Sunshine and clouds mixed. High around 80F. Winds WNW at 5 to 10 mph..
A mostly clear sky. Low 54F. Winds light and variable.
In November, we will be asked to vote on Proposition 5 (Article 22), a proposed state constitutional amendment:
“That an individual’s right to personal reproductive autonomy is central to the liberty and dignity to determine one’s own life course and shall not be denied or infringed unless justified by a compelling State interest achieved by the least restrictive means.”
What does “unless justified by a compelling State interest” mean? Does the state have “a compelling interest” in protecting the life of a viable fetus? Who will define “by the least restrictive means”?
Why do we need a constitutional amendment? The will of the people is more easily updated and modified when the law is statutory, than when ensconced in the state constitution.
The Legislature has recently adopted an abortion law with few limitations, with minimal public debate, and with many conditions. The current Vermont statute provides, in part:
“The State of Vermont recognizes the fundamental right of every individual who becomes pregnant to choose to carry a pregnancy to term, to give birth to a child, or to have an abortion.”
The statute goes a long way to providing an important choice for women. But there are questions. Does a viable fetus ever have a right to life, however conditioned on the health, welfare or orientation of the mother? Can a doctor or a clinic ever refuse to perform a “partial birth abortion” with impunity?
Our most extreme voices would carry their emotions to the national level. They argue that the overturning of Roe v Wade ended a constitutional right to abortion. They would “reverse” the situation by codifying Roe v Wade through legislation that allows abortions up to the time of birth.
This is a misreading of Roe. Roe recognized the State’s “important and legitimate interest” both in the health of the mother and in protecting fetal life after viability. Where is the balance between these two “interests”? Is there any provision protecting a viable fetus in the Act, the proposed constitutional amendment, or the current Vermont statute?
Our law should not parrot one extreme to the neglect of the other. If we are to live together in peace, our laws must respect the views of the majority, not the 10 percent of either extreme. We need laws that, although not perfect in everyone’s eyes, can be respected by the majority.
Like Roe v Wade, our state constitution should reflect a balance between both choice and life. The proposal addresses choice appropriately but ignores life. The proposal does not consider the overlap of these two “important and legitimate interests.”
The Legislature could have done a lot more to develop additional programs to provide young mothers with educational sources, counseling, support, and options. What it gives us is a half-baked idea that will only stir controversy.
On Aug. 9, Vermonters will have the opportunity to vote for a new Representative to Congress. I’m voting for Lt. Gov. Molly Gray, and below are just a few of the reasons she has earned my vote:
1. LGBTQ+ rights. As a human rights lawyer, Molly will fight to protect and codify same-sex marriage. She will work to pass the Equality Act, a bill to prohibit discrimination based on sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity in public spaces.
2. Voting rights. Molly will work to enact many of Vermont’s voter protections into federal law, including the right to vote early, vote by mail, and use ballot boxes; nationwide same-day voter registration; the right of local election officials to send information and ballots to eligible voters; and equal access to the ballot box with no discrimination.
3. Reproductive rights. With a woman’s “right to choose” under attack in the U.S., Molly will fight doggedly to codify Roe v. Wade into federal law. She will strengthen protections for funding for women’s healthcare providers, and focus attention on women’s high mortality rate.
4. Gun safety. In a battle to save American lives, Molly will fight to ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines; make sure guns cannot be sold to dangerous individuals or people in crisis; and enforce safe gun storage.
5. Climate. Molly has committed to fighting for more affordable electric vehicles, redoubled investment in weatherization and clean heat, and much more.
Join me on August 9 — vote for Molly Gray!
Thank you for sending someone from your staff to the Coffee Bar for the Bennington Meet & Greet with Attorney General candidate Rory Thibault.
I think the Attorney General is one of the most important races on the ballot this year. My husband and I went to meet Rory and I’m very glad we did. I liked what he had to say about protecting and defending reproductive rights, anti-corruption and ethics, and most notably for me, public safety.
I think it’s important to have an Attorney General that will appear in court from time to time on certain high profile trials. I was very surprised (Democratic candidate Charity) Clark has never tried any cases in court. I guess I just assumed/expected that someone who had worked in former Attorney General T.J. Donovan’s office for so long would have trial experience. I also think it was inappropriate for T.J. Donovan to resign as the Vermont AG to become a high-priced lobbyist. It may not be illegal in today’s AG office but it certainly appears to be inappropriate.
I was concerned after watching an earlier debate where Ms. Clark said she thought the current practices in place were sufficient. I think it’s time for the AG’s office to take a harder look at our anti-corruption and ethics laws, and I wanted to ask Rory about that myself. I was pleased to learn anti-corruption and ethics is a priority for Mr. Thibault.
I hope we get more state wide candidates in Bennington. Bennington County is too often forgotten. When Rory Thibault returns to Bennington, I plan to be there with some follow up questions and I hope The Banner covers that visit as well.
Get up-to-the-minute news sent straight to your device.