota, will see crucial ballot initiatives concerning abortion rights.

Political analysts suggest that these ballot measures may significantly impact Democratic candidates’ fortunes. Some strategists hope that the presence of these initiatives could galvanize voters, potentially shifting the balance against Republican candidates, particularly in battleground states like Arizona and Nevada.

However, the relationship between ballot initiatives and electoral outcomes is complex. Over three years, my research as a political sociologist has assessed the impact of these initiatives. Although several measures aimed at safeguarding abortion rights are expected to pass, translating this support into broader Democratic victories may prove less straightforward.

Since the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to overturn federal abortion protections in June 2022, states have taken individual stances on the issue. For instance, Kansas voters rejected a proposed abortion ban despite the state’s Republican majority. This outcome illuminated the possibility that abortion rights may transcend partisan lines, given that nearly 60% of voters opposed the ban.

In subsequent elections across 2022 and 2023, states like Kentucky and Montana resisted abortion bans, while California, Michigan, Ohio, and Vermont opted to enshrine abortion rights in their constitutions. These outcomes indicate that ballot initiatives may resonate with voters, irrespective of political affiliations.

Ballot initiatives, defined as votes on specific policies rather than candidates, can sometimes increase voter engagement. Yet, evidence pointing toward consistently higher turnout remains inconclusive. In the past two election cycles featuring abortion rights initiatives, some states reported more voters, while others experienced declines. For example, turnout increased in Michigan but decreased in California.

The complexity extends into partisan dynamics, as ballot measures can yield divergent outcomes in elections. Following the defeat of an abortion ban in Kansas, voters re-elected both a Democratic governor and a Republican senator. Similar patterns surfaced in Kentucky and Montana, where voters endorsed abortion rights yet maintained a Republican majority in state offices.

Although the Michigan electorate leaned Democratic in 2022, this outcome was likely influenced by broader electoral reforms established by a 2018 ballot initiative that abolished gerrymandering practices benefiting Republicans.

Moreover, popular support for abortion rights does not guarantee votes for Democratic candidates. A notable segment of Republican women also advocate for abortion rights. The political landscape reveals a nuanced relationship; for instance, some voters may strongly endorse abortion initiatives while remaining hesitant to support Democratic contenders in the upcoming elections.

If Democrats hope to secure victories this November, merely relying on ballot initiatives will not suffice. Candidates must engage voters directly, presenting their qualifications against Republican rivals to earn widespread support. Political engagement and candidate credibility remain essential components for success.

This article is based on research and analysis, highlighting the intertwined yet distinct roles of ballot initiatives and electoral outcomes in the ongoing discussions around abortion rights.