Missouri and Mississippi are currently making legislative moves to limit voters’ ability to voice their opinions on abortion rights, following similar tactics used in other states, such as Ohio in the previous year.

The attempts by Republican legislators and anti-abortion activists are seen as an attempt to undermine the democratic processes designed to allow voters to directly influence state legislation, according to Democrats and advocates for abortion rights.

Laurie Bertram Roberts, executive director of Mississippi Reproductive Freedom Fund, expressed that the government’s fear of the public and their opinions has led to attempts to silence them. This undemocratic approach has been observed in other states, such as Ohio, multiple times.

In 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the constitutional right to abortion. In response, voters in seven states have taken action to either preserve abortion rights or prevent any restrictions on them through statewide voting. Democrats have promised to focus on this issue in their campaigns for various positions in the upcoming election.

On Wednesday, the Mississippi House approved a proposal that would prohibit residents from including abortion measures on the statewide ballot. Mississippi currently has some of the most stringent abortion regulations in the United States, as the only permissible reasons for the procedure are to protect the woman’s life or in instances of rape or incest.

Democratic Representative Cheikh Taylor stated that direct democracy should not have any terms or conditions attached to it in regards to the bill.

Taylor stated, “Do not be deceived, this issue goes beyond abortion.” She emphasized that the Republican Party believes they understand what is best for individuals more than they do themselves. This is a matter of control, contradicting the principles of liberty and limited government.

The resolution aims to reestablish the ballot initiative process in Mississippi, as it has not been in effect since 2021 due to a ruling by the state Supreme Court. This ruling deemed the process invalid because it required individuals to collect signatures from the state’s five former U.S. House districts. However, Mississippi now only has four districts after the 2000 census, but the language for the initiative was never revised.

According to Republican Representative Fred Shanks, the House Republicans would not have agreed to the resolution, which will soon be sent to the Senate, if it did not include an exemption for abortion. Some House Republicans argued that voters should not have the right to vote on altering abortion laws, citing Mississippi’s role in the legal case that struck down Roe v. Wade.

Mississippi House Speaker Jason White, a Republican, stated that it took 50 years to reverse the decision made in Roe v. Wade. He also expressed determination to not let outside influences and a large sum of money dictate the outcome of the initiative.

However, Democrats in Mississippi and organizations advocating for abortion access criticized the exemption, arguing that it stifles the public’s input.

Sofia Tomov, the operations coordinator for Access Reproductive Care Southeast and a member of the Mississippi Abortion Access Coalition, criticized this method as highly undemocratic and harmful to individuals seeking reproductive health care. She believes it restricts people’s right to engage in the democratic process.

In Missouri, a proposed abortion rights initiative may be presented to voters in the upcoming election. Advocated by anti-abortion organizations, the plan would mandate that initiatives secure a majority vote in at least five of the state’s eight congressional districts, in addition to a simple majority statewide.

The suggestion was made just days after a campaign in Missouri advocating for abortion rights launched its efforts to include these rights in the state’s constitution. Groups supporting abortion rights in Missouri have also expressed dissatisfaction with Republican Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft, accusing him of trying to hinder the initiative by altering the summary on the ballot. A Missouri appeals court has ruled that the summaries were biased and deceptive.

During a recent committee hearing, Republican state Rep. Ed Lewis was questioned about whether the GOP proposal aimed to eliminate direct democracy. In response, Lewis stated that the founding fathers were wary of direct democracy, just as we should be, and that is why they established a republic.

On Tuesday, Sam Lee, a lobbyist representing Campaign Life Missouri, spoke about the importance of including measures that protect the rights of minorities to prevent them from being disregarded.

He stated that the goal of our founders and the goal of numerous individuals over time is to prevent a situation where the majority holds all the power and becomes a tyranny.

John Rizzo, the Democratic Minority Leader in the Senate, stated that the Republican Party’s main focus for the past two decades has been regulating voter eligibility and the topics that can be voted on.

In an interview, he stated that we are witnessing the death of democracies in real time, which he considers to be the most frightening moment of his life.

Representative Joe Adams, a Democrat, voiced his disapproval of the proposal, claiming that the districts for both congressional and legislative seats in the state have been unfairly drawn to benefit Republicans. This would greatly hinder the chances of an abortion bill passing under the proposed laws.

Efforts to prevent abortion measures from appearing on the ballot in Missouri and Mississippi mirror strategies used in other states to restrict the use of ballot initiatives, which are a method of direct democracy that is only accessible to voters in approximately half of the states.

The Republican attorney general of Florida has requested that the state’s Supreme Court prevent a proposed amendment regarding abortion rights from appearing on the ballot. This month, a coalition advocating for abortion rights obtained enough signatures to qualify the amendment for the 2024 ballot.

On Tuesday, a judge in Nevada approved a petition for a ballot measure that supports abortion rights, despite efforts from anti-abortion groups to stop it from being presented to voters.

Advocates for abortion rights in Ohio argued that the vote to include abortion rights in the state’s constitution last year was not just about abortion, but also a reflection of the state of democracy. They claimed that Republicans made efforts to impede the democratic process before the vote and disregarded the voters’ decision after the amendment was approved.

In August, Ohio Republicans held a special election to try and increase the requirement for passing future constitutional amendments from a simple majority to 60%. This attempt was unsuccessful and was widely viewed as an effort to weaken the abortion amendment.

Following the passage of the abortion protections by Ohio voters in the previous year, Republican legislators committed to impeding any attempts to overturn the state’s restrictions. Certain measures were suggested to forbid Ohio courts from interpreting any legal cases pertaining to the amendment.

Deirdre Schifeling, the chief political and advocacy officer of the ACLU, stated after the Ohio amendment was approved last fall that it was not solely focused on abortion. She emphasized that it was also a question of whether the majority’s voice would be recognized.

__

Reporters from the Associated Press, Summer Ballentine in Jefferson City, Missouri, and Emily Wagster Pettus in Jackson, Mississippi, provided additional information for this article.

___

The Associated Press receives backing from multiple private foundations to improve its reporting on elections and democracy. Learn more about AP’s democracy effort here. The AP is solely accountable for all material.