There is a possibility that abortion rights will be voted on in approximately 25% of states during this November. This has caused worry among advocates about the financial resources needed to support campaigns in all of these states.

Activists in states ranging from deep-red Arkansas and Missouri to purple Arizona and Nevada are vying for a restricted amount of funding and seeking support from national progressive organizations. Their goal is to secure protections in state constitutions.

There is a limited amount available for all individuals, especially since affluent contributors who have generously funded political campaigns in the past two years following the Supreme Court’s decision to reverse Roe v. Wade are now splitting their focus and financial resources between these campaigns and the upcoming presidential and congressional elections.

The scramble is pitting abortion-rights supporters in states with near-total bans against those in states where abortion is legal but under threat against those in battleground states
where Democrats hope a strong abortion access campaign will juice turnout and propel President Joe Biden and congressional candidates to victory.

Deirdre Schifeling, the chief political and advocacy officer for the American Civil Liberties Union, expressed interest in creating an expanded map to address a pressing crisis. However, due to budget and staffing limitations, this project may not be feasible. The cost of these campaigns is high, so careful consideration and proper resources are necessary for success.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is one of several organizations, including Planned Parenthood, Reproductive Freedom for All, the Fairness Project, Think Big America, Open Society Foundations, and the Tides Foundation, that are projected to spend millions of dollars this year to establish abortion rights in state constitutions. These groups are carefully considering where their funds could make the greatest difference, taking into account the specifics of each ballot measure, as well as the political and legal challenges they may face, public opinion polling, and the potential impact on the 2024 election.

Campaigns that are on the losing side of these decisions may face a lack of funds to collect signatures for petitions, fend off efforts from Republican officials to prevent the measures, and convince voters to reinstate access for millions of individuals.

Gennie Diaz, executive director of For AR People, a group spearheading Arkansas’ ballot measure campaign, stated that there is no one coming to rescue them. She acknowledged that other groups may have a different, more complex strategy that they may not align with. However, if they do not receive enough funding for a strong statewide campaign, it will result in the loss of women’s lives in the state. The group requires this funding in order to restore access and prevent such tragedies from occurring.

According to Diaz, the measure may be able to get enough support to be included on the ballot, but without significant funding from large organizations, it is unlikely to win in November. So far, they have not received any funds from national groups and have only managed to gather $30,000 from individual donors.

Organizations with progressive values are refraining from involving the state due to concerns about Arkansas’ proposed ballot measure. This measure would override the current strict abortion ban and instead limit abortions to 20 weeks of pregnancy, which goes against the standard set by Roe v. Wade at around 24 weeks. They fear that this restrictive measure could set a negative precedent for future attempts to protect abortion rights.

Beth Huang, program officer for civic engagement and democracy at the Tides Foundation, stated that their motto is “No going backwards.” She explained that they see Roe as the minimum standard and are focusing on measures that strengthen this standard. They do not want to endorse policies that allow for regression.

There is no evidence that this is a dependable way to support Democratic candidates on the same ballot, and certain advocates are cautioning against prioritizing electoral politics too heavily when allocating funds.

Colorado and Florida are not thought to be in play in the 2024 election but both serve as regional hubs for people traveling from nearby states with anti-abortion laws and campaigns there have raised more than $1.3 million and more than $17 million, respectively. Colorado’s measure would codify the right to abortion throughout pregnancy in the state constitution and allow state funding for the procedure. Florida’s would nullify both the state’s active 15-week ban and a pending 6-week ban.

It remains uncertain until the summer whether most of the campaigns supporting abortion rights will obtain sufficient signatures and overcome legal or bureaucratic obstacles to be included on the ballot. Additionally, numerous well-funded national organizations have emphasized that they will reassess their approach to funding as the year progresses.

In Florida, certain organizations such as the Fairness Project are anticipating the decision of the state Supreme Court regarding the approval of the measure, before committing to investing large amounts of money. However, other groups including the Tides Foundation, Open Society, and Planned Parenthood view the state as a critical location for abortion rights and have been willing to spend significant funds to increase the chances of the proposal’s success.

According to Huang, Florida is the second most prominent state in terms of providing abortion services, while the South lacks resources for reproductive healthcare. The proposed six-week abortion ban would greatly hinder access to abortion in the region and also have a significant impact on the Caribbean. This legislation would not only affect the 20 million residents of Florida, but also extend beyond its borders.

There has been a continuous series of wins since the Dobbs ruling in the summer of 2022. Beginning with Kansas’ initiation of the abortion ballot measure fight in August of that year, the pro-abortion-rights side has significantly surpassed their anti-abortion opponents in both red and blue states in terms of fundraising and spending. For instance, in Michigan, progressives received more than twice the funding compared to their anti-abortion rivals leading up to their success in the autumn of 2022.

Pro-life organizations are promising to counter and defeat these election proposals. One of the largest national groups, Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, intends to allocate a historic $92 million this year – a portion of which will fund door-to-door campaigning in Arizona, Montana, and other states where they aim to convince voters to reject initiatives supporting abortion rights. In 2022, the group spent $78 million, but after their supported ballot measures and congressional candidates were unsuccessful that year and in 2023, they reprimanded conservative donors for not being more involved.

“We must strive for a fair and balanced financial battle. It is imperative that we gather funds and increase awareness immediately,” stated Kelsey Pritchard, the State Affairs Director for SBA, during a press conference in January. “We must also take a proactive approach in states where the outcome of the ballot is uncertain.”