The Anderson Files: Forced pregnancy & rise in fascism

cantina lunada

I

ST. VRAIN HABITAT RESTORE

FRESHLY SQUEEZED LIME JUICE!

1225 Ken Pratt Blvd, Longmont 720-612-7315 • lunadaeatery.com

$3 Draft Beers - 16 oz $5 House Margarita - 16 oz $3 Mimosa Taco Tuesday $2 Tacos

2030 Ken Pratt Blvd. • Longmont, CO • 303-776-1747 blueagaverestaurant.net

BOULDER COUNTY OWNED AND OPERATED

Publisher, Fran Zankowski Circulation Manager, Cal Winn

EDITORIAL

Editor-in-Chief, Caitlin Rockett Senior Editor, Emma Athena News Editor, Will Brendza Food Editor, John Lehndorff

Contributing Writers: Dave Anderson, Rob Brezsny, Michael J. Casey, Shay Castle, Angela K. Evans, Mark Fearer, Jodi Hausen, Karlie Huckels, Dave Kirby, Matt Maenpaa, Sara McCrea, Rico Moore, Adam Perry, Katie Rhodes, Dan Savage, Alan Sculley, Tom Winter

SALES AND MARKETING Market Development Manager,

Kellie Robinson Account Executives, Matthew Fischer, Carter Ferryman Mrs. Boulder Weekly, Mari Nevar

PRODUCTION

Art Director, Susan France Senior Graphic Designer, Mark Goodman

CIRCULATION TEAM

Sue Butcher, Ken Rott, Chris Bauer

BUSINESS OFFICE

Bookkeeper, Regina Campanella

Founder/CEO, Stewart Sallo Editor-at-Large, Joel Dyer

May 12, 2022

Volume XXIX, Number 36

As Boulder County's only independently owned newspaper, Boulder Weekly is dedicated to illuminating truth, advancing justice and protecting the First Amendment through ethical, no-holds-barred journalism, and thought-provoking opinion writing. Free every Thursday since 1993, the Weekly also offers the county's most comprehensive arts and entertainment coverage. Read the print version, or visit boulderweekly.com. Boulder Weekly does not accept unsolicited editorial submissions. If you're interested in writing for the paper, please send queries to: editorial@boulderweekly.com. Any materials sent to Boulder Weekly become the property of the newspaper.

690 South Lashley Lane, Boulder, CO, 80305 p 303.494.5511 f 303.494.2585 editorial@boulderweekly.com www.boulderweekly.com

Boulder Weekly is published every Thursday. No portion may be reproduced in any form without written permission from the publisher. © 2022 Boulder Weekly, Inc., all rights reserved.

Boulder Weekly

welcomes your correspondence via email (letters@ boulderweekly.com) or the comments section of our website at www.boulderweekly.com. Preference will be given to short letters (under 300 words) that deal with recent stories or local issues, and letters may be edited for style, length and libel. Letters should include your name, address and telephone number for verification. We do not publish anonymous letters or those signed with pseudonyms. Letters become the property of Boulder Weekly and will be published on our website.

Forced pregnancy and rises in authoritarianism

by Dave Anderson

Abortion is a unique issue in American politics. For many years, a majority of people have opposed overturning Roe v. Wade. However, many have ambivalences and take contradictory positions. is is partly the result of issue framing and questions asked. Isn’t everyone “pro-life”? Sociologist Tricia Bruce says many people she surveyed on the topic were uncomfortable discussing it for fear of being judged.

Abortion is more widespread than it seems. According to the Guttmacher Institute, one in four women will have an abortion by age 45. e Centers for Disease Control says six in 10 women who have an abortion are already mothers.

Pregnancy is a complex biological process. ere are countless ways it can go awry. Writing in Scienti c American, Maternal-fetal medicine physician Cara C. Heuser says:

Most people don’t realize that carrying a pregnancy to term is 14 times more dangerous than an early legal abortion. While we should work to reduce the maternal mortality rate, especially among women of color, the fact is that being pregnant (or being forced to seek an unsafe or illegal abortion) is always going to be riskier than a safely performed abortion. acacaShe cites multiple studies, which found that “being denied an abortion results in worse nancial, health and family outcomes.” She notes:

Dogmatic laws presume a certainty that rarely exists in the realities of clinical medicine. ey fail to account for the

range of prognoses that characterize many conditions, as well as how the complexities of psychosocial circumstances, mental health and disparities in access to care a ect a person’s health outcomes. Lawmakers cannot possibly legislate every circumstance or exception that must exist to prevent sometimes signi cant harm and/or su ering. Biology constantly surprises us.”

However, the dogmatic anti-abortion laws are an answer for many who feel cultural anxiety about rapid social change involving gender roles and sexuality. Authoritarian movements wipe away ambiguity and nuance. Republicans are saying if they win in national elections this fall, they will pass a bill outlawing abortion everywhere in this country. What does this mean? New York Times columnist Michelle Goldberg says, “If your aim is a near-total abortion ban in a rapidly secularizing country with a younger generation that largely despises the right, democracy isn’t your friend.”

Meanwhile, the U.K. media outlet openDemocracy reported last year that “the ‘dark money’ global empire of the U.S. Christian right” spent at least $28 million in recent years on e orts to roll back the rights of women and LGBTQ+ people worldwide. ey are exporting their legal strategy, army of lawyers, and resources overseas to undermine international progress on abortion access.

New York Times reporter Max Fisher writes: “Recent shifts on access to abortion suggest democracy and women’s rights go hand in hand— and that the inverse might be true as well.” Since 2000, 31 countries have expanded access to abortion. Only three have gone backwards: Poland, Nicaragua and the U.S.

Ximena Casas, the women’s rights

researcher at Human Rights Watch, writes about a “Green Wave” in Latin America of mass popular protests, legal action and legislative demands “that center broadly on women’s autonomy and rights, especially protecting women against violence.” But there has been pushback. In Honduras, Congress has made it almost impossible to legalize abortion. In El Salvador, the president blocked any change in abortion laws. Women in that nation have been sentenced for up to 40 years in prison for violating the law, many after miscarriages or stillbirths. e U.S. SuWHEN THE U.S. preme Court’s draft ruling on SUPREME COURT abortion has alarmed many FIRST LEGALIZED around the world. Araceli Lopez Nava ABORTION IN is the Latin America region1973, the country was al managing director for MSI Reproducone of the leaders on tive Choices, an organization reproductive rights. which provides contraception and safe abortion services in 37 countries. She told Ms. Magazine: It has been a long ght for our right to choose, but just as my home country of Mexico celebrates a turning point in abortion rights, it is devastating to see our neighbors in the U.S. poised to take a huge step backwards. When the U.S. Supreme Court rst legalized abortion in 1973, the country was one of the leaders on reproductive rights. Today, it is moving against the ‘Green Wave’ sweeping Latin America, and the once-unthinkable prospect of U.S. women crossing the border to access safe, legal reproductive healthcare in Mexico, could soon become a reality.” e elections this year and in 2024 are more crucial than ever. is opinion column does not necessarily re ect the views of Boulder Weekly.

Council contends with even year elections and COVID infections

by Shay Castle

Local elections may move to even years, but how and when is TBD.

Assuming voters give it a green light, Boulderites could soon be electing their local o cials alongside governors, senators and presidents. How soon? It’s too soon to tell.

In a bid to increase turnout, a majority of City Council backed a plan to move council elections from odd years to even, a shift that in other cities has resulted in way, way more people casting ballots—even in small, local races.

Boulder already sees huge gaps in even vs. odd-year elections: Nearly 30,000 more people voted in 2020 compared to 2021. Even without a presidential race driving turnout, more people consistently show up for even-year elections, as evidenced by the 2018 vs. 2019 participation rates (57,377 and 34,971, respectively—a gap of 22,406).

Local measures don’t appear to su er from crowded even-year ballots, as critics contend. An analysis of turnout over the past decade found that 17,239 more votes were cast for local issues, on average, in even years vs. odd ones, despite more crowded ballots.

“ ere’s no evidence that voters are going to get overwhelmed with the national stu ,” council member Matt Benjamin said Tuesday night, in a passionate speech advocating for reform. (Benjamin previously served on the city’s election and campaign nance working group.)

“We know where the voters are; we go to them in space” with drop boxes and mail-in ballots, Benjamin said. “We also need to go to them in time. It’s odd we still hold on to that system (when) we have 20,000 more people who participate in our local elections in even years.”

Opponents made a quantity vs. quality argument.

“We’ve made voting very, very easy,” said council member Bob Yates. “Some people choose not to vote in City Council elections—they’re not interested in City Council, they don’t care, they don’t want to inform themselves, they can’t be bothered. I’m not sure those people will become more informed if we move to even-year elections. Maybe there’s a laziness factor there.

“We will undoubtedly have more people voting, but it’s not necessarily going to improve the quality of the election.”

Yates was joined by Mark Wallach in voting against moving to even-year elections for City Council, a change