Pro-lifers rallied March 6 in Sacramento in front of the Capitol. They numbered “a few hundred,” according to the Sacramento Bee. Given recent events in this state, this would seem not the most propitious time to try to save babies.
Last November, voters passed Proposition 1, which wrote abortion “rights” into the state constitution, even though abortion has been legal in the state since 1967. The vote was 67 percent to 33 percent.
The Legislature also passed five new laws to make it even easier to obtain an abortion here. Senate Bill 1142 provided California taxpayers’ funds for abortions of babies carried here from other states. It has been touted many times by Gov. Gavin Newsom.
But as Bob Dylan sang, it’s darkest just before the dawn. I’ve been a pro-life advocate for 50 years now. In 1972, when I was 17 and still couldn’t vote, I worked to defeat Proposal B in Michigan, which would have legalized abortion, 61 percent to 39 percent.
Abortion-rights activists (R) argue with anti-abortion activists in front of the Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., on June 26, 2022. The Supreme Court's decision in the Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health case overturns the landmark 50-year-old Roe v. Wade case, removing a federal right to an abortion. (Nathan Howard/Getty Images)
Two months later, the U.S. Supreme Court imposed its infamous and anti-democratic Roe v. Wade decision. It overturned not only the will of voters in Michigan and other pro-life states. It also overturned the legalized abortion statutes in California, New York, and other states, replacing the will of the people in all 50 states with one top-down national policy. The court made itself a super-legislature.
Roe v. Wade was overturned last year by the court in the Dobbs decision, once again throwing the matter back to the states—where it belongs in our federalist system. Although that led to California’s Prop. 1 vote. As well as to a new vote in Michigan last November, Proposal 3, which this time legalized abortion, 57 percent to 43 percent.
These votes came in the wake of the national controversy over Dobbs. The pro-abortion forces were outraged and went on a national rampage, probably leading to the Republicans failing to take over the U.S. Senate and reducing the margin of their new House majority.
But such furies inevitably abate. Anyone who wants an abortion in America still can get one. Those in states where it’s banned can drive or fly to states where it’s legal. If they come to California, taxpayers even will foot the bill.
Now it’s the pro-abortion politicians who are miscalculating. Newsom tweeted March 6: “California won’t be doing business with @walgreens -- or any company that cowers to the extremists and puts women’s lives at risk. We’re done.” That was above a picture of the abortifacient Mifepristone.
Mifepristone (Mifeprex), one of the two drugs used in a medication abortion, is displayed at the Women's Reproductive Clinic in Santa Teresa, N.M., on June 15, 2022. (Robyn Beck/AFP via Getty Images)
But how can California extend its laws to other states? Does Newsom think he’s already the U.S. president?
In response, pro-life activist Lila Rose tweeted, “This is ghoulish. Yet another new low. The salivating over drugs that kill babies is disgusting.”
Reuters reported, “In a statement issued later on Monday to clarify its position, Walgreens said it planned to dispense abortion pill mifepristone in any jurisdiction where it was legally permissible to do so.”
The statement read: “Once we are certified by FDA, we will dispense this medication consistent with federal and state laws.”
The big problem with Newsom is millions of Californians get their general prescriptions from Walgreens. If their business is hurt by his edict, the company inevitably will have to shut down some stores, making it more difficult for people to get their medications.
That comes on top of Walgreens and other drugstores shutting storefronts due to Newsom-style left-wing policies that have increased crime. Last month SFGate reported, “Walgreens has closed at least 12 stores in San Francisco since the beginning of 2019.”
Moreover, the group most likely to vote, seniors, also are those most likely to need and get prescriptions. They’re not going to be happy.
A Walgreens store in Mill Valley, Calif., on Jan. 6, 2022. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)
As I have been reporting here in The Epoch Times, Newsom has a tendency to overreach. Another example is his attack on “Big Oil” for “gouging” at the pump, although the high prices actually are caused by state policies. Maybe such stances will score well in the Democratic primaries in the more liberal states, such as New York and California. But they won’t go down well in states with conservative Democrats, such as South Carolina, which now sports the party’s first primary next Feb. 3.
Meanwhile, we’ll see if California pro-lifers follow my longtime suggestion of putting a pro-life initiative on the 2024 ballot. It probably still would lose.
But the post-Dobbs hothouse environment of November 2022 will have dissipated. Newsom, a lame duck in the governor’s office, will be otherwise occupied, perhaps with a White House run.
Even a 55 percent to 45 percent loss on a pro-life initiative would be respectable—and a new start on protecting the babies. More initiatives could follow.
Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.
John Seiler is a veteran California opinion writer. Mr. Seiler has written editorials for The Orange County Register for almost 30 years. He is a U.S. Army veteran and former press secretary for California state Sen. John Moorlach. He blogs at JohnSeiler.Substack.com and his email is [email protected]
Friends Read Free