Will "abortion tourism" help shift Kansas D?

[they don't love you like i love you]

Kansas is going to be the only state for quite a wide stretch with legal abortion. Based on that it's probably a fair assumption that many abortion providers will relocate there and thus lots of staff. So...more D voters?

[Skill and Chance]

I mean it's plausible that Kansas would attract liberals from the other Plains states and diverge from them over time.  I would say the actual number of people moving for this reason will be low.  It could have appeal for tech WFH as a low cost area with relatively liberal laws?  A lot of this still hinges on Kelly being reelected and/or the judges who made the 2019 ruling being retained.

Also worth noting that Republicans currently don't have the votes for abortion restrictions in Nebraska either.  A pretty moderate 12 week limit failed to attract enough support to overcome a state legislative filibuster.  However, my understanding is they only need one more pro-life vote, so Nebraska is a lot more tenuous.

[Sol]

This could actually matter quite a bit in Southern IL and NM too.

[Skill and Chance]

This could actually matter quite a bit in Southern IL and NM too.

Population vs. statewide is too small to be relevant for anything beyond state legislative districts.

NM is quite interesting, though.  Several plausible scenarios where this causes a massive Dem trend in the counties closest to the Texas border (they are currently like 80% R) and flips NM-02.

[Torie]

I don't think the half life of the abortion issue will be very long. The panic inspired by Dems and nurtured by the Pubs has some salience in this election and that is it. By the next election, the horror shows will have been resolved by the laws passed and the courts. The era of abortion as a bloody shirt issue is coming to an end, precisely because of Dobbs, which was the point. Roe was toxic to the public square, Dobbs the crude antidote (the Roberts take it slow and with lot of notice much better to give the public square time to sort it out).

What will last a lot longer are the issues of race, and tribe, and globalization, which have enough fuel to erode the rule of law itself, and this democracy. Gays don't cut it much either, anymore. It's back to the basics without deflection. I think that is a good thing, but am not absolutely sure about that. There is a lot of anger out there.

Pray for Trump fatigue, not as a panacea perhaps, but at least as a sedative.

[ProgressiveModerate]

I don't think the half life of the abortion issue will be very long. The panic inspired by Dems and nurtured by the Pubs has some salience in this election and that is it. By the next election, the horror shows will have been resolved by the laws passed and the courts. The era of abortion as a bloody shirt issue is coming to an end, precisely because of Dobbs, which was the point. Roe was toxic to the public square, Dobbs the crude antidote (the Roberts take it slow and with lot of notice much better to give the public square time to sort it out).

What will last a lot longer issues of race, and tribe, and globalization, which have enough fuel to erode the rule of law itself, and this democracy. Gays don't cut it much either, anymore. It's back to the basics without deflection. I think that is a good thing, but am not absolutely sure about that. There is a lot of anger out there.

Pray for Trump fatigue, not as a panacea perhaps, but at least as a sedative.

I agree. I also think this forum tends to overestimate how much people move *for* policy with the classic example being the mass exodus of Rs out of Cali. Most people can't even really afford to do that even if they wanted to. Self-sorting amongst races, classes, and political groups def exists which is why so much of the country is >90% in either direction but a lot of it is less voluntary. Say if you're a white person moving into NYC, you just likely aren't going to be looking at homes up in Grand Concourse or Canarsie to begin with, not because they are 95% non-white neighborhoods, but just because they culturally don't seem like good fits.

[Hope For A New Era]

Not enough to matter, but I do think this referendum will have lasting effects in Kansas. Sometimes an unexpected big show of strength by one side, even in exceptional circumstances, seems to flip some psychological or institutional switch that results in much greater strength afterward.

One example that seems to be mentioned a lot here is VA-SEN 2006, the opening act of the "Virginia Democratic revival."

Sometimes it doesn't seem to have this effect, though - Beto outperforming polls and getting close in Texas in 2018 isn't stopping Texas Rs, at least not this year, and Trump outperforming polls and getting close in Minnesota in 2016 doesn't seem to have seriously harmed Minnesota Ds.


For this year's elections, if we see anything like this, possibilities include:
- It's beginning to feel like Peltola is the first of many in Alaska. Almost "dawn of a new era" vibes.
- I worry about what a Drazan victory might do to Oregon.
- But I worry even more about what a Laxalt victory might do to Nevada.

[Del Tachi]

Abortion laws varied drastically between states pre-Dobbs.  AR, MO, OK and NE were down to 3 or fewer abortion clinics by 2018.

That didn't seem to help Kansas very much then, so I don't see why it would now.  This is not an issue where people "vote with their feet" like taxes or education.

And Kansas is actually quite near other abortion-providing states...Illinois, New Mexico and Colorado. 

[Skill and Chance]

I don't think the half life of the abortion issue will be very long. The panic inspired by Dems and nurtured by the Pubs has some salience in this election and that is it. By the next election, the horror shows will have been resolved by the laws passed and the courts. The era of abortion as a bloody shirt issue is coming to an end, precisely because of Dobbs, which was the point. Roe was toxic to the public square, Dobbs the crude antidote (the Roberts take it slow and with lot of notice much better to give the public square time to sort it out).

What will last a lot longer are the issues of race, and tribe, and globalization, which have enough fuel to erode the rule of law itself, and this democracy. Gays don't cut it much either, anymore. It's back to the basics without deflection. I think that is a good thing, but am not absolutely sure about that. There is a lot of anger out there.

Pray for Trump fatigue, not as a panacea perhaps, but at least as a sedative.

This is definitely where I was when Dobbs was being argued-that this would eventually be treated as a local issue like deciding whether to build a particular road and how to fund it.  I'm less sure now.  That could still happen, but it might take a decade to sort out, especially with referendums being an unexpectedly big factor. 

[ProgressiveModerate]

I also think this forum tends to overestimate how much people move *for* policy with the classic example being the mass exodus of Rs out of Cali. Most people can't even really afford to do that even if they wanted to.

Moving out of California is possibly the single most affordable thing you can do.

Oh yeah folks def could be getting priced out of places like Cali and NYC, however, that's a move because of price, not politics. Infact in Cali I'd argue it's likely more Dems are being priced out cause they tend to live in the parts of the state that are most expensive and have housing problems (Bay area and LA mainly).

[Aurelius]

I also think this forum tends to overestimate how much people move *for* policy with the classic example being the mass exodus of Rs out of Cali. Most people can't even really afford to do that even if they wanted to.

Moving out of California is possibly the single most affordable thing you can do.

Oh yeah folks def could be getting priced out of places like Cali and NYC, however, that's a move because of price, not politics. Infact in Cali I'd argue it's likely more Dems are being priced out cause they tend to live in the parts of the state that are most expensive and have housing problems (Bay area and LA mainly).

California has more Republicans than any state other than Texas. LA County alone has more Republicans than many states.

[ProgressiveModerate]

I also think this forum tends to overestimate how much people move *for* policy with the classic example being the mass exodus of Rs out of Cali. Most people can't even really afford to do that even if they wanted to.

Moving out of California is possibly the single most affordable thing you can do.

Oh yeah folks def could be getting priced out of places like Cali and NYC, however, that's a move because of price, not politics. Infact in Cali I'd argue it's likely more Dems are being priced out cause they tend to live in the parts of the state that are most expensive and have housing problems (Bay area and LA mainly).

California has more Republicans than any state other than Texas. LA County alone has more Republicans than many states.

Lol LA County gave Trump like 300k more votes than the entire state of Utah in 2020. Also weird to think about how Trump got more votes in Cali than Texas. This is why if there actually was some mass exodus of Rs and only Rs out of Cali, we likely would've seen more direct political consequences of that in states like Arizona, which has been shifting pretty hard left. If Rs could strategically coordinate a mass exodus, it would likely give them insane electoral benefits but practically that isn't going to happen.

[Skill and Chance]

I do like the Western/Plains small state strategy for Democrats over the decade, and I think its more reasonable than putting all their eggs in Texas.  Alaska, Kansas, Nebraska, Montana and maybe even Utah all seem ripe for a big swing left by the end of the 2020's, and they have Peltola's win and the Kansas abortion referendum to back this up.  They need something to take the emphasis off Wisconsin, where their position seems to be eroding by the year and replace Nevada, which frankly should be voting like West Virginia based on educational polarization. 

[Person Man]

I do like the Western/Plains small state strategy for Democrats over the decade, and I think its more reasonable than putting all their eggs in Texas.  Alaska, Kansas, Nebraska, Montana and maybe even Utah all seem ripe for a big swing left by the end of the 2020's, and they have Peltola's win and the Kansas abortion referendum to back this up.  They need something to take the emphasis off Wisconsin, where their position seems to be eroding by the year and replace Nevada, which frankly should be voting like West Virginia based on educational polarization. 

They were well on the way the last time Democrats had the unquestioned momentum but the party went a direction heading into and beyond 2010. Maybe if 22 and 24 are especially bad, Democrats can go back to talking to non-evangelical Perot style voters. That’s how we got Tester.

[Skill and Chance]

I do like the Western/Plains small state strategy for Democrats over the decade, and I think its more reasonable than putting all their eggs in Texas.  Alaska, Kansas, Nebraska, Montana and maybe even Utah all seem ripe for a big swing left by the end of the 2020's, and they have Peltola's win and the Kansas abortion referendum to back this up.  They need something to take the emphasis off Wisconsin, where their position seems to be eroding by the year and replace Nevada, which frankly should be voting like West Virginia based on educational polarization. 

They were well on the way the last time Democrats had the unquestioned momentum but the party went a direction heading into and beyond 2010. Maybe if 22 and 24 are especially bad, Democrats can go back to talking to non-evangelical Perot style voters. That’s how we got Tester.

They will have to move away from the more extreme elements of their base that want to regulate everything under the sun that isn't abortion, but if SCOTUS is going to gut the administrative state anyway, it will be fairly easy to tell the bold progressives "sorry, our hands are tied."  The same strategy should also help them hold onto Michigan and Maine longer than they otherwise would.  I think this is a plausible 2028 or 32:



As you can see, it helps them greatly in the senate (that's 26 states), but it's pretty marginal for the EC (they just barely squeak by without NC assuming NM holds).

[Sol]

on what planet are nebraska and kansas D but wisconsin R

[💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)]

After controlling for other things the number of voters who would move into Kansas because of abortion services is in the hundreds if even that.

[Adam Griffin]

Unless you know you're going to be having annual abortions for the rest of your pre-menopausal life, who on earth would relocate to a state solely based on such?

[they don't love you like i love you]

Unless you know you're going to be having annual abortions for the rest of your pre-menopausal life, who on earth would relocate to a state solely based on such?

It's not the women getting abortions, it's the providers and their staff relocating there.

[Person Man]

Unless you know you're going to be having annual abortions for the rest of your pre-menopausal life, who on earth would relocate to a state solely based on such?

It's not the women getting abortions, it's the providers and their staff relocating there.

It's not just for people who are planning on getting abortions but the other unintended consquences  of a grossly overregulated health care system.

[Hope For A New Era]

I think what's being theorized here is basically "abortion clinics on the borders all around Kansas."

It's kind of already a thing. Even before Dobbs, all providers in the Kansas City and St Louis metros were in Kansas and Illinois.

[Adam Griffin]

Unless you know you're going to be having annual abortions for the rest of your pre-menopausal life, who on earth would relocate to a state solely based on such?

It's not the women getting abortions, it's the providers and their staff relocating there.

I'm not sure how many healthcare workers you think would be required to saturate Kansas even with abortion tourism on the docket (note: it's a tiny figure), but it's still likely a solid majority of those ultimately employed in such would be native residents.

[Person Man]

Like I said, people will move not for jobs or abortions, but because of the side effects such laws have.