Abortion-rights ballot measure supporters across the country have raised nearly eight times as much as groups campaigning against the amendments on the November ballots. But that advantage may not translate into a huge benefit down the stretch in Florida, the most expensive of the nine statewide campaigns to enshrine abortion rights into state constitutions.
So far, campaign finance data compiled by the watchdog group Open Secrets and analyzed by The Associated Press tells a similar story in most of those states: Amendment backers have raised multiple times as much money and have far more donors, bringing in nearly $108 million compared to $14 million for their opponents as of reports aggregated by Tuesday. Still, it’s not a sure thing that will mean more spending to promote the measures in every state in the final weeks before the Nov. 5 elections.
“The apparent differential on campaign finance reports does nothing to reassure me that we will not see large, late spending on these campaigns,” said Kelly Hall, executive director of The Fairness Project, which is providing money and other support for abortion rights groups in several of the campaigns.
The measures would roll back restrictions in some states and enshrine protections into the constitutions in others after the Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling overturning Roe v. Wade. Most GOP-controlled states implemented bans or restrictions after the ruling. Most Democratic-controlled ones offered some protections for abortion access.
The ballot measures could also drive voter turnout in the elections.
Campaigns that raise more money have an edge reaching voters with ads on TV, radio and websites, along with mailers and yard signs and more organizing power for door-knocking and other efforts.
That’s evident so far in Missouri and Montana, where big funding advantages have translated into far more ad buys, according to data collected by the media tracking firm AdImpact.
In Missouri, the Open Secrets data shows abortion rights groups have raised more than $5 million, and state filings reflect millions more in contributions, including $1 million from former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg. The giving has fueled over $11 million in ad spending supporting a measure that would overturn the state’s ban compared with less than $50,000 opposing it.
In Montana, pro-amendment groups lead in ad spending, with more than $11 million compared to under $50,000 for opponents.
There hasn’t been as much ad activity so far in Arizona, Colorado, Maryland, Nevada or South Dakota. In Nebraska, abortion opponents have raised slightly less money but have spent slightly more on ad buys. Contribution totals don’t have to be reported in Nevada or South Dakota until later this month.
Supporters of the ballot measures also have some costs that opponents don’t.
Getting most of the abortion questions on the ballots required signature drives, which are a major cost for their sponsors. And with most of the questions, there were legal battles over whether ballot requirements were met. Paying lawyers in those battles often falls to the groups behind the campaigns, reducing how much of the money they raise is available for reaching voters.
The costs of legal challenges often do not eat into their opponents’ fundraising the same way.
The Thomas More Society, for instance, challenged initiatives in Missouri and Nebraska. The group is not required to file campaign finance reports.
And in Florida, the state attorney general challenged that state’s measure, shifting legal expenses to taxpayers.
Florida’s race has some other unique wrinkles.
For one, adopting the measure requires approval from 60% of voters, compared to lesser thresholds needed in other states.
If approved, Florida’s amendment would make abortions legal until the fetus is viable, or when necessary to protect the patient’s health, as determined by a health care provider. Florida currently bans most abortions after six weeks, with some exceptions.
Abortion rights groups have reported raising more than $60 million and opponents $9 million. But that does not reflect all of the spending.
The state Republican Party has aired commercials urging voters to defeat the amendment. AdImpact data shows the GOP has spent $9.6 million running TV and online ads. That’s about half the $20.7 million bought by groups backing the amendment. But using an industry calculation for how many people see TV ads, it puts the ballot measure’s opponents ahead.
Even that spending doesn’t include another boost for the argument that the amendment goes too far. A state government website states, “Amendment 4 threatens women’s safety.” Advocates sued last month to stop the taxpayer-funded messaging. A judge ruled Monday that the website could remain up.
Peter Northcutt, director for state strategies at National Right to Life, portrays the anti-abortion movement as an underdog up against funding from those with a financial interest in abortion.
“The abortion industry and their allies bring massive funds to the table,” he said. “Those who are trying to fight off these extreme amendments have an uphill climb.”
Planned Parenthood Federation of America and some of its regional affiliates are among those who have kicked in more than $1 million to support the amendments. But the biggest donor so far is Marsha Zlatin Laufer, a frequent contributor to liberal causes. She’s given more than $9 million in Florida.
Other abortion-rights groups that have given more than $1 million in multiple states include the Sixteen Thirty Fund, The Fairness Project and Advocacy Action Fund, which aren’t required to disclose their donors, as well as the George Soros-connected Open Society Action Fund.
Nationally, the abortion rights side also has far more donors: More than 94,000 to fewer than 2,600.
On the opposing side, the big individual contributors are U.S. Sen. Pete Ricketts, a Nebraska Republican, and his mother, Marlene Ricketts. Each of them has given at least $1 million in Nebraska. Nebraska is the one state where campaign finance filings show the two sides have raised similar amounts of money, with both between $3 million and $4 million.
There’s a reason for that: Nebraska has competing ballot measures. One would expand access to abortion and the other would enshrine the current ban on most abortions after the first 12 weeks of pregnancy.
The fundraising gap is partly explained by the fact that two big national organizations that together spent about $40 million trying to defeat a similar campaign last year in Ohio have not gotten heavily involved in campaign funding this year.
One is The Concord Fund, which spent more than $25 million in Ohio last year – more than 40% of the total in opposition to the amendment. Like abortion-related ballot measures in six other states since 2022, the abortion-rights side prevailed.
The group, formerly known as the Judicial Crisis Network, is part of a network of political groups centered around Leonard Leo, a prominent conservative legal activist and driving force in securing nominations of conservative Supreme Court justices who voted to overturn Roe v. Wade.
The other is Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, which contributed nearly $15 million in Ohio last year. The group said it planned to raise $92 million for political campaigns this year, but the focus was not on abortion-related measures. Instead, it said it would prioritize helping Republicans win the presidency and Congress.
Neither organization commented for this article.
Be the first to comment