Funding Freedom, Raising Restriction: The Impact of Campaign Finance on Reproductive Rights

Wade (1973), a landmark case that constitutionally protected an individual's right to an abortion for over 50 years.The overruling case Dobbs v. Jackson returned jurisdiction on abortion to the states.Following the decision, state governments began to draft legislation to establish their stance on abortion in a post-Dobbs America.Consequently, abortion interest groups worked to ensure the public's opinions on abortion were heard by politicians.They dedicated funds to gubernatorial and state legislative election campaigns in hopes of electing political leaders who would pass legislation that aligned with their views on abortion and reproductive rights.With the scene of abortion politics undergoing significant change in 2022, uncertainty remains around the effect of democratic practices such as campaign finance on abortion policy.Therefore, I ask, broadly, how does 2022 gubernatorial and state legislative campaign funding from abortion interest groups affect the restrictiveness of state-level reproductive rights policies in 2023 and 2024?Specifically, among states with gubernatorial elections in 2022, did states with greater pro-life interest group contributions and less pro-choice interest group contributions toward 2022 gubernatorial and state legislative elections pass more restrictive abortion and reproductive health policies in 2023 and 2024 compared to states with less pro-life interest group contributions and greater pro-choice interest group contributions toward 2022 state campaigns?To answer this question, I compare the relationship between the difference in pro-life interest Valera 2 group spending and pro-choice interest group spending toward campaigns and parties in 2022 to the restrictiveness of abortion policies in 2023 and 2024 in 13 states. Context and SignificanceSince the 2022 Supreme Court ruling of Dobbs v. Jackson, which returned jurisdiction of abortion concerns to the states, many states across the U.S. have implemented legislative restrictions or total bans on abortion.During the 2022 midterm election following the Dobbs ruling, California voters passed Proposition 1, which states, "The state shall not deny or interfere with an individual's reproductive freedom in their most intimate decisions, which includes their fundamental right to choose to have an abortion and their fundamental right to choose or refuse contraceptives," constitutionally protecting the right to an abortion in the state (LegInfo, 2024).Consequently, California has become a safe haven for individuals seeking an abortion living in states where abortions are restricted.The number of abortions performed in California increased post-Dobbs, with non-California residents accounting for 16% of all abortion procedures in the state (Guttmacher Institute, 2024).On a national scale, Dobbs v. Jackson instigated a wave of immediate changes to state abortion laws, setting a historic record for the number of ballot measures addressing abortion in a single election cycle.