State Legislatures

Subterms

    More stories

    • 100 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Eric Adams Is Using Endorsements to Influence Policy

      by

      The mayor has chosen sides in at least 10 primaries this year, as he looks to enact criminal justice changes and defeat left-leaning candidates.Most big-city mayors, especially those in the relative infancy of their tenures, typically try to avoid wading into fractious party primaries, mindful that their goal is to build consensus.Mayor Eric Adams of New York City does not subscribe to that theory.Just seven months into his first term, Mr. Adams, a Democrat, has injected himself into his party’s divide, making endorsements in roughly a dozen state legislative primaries.Mr. Adams has endorsed incumbents, upstart challengers, and even a minister with a history of making antisemitic and homophobic statements.Behind all the endorsements lies a common theme: The mayor wants to push Albany and his party away from the left, toward the center.“I just want reasonable thinking lawmakers. I want people that are responding to the constituents,” Mr. Adams said Thursday. “The people of this city, they want to support police, they want safe streets, they want to make sure people who are part of the catch-release-repeat system don’t continue to hurt innocent New Yorkers.”In Tuesday’s State Senate primary, the mayor has endorsed three candidates facing rivals backed by the Democratic Socialists of America. The mayor said the endorsements are meant to help elect people willing to tighten the state’s bail law, a move that he believes is needed to address an uptick in serious crime.Mr. Adams’s most striking endorsement might be his decision to back the Rev. Conrad Tillard, who has disavowed his remarks about gay people and Jews, over incumbent Senator Jabari Brisport, a member of the Democratic Socialists.The mayor, who proudly hires people with troubled pasts, said Mr. Tillard is a changed man. During a recent interview on WABC radio, Mr. Tillard said that Mr. Adams was elected with a “mandate” to make New York City safer.“I want to join him in Albany, and I want to join other legislators who have common sense, who realize that without safe streets, safe communities, we cannot have a thriving city,” he said.The mayor has also held a fund-raiser for Miguelina Camilo, a lawyer running against Senator Gustavo Rivera in the Bronx. Mr. Rivera was endorsed by Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who has criticized Mr. Adams for some of his centrist views; Ms. Camilo is the candidate of the Bronx Democratic Party.In a newly created Senate district that covers parts of Queens, Brooklyn and Manhattan, the mayor has endorsed a moderate Democrat, Elizabeth Crowley, over Kristen Gonzalez, a tech worker who is supported by the Democratic Socialists and the Working Families Party. Mike Corbett, a former City Council staff member, is also running. The race has been flooded with outside money supporting Ms. Crowley.In Brooklyn, Mr. Adams endorsed incumbent Senator Kevin Parker, who is facing a challenge from Kaegan Mays-Williams, a former Manhattan assistant district attorney, and David Alexis, a former Lyft driver and co-founder of the Drivers Cooperative who also has support from the Democratic Socialists.Senator Kevin Parker, endorsed by the mayor, faces a Democratic Socialist opponent.Michael M. Santiago/Getty ImagesThree candidates — Mr. Brisport, Ms. Gonzalez and Mr. Alexis — whose rivals were supported by Mr. Adams said they are opposed to revising the bail law to keep more people in jail before their trials.“When it comes to an issue like bail reform, what we don’t want to have is a double standard where if you have enough money you can make bail and get out, but if you are poor or working class you don’t,” Ms. Gonzalez said.Mr. Brisport said that the mayor’s motive extends beyond bail and criminal justice issues.Mr. Adams, Mr. Brisport said, is “making a concerted effort to build a team that will do his bidding in Albany.”The mayor did not disagree.In his first dealings with Albany as a mayor, Mr. Adams fell short of accomplishing his legislative agenda. He had some victories, but was displeased with the Legislature’s refusal to accommodate his wishes on the bail law or to grant him long-term control of the schools, two issues central to his agenda.While crime overall remains comparatively low and homicides and shootings are down, other crimes such as robbery, assault and burglary have increased as much as 40 percent compared with this time last year. Without evidence, the mayor has blamed the bail reform law for letting repeat offenders out of jail.Under pressure from the governor, the Legislature in April made changes to the bail law, but the mayor has repeatedly criticized lawmakers for not going far enough.Mr. Adams has raised campaign money for Miguelina Camilo, center. Janice Chung for The New York Times“We passed a lot of laws for people who commit crimes, but I just want to see what are the list of laws we pass that deal with a New Yorker who was the victim of a crime,” Mr. Adams said. The mayor’s strategy is not entirely new. Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg sought influence by donating from his personal fortune to Republicans. Mayor Bill de Blasio embarked on a disastrous fund-raising plan to help Democrats take control of the Senate in 2014. But those mayors were interceding in general elections, not intraparty primaries.In the June Assembly primaries, Mr. Adams endorsed a handful of incumbents facing upstart challengers from the left. He backed Michael Benedetto, an incumbent from the Bronx who beat back a primary challenge from Jonathan Soto, who worked for, and was endorsed by, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Mr. Adams also endorsed Assemblywoman Inez E. Dickens in Central Harlem in her victorious campaign against another candidate backed by Ms. Ocasio-Cortez.“The jury is still out on how much endorsements matter, but they do matter for the person being endorsed,” said Olivia Lapeyrolerie, a Democratic political strategist and former aide to Mr. de Blasio. “It’s good to keep your friends close.”Mr. Adams’s influence is not restricted to his endorsements. Striving for a Better New York, a political action committee run by one of his associates, the Rev. Alfred L. Cockfield II, donated $7,500 to Mr. Tillard in May and more than $12,000 to Mr. Parker through August.The mayor’s efforts have come under attack. Michael Gianaris, the deputy majority leader in the Senate, said there is no need to create a new faction in the Senate that is reminiscent of the Independent Democratic Conference, a group of breakaway Democrats that allowed Senate Republicans to control the chamber until they were vanquished in 2018.“Eric Adams was never very good at Senate politics when he was in the Senate,” Mr. Gianaris said. “And apparently he hasn’t gotten much better at it.”It’s unclear how much influence Mr. Adams’s endorsements will have. Sumathy Kumar, co-chair of the New York City chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America, said that with the mayor’s lukewarm approval ratings, she’s betting that on-the-ground organizing will be the deciding factor in what is expected to be a low turnout primary.Mr. Parker said the mayor’s endorsement would be influential in his district and supported Mr. Adams’s push against the left wing of the party.“How many times do you have to be attacked by the D.S.A. before you realize you’re in a fight and decide to fight back?” Mr. Parker said.Emma G. Fitzsimmons contributed reporting. More

    • 88 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      What Liz Cheney’s Loss in Wyoming Means

      by

      If Liz Cheney’s loss to Harriet Hageman in Wyoming’s primary election on Tuesday seems like a bad dream to many of Ms. Cheney’s Democratic admirers, that’s because it is: For a generation, progressives have imagined the moment when the white working class would finally turn against an insular and privileged Republican establishment. That day has arrived. But it isn’t what Democrats dreamed.Apparently uninterested in everyday governing, the new insurgents who elected Ms. Hageman are consumed with demonstrating that they are authentic conservative Republicans. And in that sense, they are succumbing to the same impulses they associate with their liberal opponents: a shrill hostility to different viewpoints, an obsession with virtue signaling and a willingness to purge their own ranks. The older tradition of Republican politics — the one that cradled Ms. Cheney from girlhood and shaped her in office — is still alive, though embattled, even in Wyoming. Progressives who realize that this privileged Republican establishment was a linchpin of our democracy all along may start rooting for a counterrevolution from above rather than a revolution from below.In the not very distant past, Wyoming’s G.O.P. was focused on governing the state by addressing everyday challenges, like distributing a limited number of liquor licenses and funding its public schools. Politics was “frankly boring,” recalled Tim Stubson, a partisan of the old school.The Cheneys exemplified Wyoming’s establishment: They are quiet and diligent legislators, even a little bland. They are also highly educated and wealthy, splitting their time between Washington and Wyoming’s Teton County, one of the wealthiest counties in the United States.Wyoming politics began to change beneath their feet, slowly at first, as the Tea Party rose to power, and then rapidly during the Trump years, as a new guard waged war with the establishment, making politics less about ordinary governance than about identity.We’ve spent the last year traveling Wyoming, from Cheyenne in the south to Sheridan in the north, from Evanston in the west to Wheatland in the east, talking to local political activists and leaders. This obsession with identity left a mark everywhere, but nowhere more obviously than at the recent Republican state conventions. Just a decade ago, few delegates would have attended party meetings with guns strapped to their hips. Now many do. That wasn’t enough for one delegate at the last convention: He reportedly strutted about with a gun fully cocked. In another departure from old norms, many delegates have taken to wearing their cowboy hats inside the convention center. “That’s not a Wyoming thing,” noted JoAnn True, a patron of the old party. This is mostly because there is no need to wear a cowboy hat indoors — unless your goal is to sport a costume that signals a conservative social identity.Virtue signaling is also on the rise. One convention delegate argued that Wyoming schoolchildren should not be required to say the Pledge of Allegiance, since the word “indivisible” suggests that states can’t secede from the union. Another Republican Party figure was criticized for allegedly failing to adopt an appropriately respectful posture during the pledge.Acting the part of a true Wyoming conservative is a delicate art. It’s not only about signaling that you belong to a rugged, rural working class, but also about highlighting your conservative bona fides, which often means exiling anyone who doesn’t toe the line. Now a conservative cancel culture as unforgiving as its progressive rival is sweeping over the Wyoming G.O.P.Ms. Cheney, of course, is the most prominent victim of that cancel culture: She has been censured twice by the party, and now has been voted out of office. But she is just the tip of an iceberg that mostly lies beneath the media’s radar. Other members of the old type have been censured as well. Their crimes are varied, ranging from supporting Medicaid expansion to founding a nonpartisan PAC to fund female candidates.Websites have emerged that help the new censors identify politically incorrect Republicans. WyoRINO, for example, exposes legislators “who falsely claim to be Republicans” by scrutinizing their voting records for the slightest signs of apostasy. According to the site’s index, nearly a two-thirds majority of Wyoming’s Republican legislators are faking it.Those who are formally censured, though, usually have something else in common: They are from the upper class. In recent years the party has censured a wealthy activist, a state senator with a doctorate and a physician. Joe McGinley, the physician — a prominent party leader of the old style — was censured for reasons that are still a bit mysterious. But as a Stanford-trained doctor, he was a perfect symbol of an inauthentic conservative. Joey Correnti IV, a pistol-packing delegate, mocks his supposed haughtiness, claiming that he introduces himself as “Doctor Joe McGinley.”Plenty of the new insurgents are themselves comfortable members of the professional class pretending to be “one of the people.” Some, like Ms. Hageman, simply seem opportunistic, while others sincerely share cultural affinities with Wyoming’s working class. But to its credit, the new identity politics has also done something rare in this gilded age of American politics: It has elevated genuinely working-class citizens into positions of power. For example, Tom James, elected to the State Senate in 2018, grew up in a foster home and campaigned for office as he delivered pizzas. Meanwhile, Frank Eathorne, the current chairman of the state party, previously worked as a Terminix pest exterminator. As Tim Stubson of the old establishment acknowledged, “It’s a much more blue-collar party.”These candidates are starting to reshape the G.O.P. beyond Wyoming as well. Representative Lauren Boebert of Colorado earned a G.E.D., having left high school after she got pregnant. Meanwhile, in New Jersey, a truck driver won a State Senate seat on a shoestring budget. And in Arizona, Rusty Bowers — who resisted pressure from Donald Trump to overturn his state’s election results — was just badly defeated by David Farnsworth, a small businessman and former crane operator with an A.A. degree.For decades, progressives have hoped that the white working class would turn against the affluent bankers, doctors and oil magnates who control the Republican Party. Well, it did. Class warfare of a kind did finally break out. It’s just not the sort of war progressives imagined, much less hoped for.That’s true partly because progressive longings for class war rested on a falsehood. Influential books like Thomas Frank’s “What’s the Matter With Kansas” insisted that the Republican elite was rapaciously consumed with padding its wealth and exploiting its working-class supporters. Like other myths, that critique contained a kernel of truth. Wyoming’s establishment was too insular at times — and it practiced self-dealing on occasion.But whatever its sins, it was also public spirited. It cared about the general welfare of the state and worked hard on its behalf, laboring away for a pittance in a legislature that begins its sessions in the dead of Wyoming’s punishing winter, when driving is treacherous. The new identitarians infiltrating the State Legislature seem less interested in seeking remedies to real problems than in signaling to their base.Thus, they perform small symbolic acts, like pushing a bill that requires local law enforcement officials to ignore federal law that violates the Second Amendment, or sponsoring a bill that prohibited the teaching of critical race theory in Wyoming public schools. It failed because enough traditional conservatives don’t believe it’s a real problem. Tom Walters, a state representative of the old school, observed, “They speak of it as though it’s there, and yet they know all their teachers and they know their teachers aren’t teaching it.”Addressing these phantoms swallows up time, leaving larger issues neglected. Cathy Connolly, the Democratic minority leader in the State House, told us: “We have one of the highest suicide rates in the nation. We now have the highest workplace fatality rate. We’ve got Covid issues. We’ve got hospitals closing. We’re not looking at these issues because we have these stupid bills,” she said, adding an expletive.The right’s new identity craze wasn’t engineered by Donald Trump. It simply created an opportunity that he exploited. But Mr. Trump has rendered identity politics more dangerous than its progressive rival by wedding it to a cult of personality and a campaign to steal an election. Those changes have only widened the party’s class divide: While a substantial majority of white Republican primary voters without a college degree say they would prefer to vote for him in 2024, those with college degrees generally want someone else, according to a July New York Times/Siena College poll.Ms. Cheney’s fall highlights the cultish character of the right’s evolving politics of identity. During her first two terms, she supported Mr. Trump’s positions 93 percent of the time, according to FiveThirtyEight (almost as often as Kevin McCarthy and more often than Elise Stefanik). Yet Ms. Cheney is not only considered to be a “Republican in Name Only” by many Wyoming Republicans — she is the face of the RINOs. At the state convention, one attendee sported a T-shirt that said “No More RINOs” with Ms. Cheney’s name circled and crossed out. To cross Mr. Trump is to become a fake conservative.Sadly, the G.O.P. establishment was not strong enough to save Ms. Cheney. Happily, though, it isn’t dead, even in Wyoming. In fact, it’s far more entrenched than Ms. Cheney’s defeat might suggest. The old guard still controls the State Legislature and Wyoming’s two most populous counties, both of which pushed back forcefully on efforts to censure Ms. Cheney. And in some places the new insurgents have been outmaneuvered and beaten back. For example, in Campbell County, where support for Mr. Trump surpasses that of most Wyoming counties, the establishment wrestled the party away from the new identitarians.Similar fights are playing out in state parties and legislatures from Colorado to Arizona, Idaho, Illinois and Texas, where the new identitarians are gaining momentum, chipping away at the old guard’s power. But even if they continue to advance, their style of politics may also contain the seeds of its destruction. Any party that elevates symbolism over governing risks stirring mass revolt down the road. Some practitioners of identity politics on the left have already discovered that lesson the hard way. When some members of the San Francisco Board of Education busied themselves renaming schools instead of prioritizing reopening them after lengthy closures during the pandemic, they were recalled. Results matter even in the age of identity politics.Though the outcome of the G.O.P.’s civil war is impossible to determine, one thing is clear: Both sides see the conflict in existential terms. As the traditionalist Dr. McGinley said of Ms. Cheney’s race: “The soul of the Republican Party is at stake.” Ms. Cheney fought valiantly for the party’s soul and was celebrated by traditional Republicans in Wyoming for doing so. They don’t believe her cause is lost — and neither should we.Stephanie Muravchik (@stephaniemurav1) and Jon A. Shields are professors of government at Claremont McKenna College and the authors of “Trump’s Democrats.” They are working on a new book about Liz Cheney’s Wyoming and the future of the American right.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

    • 125 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      In Wisconsin, Governor’s Race Stand Between G.O.P. and Near-Total Power

      by

      KAUKAUNA, Wis. — Nowhere in the country have Republican lawmakers been more aggressive in their attempts to seize a partisan edge than in Wisconsin. Having gerrymandered the Legislature past the point that it can be flipped, they are now pushing intensely to take greater control over the state’s voting infrastructure ahead of the 2024 presidential contest.Two pivotal elections in the coming months are likely to decide if that happens.The soaring stakes of the first, the November race for governor, became clear last week when Tim Michels, a construction magnate endorsed by former President Donald J. Trump, won the Republican primary.His victory raised the prospect that Gov. Tony Evers, a Democrat who has vetoed a range of Republican voting bills, could soon be replaced by a Trump ally who has embraced calls to dismantle the state’s bipartisan election commission, invoked conspiratorial films about the 2020 election and even expressed openness to the false idea that Mr. Trump’s loss can still be decertified.The second election, an April contest to determine control of the narrowly divided Wisconsin Supreme Court, could be even more important.This year alone, the court’s 4-to-3 conservative majority has upheld the most aggressive partisan gerrymander of state legislative districts in the country, prohibited the use of most drop boxes for voters returning absentee ballots, and blocked Mr. Evers from making appointments to state agencies.The Wisconsin Supreme Court has prohibited the use of most drop boxes for voters returning absentee ballots, forcing them to vote by mail or in person.Jamie Kelter Davis for The New York TimesAnd three of the four conservative justices on the court voted to hear Mr. Trump’s objections to the 2020 election, which could have led to overturning Wisconsin’s results. Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s 20,000-vote victory in the state stood only because Justice Brian Hagedorn, a conservative, sided with the court’s three liberals.Electing a liberal justice to replace the retiring conservative, Justice Patience D. Roggensack, would give Wisconsin Democrats an opportunity to enact a host of measures that currently have no shot at passing in the Republican-led Legislature. Bringing new lawsuits through the courts, they could potentially undo the gerrymandered legislative districts; reverse the drop box decision; and overturn the state’s 1849 law criminalizing abortion, which went back into effect in June when the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade.Wisconsin’s next two elections are inexorably linked. Mr. Michels has said that he will seek to change the state’s voting laws on his first day as governor. If he is indeed elected and moves quickly, new voting procedures could be in place before a new justice is elected to a 10-year term in April — and the court combined with Mr. Michels would have wide leeway to set voting rules for the 2024 presidential election, when Wisconsin is widely expected to again be a central presidential battleground.“If they’re going to cherry-pick things that they know will depress a Democratic vote, it will absolutely impact every Democrat, including Joe Biden,” Mr. Evers said in an interview on Thursday. Referring to Mr. Michels, he added, “His election certainly would focus on depressing the vote of Democrats, no question about it.”Gov. Tony Evers, a Democrat, has vetoed a range of Republican voting bills, including measures to give the Legislature greater control over elections.Youngrae Kim for The New York TimesDuring the primary campaign, Mr. Michels promised to replace the Wisconsin Elections Commission with an agency that would effectively be under the control of Republicans. And while he never explicitly endorsed decertifying Wisconsin’s 2020 presidential election, Mr. Michels did not rule it out, either, saying enough to appease Mr. Trump — who has repeatedly demanded such a move.At campaign stops and during primary debates, Mr. Michels invoked films about the 2020 election that propagate conspiracy theories falsely suggesting that Mr. Trump was the real winner. He claimed without evidence that there had been fraud in the state and pledged to prosecute the perpetrators.“I’ve seen the movies ‘2000 Mules’ and ‘Rigged.’ And I’ll tell you, I know that there was a lot of voter fraud,” Mr. Michels said at a recent rally in Kaukauna, a small industrial city in the state’s politically swingy Fox Valley. “When I am sworn in as governor, I will look at all the evidence that is out there in January and I will do the right thing. Everything is on the table. And if people broke the law, broke election laws, I will prosecute them.” More

    • 100 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      A Campaign Tactic by Democrats: Smart? Risky? Unethical?

      by

      More from our inbox:Covid Priorities, in the Schools and BeyondThe Needs of Ukraine’s StudentsThe Kansas Abortion Vote Trent Bozeman for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “A Cynical Low for the Democratic Party” (editorial, Aug. 4):Cynical, indeed! As a moderate Democrat, I find it appalling that Democratic campaign organizations are contributing money to finance the primary campaigns of ultra-right, pro-Trump supporters and election deniers.Money contributed to these Democratic organizations should go to candidates promoting free and fair elections, and who work to combat lies, racism and antisemitism. I want campaign dollars to support and guarantee that women have the right to make decisions about their own health and welfare.To learn now that our campaign dollars are going to promote extreme right-wingers and Trumpers makes me wonder: Why would I ever consider making contributions again to Democratic groups if they give money to the campaigns of the very people I wish to see defeated?Robert D. GreenbergBethesda, Md.To the Editor:I would beg to differ with the editorial board’s view that the Democratic Party’s support for Trump Republican proponents of the Big Lie is a “cynical low.” Your argument is that Democrats, who claim to stand up for the truth, should not be supporting the deniers of truth, and, furthermore, that theirs is a “repugnant and risky strategy.”But can it also be considered a deft political strategy and worth the risk? It is not an illegal action, and it is probably not immoral, but just plain smart politics.Raymond ComeauBelmont, Mass.To the Editor:While Democrats’ efforts to promote far-right candidates, whom they perceive to be easier targets in the general election, may succeed in swaying a few Republican primary voters, they pose the greater risk of alienating large swaths of independent voters like me who simply want politicians to act with a modicum of honesty and integrity.Especially in battleground states like Michigan, where independents have the power to decide races with far-reaching consequences, Democrats would be wise to build the moral high ground on election integrity rather than actively undermining it.John ZaineaAnn Arbor, Mich.To the Editor:Let’s be cleareyed. There no longer is such a thing as a moderate Republican politician. I, too, detest Democratic donations going to nominate election deniers. But Republicans who didn’t get Donald Trump’s endorsement by and large deny climate change, support abortion bans and favor a tax system that tilts toward corporations and the wealthy.Don’t shift the political landscape even farther in that direction by describing those right-wing Republicans as “moderate.” They aren’t.Ken EudyRaleigh, N.C.The writer is a retired senior adviser to Gov. Roy Cooper.Covid Priorities, in the Schools and Beyond Jonathan Kirn/Getty ImagesTo the Editor:Re “A Proposal for School Covid Policies This Year,” by Joseph G. Allen (Opinion guest essay, Aug. 6):While I appreciate the critical thought and expertise that Dr. Allen brought to the discourse on Covid policies in our education system, I’m concerned that the scope too frequently narrowed on children’s resilience.Children may be far less likely to be hospitalized or experience severe symptoms, but they are just as likely to pass symptoms to adult family members who could be at high risk.The guidelines from Britain’s education system referred to in the article suggest that children go to school unmasked if symptoms are only minor (a runny nose, a slight cough, etc). Those children may easily pass those minor symptoms to their classmates, who may just as easily pass them to an adult (a family member or staff at the school) who experiences Covid more seriously.Yes, the alternative is damaging: children missing school. But our educators and families could pay a larger price if we let children pass it among themselves and to adults.Alexandra DavisBrooklynTo the Editor:Joseph G. Allen says he is writing in these capacities: “As a public health scientist. As someone who has spent nearly 20 years doing risk assessments of indoor environmental hazards. As a dad of three school-age kids, and an uncle to 15.”But Covid policy in schools affects people schoolchildren interact with outside school. This includes the old and immunocomromised adults who cannot take Paxlovid because it interacts with their other medicines.Writing as an old person, a liberal and a bioethicist, I wonder why a public health expert thinks “the overriding goal for the next school year should be to maximize time in the classroom and make school look and feel much like it did before the pandemic started,” rather than recognizing that the overriding goal of any Covid policy should be to save lives.Felicia Nimue AckermanProvidence, R.I.The Needs of Ukraine’s Students Emile Ducke for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “For Children of War, a Time for Play” (news article and photo essay, Aug. 8):As children, their families and teachers get excited about the new school year throughout the world, it is imperative to continue to publicize the dire education needs of Ukrainian children.In addition to the physical destruction of school infrastructure, there are shortages of supplies from laptops to textbooks. Some teachers have had to physically defend their schools as Russian invaders entered.Professors have been giving lectures from the front lines. Others have been teaching in person from shelters, where air-raid sirens wail. The dedication of the teachers in wartime is heroic.Students are the future of any country. The education of students in Ukraine, as had been taking place before the invasion in February, is essential to the rebuilding of the country. They deserve our support. As do their teachers.Anna NagurneyAmherst, Mass.The writer is the Eugene M. Isenberg chair in integrative studies, University of Massachusetts Amherst, and co-chair of the board of directors of the Kyiv School of Economics.The Kansas Abortion VoteIn its most recent term, in addition to overturning Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court expanded gun rights, limited the Environmental Protection Agency’s ability to address climate change and expanded the role of religion in public life.T.J. Kirkpatrick for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Defying the Supreme Court,” by David Leonhardt (The Morning newsletter, Aug. 4):Those, like me, rejoicing over the overwhelming rejection in Kansas of a measure to allow banning abortion there ought to curb their enthusiasm. The outcome of that referendum could exemplify the adage “Be careful what you ask for; you might get it.”That Kansas voters refused to permit their legislature to roll back women’s reproductive rights plays into the narrative of the Supreme Court’s rationale in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization case, in which the justices reasoned that decisions on women’s control over their own bodies should be left to each of the states.By demonstrating that this tenet can work to protect individual rights, the Kansas vote could bolster the states’ rights argument underlying the Dobbs decision. It may be invoked to justify the inclination of the supermajority radicals on the court to reconsider decisions involving contraception and same-sex marriage, among other matters, as advocated in the Dobbs case by Justice Clarence Thomas.Marshall H. TanickMinneapolisThe writer is a lawyer. More

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Kansas Votes to Preserve Abortion Rights Protections in Its Constitution

      by

      OVERLAND PARK, Kan. — Kansas voters resoundingly decided against removing the right to abortion from the State Constitution, according to The Associated Press, a major victory for the abortion rights movement in one of America’s reliably conservative states.The defeat of the ballot referendum was the most tangible demonstration yet of a political backlash against the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark decision that had protected abortion rights throughout the country. The decisive margin came as a surprise, and after frenzied campaigns with both sides pouring millions into advertising and knocking on doors throughout a sweltering final campaign stretch.“The voters in Kansas have spoken loud and clear: We will not tolerate extreme bans on abortion,” said Rachel Sweet, the campaign manager for Kansans for Constitutional Freedom, which led the effort to defeat the amendment.told supporters that a willingness to work across partisan lines and ideological differences helped their side win.“The voters in Kansas have spoken loud and clear: We will not tolerate extreme bans on abortion,” Ms. Sweet said.At a campaign watch party in suburban Overland Park, abortion rights supporters yelled with joy when MSNBC showed their side with a commanding lead.“We’re watching the votes come in, we’re seeing the changes of some of the counties where Donald Trump had a huge percentage of the vote, and we’re seeing that just decimated,” said Jo Dee Adelung, 63, a Democrat from Merriam, Kan., who knocked on doors and called voters in recent weeks.She said she hoped the result sent a message that voters are “really taking a look at all of the issues and doing what’s right for Kansas and not just going down party lines.”The vote in Kansas, three months before the midterm elections, was the first time American voters weighed in directly on the issue of abortion since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade this summer. The referendum, watched closely by national figures on both sides of the abortion debate, took on added importance because of Kansas’ location, abutting states where abortion is already banned in nearly all cases. More than $12 million has been spent on advertising, split about evenly between the two camps. The amendment, had it passed, would have removed abortion protections from the State Constitution and paved the way for legislators to ban or restrict abortions.“We’ve been saying that after a decision is made in Washington, that the spotlight would shift to Kansas,” said David Langford, a retired engineer from Leawood, Kan., who wants the amendment to pass, and who reached out to Protestant pastors to rally support.The push for an amendment was rooted in a 2019 ruling by the Kansas Supreme Court that struck down some abortion restrictions and found that the right to an abortion was guaranteed by the State Constitution. That decision infuriated Republicans, who had spent years passing abortion restrictions and campaigning on the issue. They used their supermajorities in the Legislature last year to place the issue on the 2022 ballot.That state-level fight over abortion limits took on far greater meaning after the nation’s top court overturned Roe, opening the door in June for states to go beyond restrictions and outlaw abortions entirely. The Roman Catholic Church and other religious and conservative groups spent heavily to back the amendment, while national supporters of abortion rights poured millions of dollars into the race to oppose it.Canvassers supporting Amendment 2 left literature at a resident’s door last week in Olathe, Kan.Chase Castor for The New York TimesSupporters of the amendment have said repeatedly that the amendment itself would not ban abortion, and Republican lawmakers have been careful to avoid telegraphing what their legislative plans would be if it passed.“Voting yes doesn’t mean that abortion won’t be allowed, it means we’re going to allow our legislators to determine the scope of abortion,” said Mary Jane Muchow of Overland Park, Kan., who supported the amendment. “I think abortion should be legal, but I think there should be limitations on it.”If the amendment had passed, though, the question was not whether Republicans would try to wield their commanding legislative majorities to pass new restrictions, but how far they would go in doing so. Many Kansans who support abortion rights said they feared that a total or near-total abortion ban would be passed within monthsAbortion is now legal in Kansas up to 22 weeks of pregnancy.“I don’t want to become another state that bans all abortion for any reason,” said Barbara Grigar of Overland Park, Kan., who identified herself as a moderate and said she was voting against the amendment. “Choice is every woman’s choice, and not the government’s.”A Pew Research Center survey published last month found that a majority of Americans said abortion should be legal in all or most cases, and that more than half of adults disapproved of the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe.Kansas has been a focal point of the national abortion debate at least since 1991, when protesters from across the country gathered in Wichita and blocked access to clinics during weeks of heated demonstrations that they called the Summer of Mercy.At times, the state has seen violence over the issue. In 1986, a Wichita abortion clinic was attacked with a pipe bomb. In 1993, a woman who opposed abortion shot and injured Dr. George Tiller, one of only a few American physicians who performed late-term abortions. In 2009, another anti-abortion activist shot and killed Dr. Tiller at his Wichita church.In recent years, and especially in the weeks since Roe fell, Kansas has become a haven of abortion access in a region where that is increasingly rare.Even before the Supreme Court’s action, nearly half of the abortions performed in Kansas involved out-of-state residents. Now Oklahoma and Missouri have banned the procedure in almost all cases, Nebraska may further restrict abortion in the next few months, and women from Arkansas and Texas, where new bans are in place, are traveling well beyond their states’ borders.Kansas is reliably Republican in presidential elections, and its voters are generally conservative on many issues, but polling before the referendum suggested a close race and nuanced public opinions on abortion. The state is not a political monolith: Besides its Democratic governor, a majority of Kansas Supreme Court justices were appointed by Democrats, and Representative Sharice Davids, a Democrat, represents the Kansas City suburbs in Congress.Representative Sharice Davids speaks at an election watch party hosted by Kansans for Constitutional Freedom in Overland Park, Kansas.Arin Yoon for The New York TimesMs. Davids’s district was once a moderate Republican stronghold, but it has been trending toward Democrats in recent years. Her re-election contest in November in a redrawn district may be one of the most competitive House races in the country, and party strategists expect the abortion debate to play an important role in districts like hers that include swaths of upscale suburbs.Political strategists have been particularly attuned to turnout in the Kansas City suburbs, and are seeking to gauge how galvanizing abortion is, especially for swing voters and Democrats in a post-Roe environment.“They’re going to see how to advise their candidates to talk about the issue, they’re going to be looking at every political handicap,” said James Carville, the veteran Democratic strategist. “Every campaign consultant, everybody is watching this thing like it’s the Super Bowl.”As the election approached, and especially since the Supreme Court decision, rhetoric on the issue became more heated. Campaign signs on both sides have been vandalized, police officials and activists have said. In the Kansas City suburb of Overland Park, vandals targeted a Catholic church, defacing a building and a statue of Mary with red paint.Before the vote on Tuesday, which coincided with primary elections, Scott Schwab, the Republican secretary of state, predicted that around 36 percent of Kansas voters would participate, up slightly from the primary in 2020, a presidential election year. His office said that the constitutional amendment “has increased voter interest in the election,” a sentiment that was palpable on the ground.“I like the women’s rights,” said Norma Hamilton, a 90-year-old Republican from Lenexa, Kan. Despite her party registration, she said, she voted no. More

    • 150 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Kansas: How to Vote, Where to Vote and What’s on the Ballot

      by

      Kansas voters will weigh in on Tuesday on primary contests for governor, Senate and some state legislative offices, as well as a constitutional amendment that would make it possible for state lawmakers to ban abortion.Here is a handy, last-minute guide to Election Day in Kansas.How to voteAre you registered? Check on this page of the Kansas secretary of state website.If you requested to vote by mail, your ballot must be postmarked on or before Election Day and be received by your county election office by the close of business on the Friday after the election. The deadline to request a mail ballot was July 26.Where to voteYou can find your polling site on this page, from the secretary of state’s office.Polling locations will generally be open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. local time. (Kansas is mostly on Central time, with a handful of counties on Mountain time.) But state law allows counties to open voting places as early as 6 a.m. and close them as late as 8 p.m., so check with the election officer in your county for the voting hours by you.Here is a list of election officers in each of the state’s 105 counties.What’s on the ballotThe statewide ballot question about abortion could give the state’s Republican-controlled legislature the authority to pass new abortion limits or to outlaw the procedure entirely. It will be the first electoral test of Americans’ attitudes on the issue since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.Gov. Laura Kelly, a Democrat who is running for re-election, is facing a primary challenge from Richard Karnowski, who describes himself on his campaign website as “a Professional Political Candidate since 1992.” Ms. Kelly is expected to win her primary handily.Derek Schmidt, the Trump-backed attorney general, is favored to win the Republican primary for governor.Senator Jerry Moran, a Republican who is running for re-election, is expected to win his primary against Joan Farr. Six Democrats are also on the ballot.There are Republican primary contests for attorney general and secretary of state, as well as to challenge Representative Sharice Davids, a Democrat, in the state’s Third Congressional District this fall.Ballotpedia offers a sample ballot tool that voters can use to see a preview of their full ballot. More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Michael R. Long, N.Y. Conservative Party Stalwart, Dies at 82

      by

      His endorsement of George E. Pataki in 1994 helped elect the state’s only Republican governor in 50 years.Michael R. Long, the devout ideologue who for three decades headed New York State’s Conservative Party — which in 1994 provided the winning margin to elect the state’s only Republican governor in the last 50 years — died on Sunday at his home in Breezy Point, Queens. He was 82.The cause was kidney failure, his protégé and successor as the state party chairman, Gerard Kassar, said.Mr. Long was a fierce opponent of abortion rights, gay rights, same-sex marriages and higher taxes to pay for more spending by government, but he was generally respected and even liked by his political opponents as a man of principle who, by his consistency, had earned their trust.He was the longest-serving chairman of the state Conservative Party, from 1988 through early 2019, after heading the party’s organization in Brooklyn.He also served as an at-large city councilman from Brooklyn from 1981 to 1983, when the boroughwide position was abolished. He was the only Council member elected as a Conservative.In November 1994, George E. Pataki, a Republican state senator, toppled the liberal Democrat Gov. Mario M. Cuomo, who was seeking a fourth term, by drawing more than 300,000 votes on the Conservative Party’s ballot line.Its endorsement was a gamble: The party chose to paper over Mr. Pataki’s relatively permissive views on abortion and gay rights, but Mr. Pataki delivered on his vow to cut taxes and provided patronage appointments in state government to Conservatives, giving them greater influence over spending and other policies.“Without his support, I would never have been elected governor,” Mr. Pataki said Monday.Mr. Long stuck to his guns, a quality that even political opponents admired for its consistency.Marilynn K. Yee/The New York TimesMichael Robert Long was born on Feb. 1, 1940, in Brooklyn to Michael T. Long, who worked at different times for the Pennsylvania Railroad and the New York Stock Exchange, and Elmira (Nuetzel) Long, a supervisor for Blue Cross Blue Shield.He was raised in Queens, where he dropped out of Richmond Hill High School shortly before graduation in 1959 to join the Marines.“I just was that kind of a kid,” Mr. Long told The New York Times in 1999. “There were times when they were talking about throwing me out of school. And then I wound up on the honor roll.”“I was just contrary,” he added. “So I guess I’ve been contrary all my life.”He served in the Marines until 1961. In 1963, he married Eileen Dougherty. She survives him along with their sons, Michael, Matthew, James, Robert, Christopher, Francis and Edward; two daughters, Eileen Chelales and Maureen Hayes; 24 grandchildren; and five great-grandchildren.The Conservative Party in New York was founded in the 1960s by J. Daniel Mahoney and Kieran O’Doherty, Wall Street lawyers and brothers-in-law who sought to tilt the state’s Republicans to the right. In this they followed the pattern of the Liberal Party, which would leverage its endorsement of Democratic candidates — sometimes providing the margin of victory in close races — to nudge them to the left (and exact patronage once they were elected).Mr. Long, who ran a liquor store with his brother in Bay Ridge, Brooklyn, where he lived, was of a different breed of political leader: He was politically savvy, able to hold his own in any debate, but unlike many a standard politician, he was passionately committed to causes and unwilling to make transactional endorsements.In 1964, he volunteered to work in Barry Goldwater’s Republican presidential campaign and enrolled as a Conservative voter.The New York party achieved a stunning and unparalleled success in 1970 when James L. Buckley, William F. Buckley Jr.’s brother, was elected United States senator in a tight three-way race. He remains the only Conservative candidate who won a statewide race without the Republican nomination.In 1980, Conservative support helped Alfonse M. D’Amato defeat an incumbent senator, Jacob K. Javits — the last of the original Rockefeller Republicans — in the Republican primary, leading to Mr. Javits’s unseating that November.Mr. Long was elected Conservative Party leader in his Brooklyn Assembly district in 1968 and Kings County chairman four years later, serving until 1988. In 1974, he was chosen as state vice chairman.Despite his endorsement of Mr. Pataki in 1994, in 1997 he refused to endorse Rudolph W. Giuliani’s campaign for re-election as mayor of New York City because of the mayor’s liberal positions on social issues. Instead, he left the Conservative ballot line vacant and said he did not vote in the election. (In 1989, when Mr. Giuliani barely lost the mayoralty to David N. Dinkins, and in 1993, when Mr. Giuliani narrowly defeated Mr. Dinkins, the Conservative Party fielded its own candidates.)When the State Legislature passed the Marriage Equality Act in 2010, Mr. Long declared that no candidate who supported same-sex marriage would be allowed to run on the Conservative Party line.His political counterparts vigorously contested his ideological arguments, but generally respect his consistency in an era of expedient waffling and pandering.“There’s something almost refreshing about it, though I profoundly disagree with him,” Judith Hope, the former chairwoman of the state Democratic Party, said in 1999. “It’s rare to see what appears to be a principled stand from a party.”In 1990, the Conservative Party came perilously close to becoming what Mr. Long considered a typical political party.When the Conservative candidate for governor, Herbert London, campaigned as aggressively against the Republican nominee, Pierre A. Rinfret, as he did against the incumbent Democrat, Mr. Cuomo, Mr. London drew more than 800,000 votes, or 20 percent of the total, nearly outpolling Mr. Rinfret.“That was a little scary,” Mr. Long said at the time. Had Mr. London beaten Mr. Rinfret, the Conservatives would have dislodged the Republican Party from second place on the state ballot for four years and, Mr. Long asserted, “there would have been an infusion of people changing their registration, and you would have seen other players trying to take over the party.”“It would have become totally a political party and lost its vision,” he said.He added, “We’ve always understood that the Conservative Party is a philosophical movement, more than a political party.” More

    • 138 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      A Culture Warrior Goes Quiet: DeSantis Dodges Questions on Abortion Plans

      by

      Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida faces political pressure from Republicans to further curb abortions — and risks to his re-election campaign and any presidential aspirations if he goes too far.When the Supreme Court erased the constitutional right to an abortion last month, Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida was among the many Republicans who celebrated. “The prayers of millions have been answered,” he tweeted.But while other Republican leaders vowed to charge ahead with new restrictions — or near-total bans — Mr. DeSantis offered only a vague promise to “work to expand pro-life protections.”More than two weeks later, he has yet to explain what that means.Mr. DeSantis, a favorite among those Republicans who want to move on from the Trump era, is rarely a reluctant partisan warrior. But his hesitance to detail his plans for abortion policy reflects the new and, in some states, difficult political terrain for Republicans in the post-Roe v. Wade era, as Democrats grasp for advantage on the issue in an otherwise largely hostile midterm election year.In April, Mr. DeSantis signed a law barring abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, bringing the state’s limit down from 24 weeks. But with Roe overturned, some on the right now see a 15-week ban as insufficient, and other Republican governors, particularly in Southern states, have pushed for more aggressive restrictions.Mr. DeSantis has described fetuses in the womb as “unborn babies.” Yet he has largely avoided specifying what other restrictions he might endorse. When a state representative filed legislation last year seeking a six-week ban, the governor would not support or oppose it. “I have a 100 percent pro-life record,” he said instead.Now, campaigning for a second term as governor, Mr. DeSantis is coming under intense pressure from powerful parts of the G.O.P. base to further curb abortions in Florida — the most populous state with a Republican governor where abortions are still fairly widely available.Yet doing so could undermine Mr. DeSantis’s efforts to recruit residents and businesses to his state and complicate his re-election campaign, not to mention his national ambitions, because polls show that a majority of Floridians, and of Americans, want to keep most abortions legal. In a New York Times/Siena College poll this week, U.S. voters, by a 2-to-1 margin, or 61 percent to 29 percent, said they opposed the Supreme Court’s decision.Abortion rights demonstrators in front of the Florida State Capitol in Tallahassee on Friday.Lawren Simmons for The New York TimesThat leaves Mr. DeSantis in an unfamiliar position: on the sidelines on a major cultural-political issue. Though he has spoken about wanting to prevent abortions from taking place late in pregnancy — a far less controversial stance than pushing for an outright ban — he has said nothing about calling a special session to enact additional restrictions, as anti-abortion activists hope he will.And Republicans nationally have noticed his hesitancy so far.“This is a guy who jumps into the culture wars when he thinks he can make a point,” said Mike DuHaime, who managed Rudolph W. Giuliani’s presidential campaign in 2008 and was a top adviser to Chris Christie’s in 2016.Read More on the End of Roe v. WadeA Culture Warrior Goes Quiet: Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida celebrated the end of Roe. But his hesitance to detail his plans for abortion policy in his state reflects the new and difficult political terrain for Republicans.Under Pressure to Act: Democrats in Congress are moving ahead on measures to preserve abortion access, but with Republicans and at least one Democrat opposed in the Senate, the bills are all but certain to fail.The Right to Travel?: Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh said the Constitution did not allow states to stop women from traveling to get abortions. But what a state may choose to do if a resident travels to get an abortion is not clear.‘Pro-Life Generation’: Many young women mourned the Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe. For others it was a moment of triumph and a matter of human rights.Mr. DeSantis is not the only Republican governor whose supporters expect more from him now that Roe v. Wade has been overturned. But few have as much at stake: Mr. DeSantis’s next move could not only affect his re-election in Florida but also complicate a presidential bid.Mr. DeSantis was the most popular alternative to Donald J. Trump among Republican primary voters when they were asked about potential 2024 presidential candidates, according to the Times/Siena poll. Mr. DeSantis trailed Mr. Trump 49 percent to 25 percent, but was favored over the former president by younger Republicans, those with a college degree and those who said they voted for President Biden in 2020.The poll showed that Mr. DeSantis was still relatively unknown, with about one-fourth of Republicans saying they didn’t know enough to have an opinion about him. But he was well liked among those who did. Among white evangelical voters, 54 percent said they had a favorable opinion of the Florida governor while just 15 percent said they had an unfavorable view of him.And abortion opponents are not shy about pressing Mr. DeSantis for bold new action.“There’s an enormous expectation,” said John Stemberger, president of the Florida Family Policy Council, a conservative Christian group. “I think he realizes this is something that has to be dealt with.”A spokesman for Mr. DeSantis’s office would only refer to a previous statement when asked whether a special session of the legislature — or any other move related to abortion — was in the offing.Mr. DeSantis signed the new 15-week abortion ban to great fanfare in April.“This will represent the most significant protections for life that have been enacted in this state in a generation,” he said at the time, accusing the “far left” of “taking the position that babies can be aborted up to the ninth month.”“We will not let that happen in the State of Florida,” he vowed.The new law, which took effect July 1, was briefly blocked by a state judge, but that ruling was placed on hold pending appeal, leaving the 15-week ban in place. Mr. DeSantis’s administration wants the Florida Supreme Court to uphold the new law.Doing so would require reversing 30 years of legal precedent asserting that a privacy provision in the State Constitution applies to abortion. But the seven-member court, which for decades pushed back against some of the more ambitious policies enacted by Republican governors and lawmakers, is now made up entirely of conservative justices appointed by Republican governors, including three appointed by Mr. DeSantis.Mr. Stemberger predicted that if, as expected, the court allows the 15-week ban to stand, lawmakers will move to ban abortions after six weeks of pregnancy — either during a special session after the November election or in the next regular legislative session in March.Kelli Stargel, a Republican state senator, sponsored Florida’s 15-week abortion ban.Phelan M. Ebenhack/Associated PressState Senator Kelli Stargel, the Lakeland Republican who sponsored the 15-week abortion ban, said lawmakers would undoubtedly face pressure to do more, especially if women from other states with newly tightened restrictions started coming to Florida for abortions.“Hearing that people are going to be traveling into Florida is very disturbing to me and I’m sure very disturbing to others,” said Ms. Stargel, who is reaching her term limit and is running for Congress.Even as the Florida law was being debated, some anti-abortion activists described it as merely a first step; others explicitly told lawmakers it did not go far enough in restricting the procedure. In May, after a draft of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling overturning Roe was published, Florida abortion opponents pushed for a complete ban to be taken up in one of the Legislature’s special sessions.State Representative Anna V. Eskamani, an Orlando Democrat, said she expected Republicans to file proposals for a six-week abortion ban and for a complete ban next year, as well as for new restrictions on medical abortions, in which prescription drugs are used to end a pregnancy. The fact that medical abortion was defined for the first time in this year’s law suggests to Ms. Eskamani that such abortions could be regulated in the future.Ms. Eskamani noted that Mr. DeSantis’s statement after Roe was overturned was “pretty watered-down.”“It’s clear that he knows this is politically unpopular,” she said. “It’s also a wake-up call for Democratic voters.”Mr. DeSantis has widely been expected to win re-election by a comfortable margin, which could bolster his standing in a crowded Republican presidential primary field for 2024.But a large margin of victory is not assured.Representative Charlie Crist, Democrat of Florida, at an art exhibit in Miami on Friday. At least one poll has shown a prospective race between Mr. DeSantis and Mr. Crist as tight.Scott McIntyre for The New York TimesRepresentative Charlie Crist and Nikki Fried, the state’s agriculture commissioner, are competing in the Democratic primary for governor. Public polling of the general election is scant; the most recent credible surveys are from earlier this year and show Mr. DeSantis with a healthy lead over Mr. Crist. Mr. DeSantis’s popularity in the state has grown since last year. A Suffolk University/USA Today poll of likely voters in January showed Mr. DeSantis leading Mr. Crist by six points and leading Ms. Fried by 11.At least one poll has shown a prospective race between Mr. DeSantis and Mr. Crist as tight. That private survey, taken last month by the veteran pollster Tony Fabrizio, who often works for former President Donald J. Trump and has frequently worked in Florida, showed Mr. DeSantis as the slight favorite in a competitive race, running just three points ahead of Mr. Crist. That survey was of registered voters, which can be less predictive than one of likely voters.Races for governor in Florida have been close in recent years as politics have become more polarized. In 2014, then-Gov. Rick Scott barely eked out a victory over Mr. Crist. In 2018, Mr. DeSantis won by a narrow margin over the Democrat, Andrew Gillum, who was recently indicted on conspiracy and fraud charges.And Mr. DeSantis is one of the most polarizing and overtly partisan statewide elected Republicans in the country — taking on Disney after it criticized a bill limiting what schools can teach about sexual and gender identity, denouncing Covid-19 vaccines for young children and opening up several fronts in the broader Republican battle against critical race theory.Some anti-abortion activists appeared willing to give Mr. DeSantis room to maneuver politically.“Ron DeSantis is one of the best governors in the country, and I believe that he will work to pass the most conservative bill he can possibly get through the Legislature,” said Penny Nance, chief executive and president of Concerned Women for America, which calls itself the nation’s largest public policy women’s organization. She said she supported a six-week abortion ban in Florida.“There are no concerns or reservations about his pro-life convictions,” said Ralph Reed, founder and chairman of the Faith & Freedom Coalition. “And for that reason, I think he’s going to have running room to make his own decision when it comes to taking the next steps with legislation to protect unborn children.”With abortion a topic of fresh intensity among conservatives positioning themselves to run for president — some of whom, like former Vice President Mike Pence, want to see bans in every state — Mr. DeSantis faces pressure from the right both in Florida and beyond.As even his admirers are reminding him.Andrew Shirvell, founder and executive director of Florida Voice for the Unborn, described Mr. DeSantis as “a tremendous ally for the pro-life movement,” but expressed some impatience with his silence on abortion since the Supreme Court’s decision.“It is frustrating that the governor doesn’t speak out more about this,” he said. “But I attribute that to other pressures going on just months before the election.”Still, to hear Mr. Shirvell tell it, Mr. DeSantis will eventually need to press for further action on abortion in Tallahassee. “It’s really up to the governor to twist the arms of the legislative leaders if he’s got presidential ambitions,” he said. More