Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Once in office, the elected can and does as he pleases.. The lobbying is the right hand of decisions and votes. The avg Betty voters has zero say in how the elected votes. It's ignorant to think otherwise. Once that law is enacted it rarely gets overturned when the avg Betty puts someone else in. Saying the voter can vote them out does NOTHING for the reality of the : legislative casting at the time of call.
There may well be power in numbers .. which is how one political side can stonewall or create a sweep.
Placing it on a quarterly call for citizens to vote upon may relieve the rep from being the sole vote. Call it the people's voice
The voters didn’t decide, the GOP dominated legislature decided. The world changed in June , how about a lengthy debate and a referendum. After Kansas they don’t want the voters weighing in on abortion, they couldn’t wait until November.
In reality, many voters are probably not happy with the new abortion law, but the majority of the voters elected their legislator.
In addition to that, the abortion ban is not a near total ban like you described. Certainly abortion will be inconvenient for some, but life is never perfect, people travel to different states for medical procedure all the time. Just don't know why some of you act like this is the end of the world.
The voters didn’t decide, the GOP dominated legislature decided. The world changed in June , how about a lengthy debate and a referendum. After Kansas they don’t want the voters weighing in on abortion, they couldn’t wait until November.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilyflower3191981
In reality, many voters are probably not happy with the new abortion law, but the majority of the voters elected their legislator.
In addition to that, the abortion ban is not a near total ban like you described. Certainly abortion will be inconvenient for some, but life is never perfect, people travel to different states for medical procedure all the time. Just don't know why some of you act like this is the end of the world.
imo, people are obsessed with Federal powers in delegation of their rights --- and in the delegation of State rights, as well. From what I've read, it seems to me some people believe the Federal power gives to them the power, to tell other people what to do. And they love that idea. That's why for the State to get their powers back, would be the end of the world for them.
imo, people are obsessed with Federal powers in delegation of their rights --- and in the delegation of State rights, as well. From what I've read, it seems to me some people believe the Federal power gives to them the power, to tell other people what to do. And they love that idea. That's why for the State to get their powers back, would be the end of the world for them.
Courts can say whether laws are constitutional or not. Roe vs Wade said banning abortion was unconstitutional. Thus, after Roe, states were forced to let abortion be legal.
I am sorely confused.
We've been told for months that Roe gave women a Constitutional right. Now you're saying states just weren't allowed to ban it.
As noted in the OP's article, it was passed in a special session of the state legislature. That special session began meeting in person July 25 - after Roe was overturned.
Thanks for the reply. Interesting that 3 women Legislators is who introduced the bill. Then I looked for IN's previous abortion laws and found this from a pro-life group:
"In 2020, Americans United for Life scored Indiana as the sixth most pro-life state in the nation.
In 2020, the pro-abortion Population Institute gave Indiana the grade of “F” for being a state that it does not consider friendly to unrestricted abortion access.
Currently there are abortion centers operating in the Indiana communities of Merrillville, South Bend, Fort Wayne, Lafayette, Indianapolis, and Bloomington."
So obviously, IN had a lot of restrictions in place, or being fought over in the court system before Roe was even leaked. And surely whoever voted for the 3 women who brought the bill knew their position on the issue, right?
Quote:
They had plenty of time to put something on the fall ballot if they wanted to, or at least put it on the ballot sometime next year if they felt that timeline was too soon.
And, Indiana could have put the issue on a referendum next year, waiting 15 months if needed.
And that's the beauty of it. It was the choice of the State government in Indiana. I mean, CA seems to do about 1/2 their legislating by Propositions. Not every state does. If you want a say in how Indiana conducts its lawmaking, you need to move to Indiana.
Quote:
As I said in a previous post, Roe vs Wade forced states to let abortion be legal. On a state level, it was not as imperative an issue to voters because Roe had forced states to let it be legal. States could try to ban it or place severe restrictions on it, but as long as Roe was in force, those state laws could be overturned by courts. Now that the Supreme Court has overturned Roe, those protections are no longer in place.
When the governor of Oklahoma campaigns on the idea of "any pro-life bill that crosses my desk I will sign" - as one example - you don't think the "pro-choice" crowd in OK considered it an imperative issue?
Quote:
That's why you had such a huge turnout in Kansas, because now the voters knew their vote really meant something this time.
But since the Kansas vote went so overwhelmingly in favor of preserving the right to abortion, GOP lawmakers in Indiana are obviously afraid to put it directly to the voters. The Indiana legislature this week could have put it up for a referendum, either in the fall or next year, but obviously they're now afraid to.
Kansas' action started in 2015, a law that was eventually overturned by the KS SC 7-1 in 2019. In January 2020, before their November elections legislators began the work to introduce and eventually pass in Jan '21 (after the election) the amendment that would then (eventually) get voted on this past week.
I happen to agree with the results of the Kansas Amendment vote. But there's a difference between agree and "approve of". I wouldn't expect a single Kansas citizen to care whether somebody in another state "approves of" their vote.
The voters didn’t decide, the GOP dominated legislature decided. The world changed in June , how about a lengthy debate and a referendum. After Kansas they don’t want the voters weighing in on abortion, they couldn’t wait until November.
The world didn't change in June. The Constitution was correctly interpreted after 50 years of legislating from the bench. Nothing in the 14th amendment refers to a Constitutionally protected right to terminate a pregnancy. It was that court's broad interpretation. That court decision even set guidelines as to when a woman can or cannot have an abortion. How can anyone think that's what the Founders meant when they passed it.
So overturning Roe V Wade brings us back to pre 1973 which left that up to the States. If people in Indiana don't want to ban or put strong restrictions on abortion they can elect representatives who don't either. Or pass a Federal Law or even an Amendment to the Constitution if you want it enshrined.
Umm... the voters did decide, in the same way they decide nearly everything in their states: They elect representatives to do what the people want done. You know, like the Constitution says?
They can always get up a state voter referendum, of course, if their state laws permit it. California has such state referenda, New York does not. Does Indiana have state referenda? If not, the people of Indiana can pressure their elected state representatives to pass state laws to establish them.
So many available solutions. So much unhappiness from the Democrats, as usual. Ever since the Supreme Court pointed out that the Constitution did not permit the 1973 court to simply hand down a sweeping edict and write their own legislation from the bench.
The Democrats always love dictatorships. As long as the dictators (in 1973 in this case) forced everyone to accept what the Democrats wanted.
Lol. Not true, now these political representatives don’t care a flying monkey about the voters. Whose paying the most is who they represent. It was recently noted that big oil from west Texas is funding the religious right against abortion etc. even though the majority said abortion was fine .
Fl Governor is rouge too, it’s not the majority of Floridians he’s listening to.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
