Caroline Kitchener, a national reporter for the Washington Post, dives into the complex intersection of abortion rights and the political landscape in this insightful discussion. She highlights how many pro-choice voters still supported Trump despite his ambiguous stance. The conversation addresses the implications of a potential Trump re-election on abortion access, ongoing legal battles over mifepristone, and the possible revival of historic regulations like the Comstock Act. Kitchener's analysis reveals the intricate dynamics shaping voter behavior and political strategies leading into 2024.
Despite strong support for abortion rights, many voters, particularly independents and Republicans, prioritized other issues over reproductive health in elections.
The podcast highlights concerns about how a Trump administration could impose restrictions on medication abortions, significantly limiting access to reproductive health services.
Deep dives
Voter Perspectives on Abortion Rights
Many voters who support abortion rights did not see the issue as a significant factor in their presidential choices, particularly among independent and Republican-leaning individuals. For example, Emily Jones from Arizona felt strongly about preserving reproductive health care after experiencing an ectopic pregnancy but ultimately voted for Trump while also supporting an abortion rights initiative. This trend was observed not only in Arizona but also in states like Missouri and Montana, where despite strong pro-choice sentiments, voters still backed Trump. It highlights a disconnect between the urgency of abortion rights and their perceived influence on presidential decision-making.
The Role of Abortion in Campaign Strategy
Democrats entered the election cycle believing that abortion would be a key issue to rally voters, especially following the overturning of Roe v. Wade. This belief was partly fueled by the significant turnout of women in previous elections to vote for abortion rights, as observed in the 2022 midterms. However, many women were compelled to support other issues such as the economy and immigration over the abortion rights agenda. Consequently, even with high-profile advocacy from leaders like Kamala Harris, the anticipated impact of abortion on voter preferences was less pronounced than expected.
Future Challenges for Abortion Access
The podcast discusses the potential implications of a Trump administration on abortion policies and access, highlighting a likely focus on regulations around medication abortions. With over half of abortions in the U.S. being medication-based, changes in how the Department of Health and Human Services oversees these prescriptions could significantly limit access. Additionally, there is concern that legal actions under the Comstock Act could pave the way for broader restrictions on abortion-related materials. The potential for significant policy shifts from a conservative administration raises questions about the future landscape of abortion rights in the U.S.
Donald Trump’s position on abortion was opaque enough that even states that passed protections for abortion rights still voted for him by a large margin. But even if a national abortion ban—something JD Vance has spoken in favor of—is probably untenable politically, how else could the incoming administration restrict access to abortion across the country?
Guest: Caroline Kitchener, national reporter covering abortion for the Washington Post.
Want more What Next? Subscribe to Slate Plus to access ad-free listening to the whole What Next family and across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe today on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of our show page. Sign up now at slate.com/whatnextplus to get access wherever you listen.
Podcast production by Elena Schwartz, Paige Osburn, Anna Phillips, Madeline Ducharme and Rob Gunther.