Momentum Grows Against Prop 1
Proponents of abortion in Idaho are convinced they’re on the right side of history. Leftists believe that their agenda is the natural march of progress from barbarism to utopia—it’s right there in the name “progressive.” After abortion initiatives succeeded in Kansas and Ohio—both red states—they believed Idaho was ripe for the picking. Early polls showed majority support for abortion in Idaho, so it seemed that now was the time to make history.
Yet as with ranked choice voting in 2024, proponents of abortion in Idaho might have overreached. Rather than pursuing a very limited expansion of exceptions, and perhaps legalizing abortion up to 12–15 weeks, which might have garnered more support, the authors of the initiative took it upon themselves to completely rewrite Idaho’s laws defending unborn life. The so-called Reproductive Freedom and Privacy Act establishes a guaranteed right to what the authors call “reproductive freedom and privacy” with no age limit, and legalizes abortion until viability, which the initiative redefines to mean when a baby can survive without “extraordinary” medical care. Depending on the circumstances, that could be in the eighth or even ninth month of pregnancy.
Even those Idahoans who might have supported a limited expansion of abortion seem to be balking at Prop 1. While there has been little public polling on the issue, prediction markets such as Kalshi and Polymarket have shown a shift in sentiment over the past few weeks. While trends in betting markets don’t guarantee any particular outcome, they can demonstrate what people—people who are willing to put money behind their predictions—believe is going to happen. Jake the Lawyer recently had a good video explaining how prediction markets work and the legal issues surrounding them.
As of this writing, Polymarket shows a 15% chance that Prop 1 passes, after bouncing between 40% and 60% for much of the summer. With two weeks to go until Election Day, bettors are suddenly pessimistic.
Several things happened around the weekend of October 9–12 that likely influenced bettors’ views of this campaign. The Too Extreme for Idaho PAC, which is behind the Stop Prop 1 campaign, reported raising $1.5 million, including $1 million from the LDS Church and another $300,000 from the Catholic Diocese of Boise. October 9 was also the day that the Idaho GOP issued a press release cosigned by nearly all statewide and federal elected officials calling on voters to reject Prop 1. It included a quote from Gov. Brad Little:
“I am voting no on Proposition 1,” Gov. Little said. “It would allow girls under 18 to receive abortion without parental consent, and it would make abortion far more accessible in Idaho. Proposition 1 simply goes too far.”
Around the same time, nearly 100 Idaho physicians signed an open letter defending Idaho’s abortion ban and urging voters to reject Prop 1, and Sen. Brandon Shippy organized an open letter from Idaho lawmakers urging the same thing. As of this writing, that letter had 66 signatories, nearly three-quarters of the Republican caucus.
All of these developments suggest momentum is moving against Prop 1 in Idaho. The same betting markets have shown barely any movement in other big races, such as the U.S. Senate race between Sen. Jim Risch and Todd Achilles or the gubernatorial race between Gov. Little, Democrat Terri Pickens, and independent John Stegner.
One caveat is that none of these Idaho markets have very high trading volume, which means relatively few people are trading contracts based on these predictions. It’s possible for bettors to be wrong, but I’m more interested in the trends. Momentum is everything in politics—voters gravitate toward candidates and causes that look to be winning bets. Right now, the betting markets suggest Prop 1 is heading for defeat.
If Idahoans reject Prop 1, it could be a watershed moment for the pro-life cause. It would show that expanding abortion rights is not inevitable, and that progress doesn’t have to be defined as a permanent leftward shift. Idahoans have the opportunity to show that progress could, in fact, mean greater respect for unborn life, rather than treating it as disposable. But polls, prediction markets, and even momentum mean nothing if you don’t show up to vote. Early voting has started in nearly every Idaho county—if you aren’t sure you can make it to the polling place on November 3, then make a plan to vote early. Generations of Idahoans yet unborn are depending on it!
Feature image by Jeffrey Eisen from Pexels.
Valerie Abraham calls out propaganda regarding Idaho’s pro-life laws
I was expecting our fifth baby. One day ago we had surprised my family with news that it was a girl. Tonight I lay in a trauma bay, trying to process the unexpected diagnosis of placental abruption just shy of 18 weeks.
According to the slew of posts I see across news sites and social media campaigns, I should have been fearing for my life because I live in a state with a near-total abortion ban, where obstetric care is (so they say) still in the dark ages. Instead, I found compassionate, competent physicians who took care of me AND my baby. I knew full well that if the bleeding couldn’t be controlled, they were prepared to escalate the interventions (D&E or C-section), but they didn’t jump to a “nuclear” option right away. They followed ACOG guidelines on treatment, and stabilized me while keeping me informed on my baby’s prognosis in a rapidly developing situation. After my body went into pre-term labor, they jumped in with more life-saving care for me to stop the hemorrhage. I received the same medications abortion advocates claim women won’t have access to in abortion-ban states. I delivered a tiny baby girl who reached out her delicate fingers and grabbed my husband’s hand and opened her mouth. She lived 43 minutes. We held her, prayed with her, and treasured every minute of her brief life.
We named her Amal after a great aunt, and we filled out her birth certificate and death certificate on the same day.
Amal died with dignity instead of trauma because of Idaho’s current laws. I was given life-saving, and health-saving care because of Idaho’s current laws.
Press releases
Article on AI use in politics
Ryan Suppe at Idaho Ed News wrote an interesting article about AI use in politics yesterday. Anyone who reads press releases and political newsletters know that AI tools are used extensively, sometimes entirely replacing human authors. Here at the Gem State Chronicle, I use AI for many things, including editing for grammar and typos, but the words you read here always have their genesis in my own human mind.
Remember that Substack has Pangram built-in, unless the author disables it on a per-article basis. Here’s what it says about what you’re reading now:
I plan to write more about this issue this week, bouncing off Suppe’s work as well as the Legislature’s interim committee on AI in education and the recent report from the Judicial Branch on AI use in courtrooms.
In the meantime, check out the article:
It’s common for high-ranking politicians to task staffers with communicating on their behalf. They write speeches, social media posts, op-eds and press statements. But if those staffers are outsourcing that work to artificial intelligence, it would raise questions around authenticity, transparency and accountability, particularly when machine-generated content isn’t disclosed.
Gov. Brad Little’s office this year published three op-eds that included AI-generated content, according to Pangram and GPTZero, two different commercial AI detectors. Attorney General Raúl Labrador’s office also published three, and State Superintendent of Public Instruction Debbie Critchfield’s office had two.
None disclosed that they used artificial intelligence.
Video of the day
Michael Knowles sits down with Chris Hansen to discuss his career fighting child predators and the recent movie that seems to portray him as the villain:
Have you been catching the Daily Minute? It’s an exclusive publication of the Gem State Chronicle summing up what you need to know, published most every weekday. You can subscribe on YouTube, Facebook, X, and even TikTok!
As always, thank you to sponsors Lynn Bradescu’s Boise Realty, Money Metals, and New Saint Andrews College. Do you want to see more independent journalism and level-headed political analysis in Idaho? Consider supporting the Gem State Chronicle with a paid subscription! I’m working on setting up some new sponsorships, so reach out to me if you want to promote your business on this platform!
I have concerns about Proposition 1. The first is its isolation of women. Proponents advocate for rights with few responsibilities, that abortion is health care, and that no man should have a say when a woman exercises her abortion rights. This isolation of women from society is bad. Why would Idaho leave women alone with this responsibility?
Men are warned they have no say in the outcome of mutual sex. When a third person is created, women now claim the sole right to destroy it, because it is only the woman's choice. Prop 1 excludes men from the decision. This is a radical, dystopian, separatist, and anarchic position that must be rejected in Idaho.
Women should control their bodies. But, when a woman becomes pregnant, decisions are no longer the sole “right” of a woman. Prop 1 cuts out the man’s responsibility; and the baby can be literally cut out. This is immoral.
My second concern is the bad incentives created for men by Prop 1. No law should encourage men to seek sex with a woman, confident that she by her sole right can destroy the new life and be solely liable for all consequences. No child, no child support. No child, no emotional ties. No child, no responsibility. No child, no problem. Prop 1 encourages this type of society. No responsible man or woman should vote for Prop 1.
Idaho should not vote for women's rights to trump mutual responsibilities. Idaho should not incentivize exclusion of men from responsibility and liability. Finally, a new life should trigger caretaking, not thoughts of killing.
Vote NO on Proposition 1.
Vote for a healthy Idaho.
For anyone on the fence about what abortion does to an unborn baby in various stages of gestation, please watch this 11:31 minute video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CFZDhM5Gwhk.
Former abortionist Dr. Anthony Levatino describes four abortion procedures, covering the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd trimesters of pregnancy. It should change anyone's mind, even someone once on the fence or even supporting abortion.
VOTE NO on PROP1. Do not murder innocent human beings who had no say about being created and none about whether they should be destroyed.