Day 6: South Dakota Has Spoken 
Yesterday, South Dakotans defeated by a wide margin the harshest state-level abortion ban our country has ever seen. In one of the most anti-choice states in the nation, 56% of voters rejected the ban. South Dakotans demonstrated that their legislators and Governor were out of step with their beliefs about giving women access to abortion.
As a group of us volunteers watched the news during the celebration party, our suspicions were confirmed that the fight is far from over.
Anti-choice coalition leaders vowed to try again in future legislative sessions. There is speculation that they will attempt to enact specific restrictions on the state’s only abortion clinic, or worse – they will attempt to enact an abortion ban that will pass the legislature and survive a popular vote. Undoubtedly, the anti-choice coalition has succeeded in changing some of the messaging in the debate here, and has convinced many people that abortion is "bad for women."
I don't write this with the intent of watering down the impact of the South Dakota victory, but to remind us that even in the face of victory we must constantly be on guard and must continue to devote our energy and resources to monitoring battlegrounds around the nation.
That said, today is a very exciting day, and we should still take a moment to celebrate our success in South Dakota.
I am proud that the National Partnership has done its part and contributed to this historic victory. Thank you to the Partnership for allowing me to witness firsthand that committed citizens – working hard to preserve women's reproductive freedom – can win and can make a difference that affects many women's lives.
– Steffany Stern
Note: Steffany Stern is a program associate at the National Partnership for Women & Families and this is her final daily reflection based on her field organizing activities with the South Dakota Campaign for Healthy Families, the local organization that successfully defeated the strictest anti-abortion measure our nation has ever seen.
Day 5: Happy Election Day!
The day we have been working toward is finally here. By the end of the day, we will know whether we have been successful in defeating the most restrictive abortion law in the nation. I am excited about the energy being generated all across the country on this important day. I can't help but feel optimistic about the outcome.
I have to confess, I am a devoted fan of Election Day. I voted absentee because I'm here in South Dakota, so I'll miss out on the excitement of voting in person – going to a polling place, standing in line with fellow voters, entering the voting booth (the best part), submitting my ballot into the optical scanner, and triumphantly slapping an "I voted" sticker on my shirt.
South Dakotans, for all their controversial politics, have a history of heading to the polls in high numbers. I have spoken with hundreds of South Dakotans, and rarely have I heard them say that they plan to avoid the polls. I appreciate South Dakotans for this reason.
When I encourage South Dakotans to vote, my message is simply this: it is extremely important that you vote. I remind them how important it is that they vote "no" on Referred Law 6, reminding them that the ban has no exceptions for victims of rape or incest or if a woman's health is in danger. I tell them that the election will be extremely close, and that their vote matters. Finally, I remind them of the location and hours of their polling place, and ask if we can count on their vote.
Get Involved. Go Vote!
Unfortunately, we cannot all vote in South Dakota! But here is a list of things you can do on Election Day:
1. Find your polling site (www.vote411.org) and vote.
2. Report any glitches or snafus by calling 1-866-OUR-VOTE (www.ep365.org).
3. Talk to others about your voting experience.
4. Encourage your friends wholeheartedly to vote – forward this e-mail to them!
5. Watch or read about the election returns.
6. Sign up to receive e-mail updates from organizations that advance policy issues you support – such as the National Partnership.
There is no way to avoid sounding like an enthusiastic idealist on Election Day, so I'll just give in to the urge. Whatever the issues or motivations are that bring you to the polls—the war in Iraq, threats to women's rights, affordable health care—today is your day to tell our leaders what you want.
Use your voice, and make it count.
– Steffany Stern
P.S. A special thanks to Jamia Wilson, a Planned Parenthood volunteer, for sharing her photos.
Day 4: Advertising Your Beliefs
November 5, 2006
Today was energizing and productive. Campaign organizers recruited a new band of volunteers for the remaining canvassing and evening phone banking shifts, and we have now canvassed nearly all of Brookings.
The regional field director recently told us how happy he is with our work. The influx of national staff has helped the Brookings team to meet its voter contact goals, and we are now able to send teams to nearby Watertown – a fantastic development since there is no field team there.
Must Miss TV
Today, we braved a viewing of the new DVD that the Vote Yes For Life campaign dropped on doorsteps yesterday, so that we would be familiar with their messages and fired up for the task at hand.
The DVD is polished and well-designed, like the rest of their campaign materials, but was profoundly disturbing to our pro-choice crew. The Vote Yes DVD includes the testimonies of several campaign spokespeople (and a great deal of misleading messages).
You may watch the video at http://voteyesforlife.com/videos.asp. Warning: the video attempts to manipulate your emotions by using real women's stories to support the ban. The spokespeople include a rape survivor who chose to keep her baby, a woman who had an abortion and regrets her decision, and several doctors who assert that abortion is bad for women’s health.
Signs of the Time
Many Midwestern campaigns rely on residents to post lawn signs to demonstrate support and to increase the visibility of particular issues. In a location where most people live in homes (versus apartments) and have at least a little property in the form of a lawn, the signs are a way for people to take a relatively easy step towards engaging in the political process.
One of the effects of having an abortion ban on the ballot is that large numbers of South Dakotans have publicly declared their stance on abortion, or at least on this particular law, through their lawn signs.
In a region where anti-choice billboards and advertisements are commonplace, you would not think that declarations of position on choice would trouble South Dakotans, and yet the action is not easy for many.
What was once a private issue is now one people literally advertise.
The lawn signs register how complex the issue is for most South Dakotans and how divided people are. Many lawns declare families’ opposition to the ban as well as their support for the anti-choice Governor who signed it.
And even along the same street in the same neighborhood, neighbors express opposing stances. Some neighborhoods are like checkerboards of “vote yes” and "vote no" signs. South Dakotans admit that the debate has caused interpersonal conflict. However, this need to publicly declare a stance and vote on it is good for the democratic process, in that it encourages people to decide and act on their beliefs.
This ban has also forced many South Dakotans who consider themselves to be anti-choice to acknowledge that they are somewhere in the middle on the issue; for example, they believe there should be exceptions to a no-abortion rule, or that residents should have access to emergency contraception and accurate sex education. This may be a step in the right direction towards stopping extreme measures like Referred Law 6 from cycling through the legislature session after session.
It is my sincere hope that the ban not only fails to pass the vote, but that its failure and the voters’ accompanying words send a message that prevents legislators from considering other versions of an abortion ban.
- Steffany Stern
Day 3: Beyond Mt. Rushmore
November 4, 2006
A few good volunteers
Today I learned more about my fellow workers and volunteers – who work cheerfully alongside me from the basement of an insurance firm and in the neighborhoods of Brookings – to find out more about why they want to help.
It was both interesting and inspiring to talk to them about their motivations – their reasons are both personal and political. Many are furious with South Dakota’s repeated actions to restrict access to contraception and abortion. Some have confessed that they are sorry for not volunteering before, but are now simply fed up and want to do everything they can to stop the ban. Others have been active for decades.
The women and men working with me make the work much easier to enjoy. There’s an “in-the-trenches” mentality that helps when ban supporters hurl insults at us on the phone or in person. We laugh a lot…having discovered that it feels better to laugh than to beat our heads against the wall.
Secret Donations
The South Dakota Campaign for Healthy Families has alleged that $750,000 in “secret donations” – from a single donor through a private corporation – to the Vote Yes for Life campaign violated state law.
Representative Roger Hunt, the primary sponsor of the abortion ban bill, set up a corporation called Promising Future, Inc., and this corporation has made three contributions of $250,000 to Vote Yes For Life. Hunt will not divulge the identity of the donor, stating that he is legally justified.
The Secretary of State is now investigating Hunt’s claim, and the Campaign for Healthy Families is asking the Attorney General to determine whether Hunt broke the law when he filed his campaign finance report. (For more information, read yesterday’s editorial in the Argus Leader.)
The controversy is a hot topic among voters, and a quick poll by the Argus Leader showed that over 70% of those surveyed think Hunt should disclose the donor’s name. Our contact with voters confirmed that serious political fallout has resulted from the story. It has definitely added another dimension to the conversations we have with South Dakotans about the ban and the people who are promoting it.
Church Signs
Other news revolves around churches’ involvement with the abortion ban. Several have taken action on the issue, featuring it prominently during church services. Pro-choice churchgoers have told me that they feel frustrated about the way it has been presented.
Churches’ actions are complicated by the fact that they are also the site of many polling places in the state. A large proportion of churches support the ban, and many churches around the state currently have “Vote Yes” signs prominently posted on their property. Before the election day, however, they will have to remove all signs from their property (or allow all signs to be posted).
One church has become entangled in a dispute with the County Auditor in Rapid City because it refuses to remove its signs. As a result, the county election supervisor was forced to change the poll location. The supervisor was reluctant to do so, because changing the poll location at this stage might confuse or even deter some voters. She says it was necessary to provide voters with a neutral walk to the poll.
This is just one example of the tension between various political and cultural forces affecting the events of election day and the outcome of the vote.
Voter Fatigue
South Dakotans I speak to tell me that they have received a great deal of attention this election cycle. There are several bills and constitutional amendments on the ballot, including a controversial amendment that would allow people to sue judges and an anti-gay marriage amendment.
Interested parties from all corners of the country have been contacting the citizens of South Dakota. We are all trying to reach those final wavering voters hoping to win them.
South Dakotans are feeling election fatigue, though many acknowledge that they understand the weight of the decisions they have been tasked with making. Turnout is expected to be over 72 percent, which is very high for South Dakota. Local pundits hypothesize that the primary issue driving people to the polls is the abortion ban.
Finally, today’s Argus Leader published responses to the question “What is the most important issue on the November 7 ballot for you, and why?” A young woman’s response was particularly compelling, and struck at the heart of the matter:
“South Dakota? Isn’t that where Mt. Rushmore is?” was the question I used to hear when I ventured outside our state’s borders. Now, it seems like all I hear is, “Oh yeah, isn’t that the state that’s trying to ban abortion?” I don’t want to sound like a broken record, but I don’t care…. Just because I do not support this legislation, I do not deserve to be labeled as either an anti-life citizen or a promiscuous teenager. I simply feel like the government has no right to intervene into the private lives of its citizens. Abortion is a difficult choice for women, and those who find themselves in such a situation do not deserve outside ridicule from their neighbors.”
–Allison La Fave, 19, DeSmet student
Again, I am incredibly glad to be taking part in this campaign. I look forward to being here when the world finds out what South Dakotans decide about a woman’s right to choose.
– Steffany Stern
Day 2: Shock and Awe (the other side’s use of misinformation and scare tactics)
November 3, 2006
I arrived safely in Sioux Falls late last night and drove an hour through farmland to Brookings.
Upon arrival, I discovered to my delight that I am staying with a wonderful hostess, who is contributing significantly to the campaign by sharing her home with weary field organizers. After feeding us a hearty breakfast, she sent us out into seriously cold weather – 17 degrees with a biting wind. Canvassing neighborhoods became challenging after a few hours – though the sympathetic looks from people inside warm houses gave us encouragement to continue. I spent the day engaging in voter contact activities on behalf of the Campaign for Healthy Families, primarily by phone banking and door-knocking.
The campaign has identified an extensive list of likely voters who are strongly against or leaning against the ban, and we are targeting our efforts at them. By this point, most people have heard of the abortion ban – called "Referred Law 6"on the ballot. We concentrate on making sure that people who will vote "NO on 6"go to the polls on Tuesday, rather than continuing voter persuasion.
The abortion ban is a hot topic in the local and national media. Residents’ mailboxes have been jammed with literature for months, and their houses have been besieged with phone calls and knocks at the door. But the voter contact must continue, because the final countdown to the election is a nail-biter.
The results of the most recent poll conducted by the Sioux Falls paper, the Argus Leader, show that 52% of South Dakotans will vote "no" on Referred Law 6, 42% will vote "yes", and 6% are undecided. The poll’s margin of error is +/- 3.5%. We at the Campaign for Healthy Families do not have the option of being comfortable with the lead in the polls; we will have to fight to maintain the ground that we have won and gain any supporters we can from the undecided group.
The atmosphere is charged at the campaign office, in the phone bank, and in the neighborhoods of Brookings. Advocates have flown in from around the country, from organizations such as the ACLU, NARAL, Planned Parenthood, and the National Partnership. We have supplied enthusiastic bodies to do the work and defer to local organizers and volunteers to give us marching orders.
Voter contact is rewarding – for example, when we reach voters opposed to the ban but who needed information on finding the polling site. It is also emotionally draining – for example, when voters throw accusatory words (such as "murderers") at us. Most people are very polite, but sometimes our calls trigger very emotional stories. One woman shared her personal story of giving up a child for adoption, and then cheerfully informed me that she intended to vote against the ban.
In just a short amount of time, it has become immediately evident that the campaigns on opposite sides of the issue are using wildly divergent messages and strategies to win supporters. On one side is the Campaign for Healthy Families, which opposes the ban, and on the other is Vote Yes For Life, which supports the ban.
I expected to be displeased at the choice of words and messages used by ban supporters, but I have been actually shocked by the other campaign’s use of misinformation and scare tactics.
For example, ban supporters claim that the law is not extreme, because there is an exception for rape or incest built into the ban. The exception, they assert, is the widespread availability of emergency contraception. This claim, however, has little basis in reality. Advocates against the ban argue that half of South Dakota pharmacies do not even carry emergency contraception. Ban supporters also claim that emergency contraception can be used for up to two weeks after sex to prevent pregnancy – when in fact the method is only effective for a period of 72 hours. These are just a number of the misleading arguments used by ban supporters in the materials they distribute and the quotes they give to the press.
However, our work continues. In Bookings, there are far fewer volunteers and staff than in more populated areas of the state, and the battleground here has drawn less media attention than in Sioux Falls and Rapid City. It is obvious that we have a lot of work to do here, but with fewer people and very limited time.
I am thankful that the National Partnership has sent me to Brookings, where my work has a larger impact. Despite the reality of stretched resources and time, rather than being discouraged, we are motivated to do all we can in the time remaining to stop this ban.
Now that I am here, it is even more evident how imperative it was for the National Partnership to heed the call for volunteers to combat the South Dakota abortion ban. I am glad to contribute to the field organizing efforts here, and I will continue sharing my experiences with you. Stay tuned.
– Steffany Stern
Day 1: Trekking to Brookings
November 2, 2006
I am leaving this afternoon for the long trek to Brookings, South Dakota. I will fly from Washington, DC into Sioux Falls and then drive to Brookings where I will be located for the week.
Because I am from a rural Minnesota town that borders South Dakota—you can actually see South Dakota on the horizon from my family's home—I am familiar with the geographical and political terrain.
Brookings is the state's fifth largest city and home to South Dakota State University – students make up a large proportion of the city's population.
I know the upcoming week will be both exhilarating and nerve-wracking, as I join field organizing activities during the final days of the campaign. My work will center around get-out-the-vote efforts in opposition to the ban – spending time on and around campus, engaging with potential voters via phone calls, door-knocking, and attending rallies and other visibility events.
The campaign is focused on ensuring that South Dakotans who are against the ban will make it to the polls, and providing information to the margin of voters still on the fence about the issue.
About the Issue:
South Dakota's population and legislators have a history of social conservativism. The state has established itself as one of the most consistently anti-choice states in the nation, and its legislators have passed several bills restricting access to abortion in recent years.
South Dakota's most recent abortion-related law represents the most dramatic step the state has taken—that any state has taken—towards banning abortion outright within its borders.
Last year the South Dakota legislature enacted the strictest anti-abortion ban the nation has seen, and the Governor signed it into law. The law would make it a felony for any doctor in South Dakota to perform an abortion. It contains no exception for pregnant women’s health or victims of rape or incest. The only potential for exception is in the event that performing an abortion would prevent a pregnant woman's death. In addition, the law makes it illegal to dispense emergency contraception in most cases.
Opponents of the ban gathered more than 38,000 signatures, and the Secretary of State certified that the law could be sent to a vote on November 7, giving South Dakota voters the option of directly deciding the matter.
Recent polls show that the race is close, and those in the undecided middle will likely determine the fate of the measure.
The nation's eyes are on South Dakota this election, and national organizations on both sides of the debate have sent donations and organizers to work on the final push.
The work that the Campaign for Healthy Families is undertaking to ensure defeat of the measure will be critical in upcoming days, and I am excited to be participating in this historic effort on behalf of the National Partnership for Women & Families.
– Steffany Stern
