US: South Dakota is the unlikely home of an intense US duel over abortion, writes Peter Slevin in Sioux Falls
Kayla Brandt had an abortion three years ago and instantly regretted her decision. Now, hoping to stop other women from making the same choice, she has become a public advocate for the most severe abortion ban in the US.
"I don't want anyone to feel what I did," Brandt says.
Maria Bell is a Sioux Falls obstetrician-gynaecologist who also joined the political fray for the first time, but on the opposite side. Appalled by the attempt to shut the state's only abortion clinic, she says she would not be able to live with herself unless she worked to overturn the law.
"To think passing a law will stop abortion is incredibly naive," Bell says.
South Dakota is the unlikely home of this year's most intense US duel over abortion, a November 7th referendum to decide the future of HB 1215, a measure that would institute a broad ban on the procedure. No exceptions would be allowed for pregnancies resulting from rape or incest - abortion would be permitted only when the mother's life was in jeopardy.
Partisans across the US are delivering money and tactical advice on an issue that has divided residents of the state. South Dakota's fight could be a harbinger of political battles across the country should the Supreme Court strike down Roe v Wade, the 1973 decision that legalised abortion nationwide.
"This has become the focal point in the country for the choice debate," says Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, which is channelling cash into the campaign. "The stakes are very high, especially for us to win in November and again say America is pro-choice, America doesn't think politicians should be involved in these private decisions, and enough is enough."
A July poll suggests voters are inclined to oppose the law as too severe - opponents of the ban held an eight-point lead, with 14 per cent undecided.
Brandt, a 29-year-old financial auditor, described a period of quiet misery after an abortion about three years ago. When the doctor finished, she felt an emptiness that led to a long year of grief. Later she decided to speak out, hoping to create what she called a "haven" for women and children in South Dakota by outlawing abortion. Her smiling face now appears on the letterhead of VoteYesForLife.com, the umbrella group mobilising support for the ban.
"I was in a relationship and panicked and got scared and ashamed, and thought an abortion was the means to fix my mistake," said Brandt, who came to see herself as a "mother who was sadly stripped of her child".
The bold South Dakota strategy has energised some proponents while highlighting strategic splits in the anti-abortion movement. Many committed foes, focusing on incremental steps to make abortion less accessible, believe that Roe v Wade cannot realistically be challenged until the composition of the Supreme Court shifts further.
The ban is not "something we would have chosen", said Daniel McConchie, chief of staff of Chicago-based Americans United for Life. "To overturn Roe v Wade, which is the goal here, you have to be able to count to five members of the court. We count five in favour of keeping Roe."
Performing an abortion in South Dakota would be a felony if the mother's life is not in danger, according to the law, which declares that mother and foetus "each possess a natural and inalienable right to life". There is no exception for rape, although rape victims would be permitted to take morning-after contraceptives "prior to the time when a pregnancy could be determined through conventional medical testing".
Governor Mike Rounds signed the Bill into law in March but architects of the law never really expected it to be implemented. Instead they figured that it would be the subject of litigation that would eventually end up in the Supreme Court, where they hoped it would be upheld by the overturning of Roe v Wade.
But instead of suing to block the law, opponents are using a 19th-century provision that allows voters to overrule the legislature by referendum.
Meanwhile, the law is on hold. In a socially conservative state of 775,000 residents who twice gave George Bush 60 per cent of the vote, abortion defenders gathered more than 38,000 signatures - more than twice the number necessary - to place the measure on the ballot.