 | ||
Proposition 4, or the Abortion Waiting Period and Parental Notification Initiative, also known to its supporters as Sarah's Law, was an initiative state constitutional amendment on the 2008 California General Election ballot
Contents
- Specific provisions
- Fiscal Impact
- Supporters
- Arguments in favor of Prop 4
- Donors
- Path to ballot and prior attempts at passage
- Opposition to Prop 4
- Arguments against Prop 4
- Consultants
- Donors to opposition
- Lawsuit filed over Prop 4 language
- Polling information
- Editorial boards in favor
- Editorial boards opposed
- Additional reading
- References
The initiative would prohibit abortion for un-emancipated minors until 48 hours after physician notifies minor’s parent, legal guardian or, if parental abuse has been reported, an alternative adult family member.
Proposition 4 was rejected by voters on November 4, 2008.
Specific provisions
The proposed initiative, if enacted as a constitutional amendment, would:
Fiscal Impact
Supporters
Arguments in favor of Prop. 4
Notable arguments that have been made in favor of Prop. 4 include:
Donors
As of September 27, 2008, the six largest donors to Prop. 4 are:
Path to ballot and prior attempts at passage
The signature-gathering drive to qualify the 2008 Parental Notification petition for the ballot was conducted by petition management firm Bader & Associates, Inc. at a cost of $2,555,000.
Proposition 4 represents the third time that California voters will have considered the issue of a parental notification/waiting period for abortion. The two previous, unsuccessful, initiatives were California Proposition 85 (2006) and California Proposition 73 (2005).
When Prop 73 lost in 2005, some supporters thought that a similar measure would fare better in a general election. However, Prop 85 did worse. Unlike 85 or 73, Proposition 4 allows an adult relative of the minor seeking an abortion to be notified, if the minor's parents are abusive.
Camille Giulio, a spokeswoman for the pro-4 campaign said that the November 2008 election represents a better opportunity for parental notification legislation because:
Opposition to Prop. 4
The Campaign for Teen Safety is the official ballot committee against the proposition.
Arguments against Prop. 4
Notable arguments that have been made against Prop. 4 include:
Consultants
The No on 4 campaign has hired the Dewey Square Group as a consultant.
Donors to opposition
As of September 27, some of the top donors to the opposition campaign were:
Lawsuit filed over Prop. 4 language
Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California and others filed a lawsuit with the Sacramento County Superior Court in early August to strike out all references to "Sarah" and "Sarah's Law" and "other misleading language in the voter's guide" for Proposition 4. The title "Sarah's Law" refers to the case of 15-year-old "Sarah" who died as a result of an abortion in 1994. Proposition 4's ballot language in the official voter's guide suggests that "Sarah" might have been saved had her parents known about her abortion. Opponents of Proposition 4 argue that "Sarah" was not considered a minor in Texas, where the abortion was performed, and that she already had a child with a man who claimed to be her commonlaw husband. If this is the case, the proposed law, Proposition 4, would not have helped her, since it wouldn't have applied to her. Based on this reasoning, opponents asked that the references to Sarah be stricken.
Judge Michael Kenny of the Sacramento Superior Court ultimately ruled against the opponents, allowing the original proposed ballot language and arguments, including references to Sarah, to stay in the official California voter's pamphlet.
Polling information
The Field Poll has conducted and released the results of four public opinion polls on Proposition 4, in July, August, September, and October.
Mark DiCamillo, director of the polling agency, said he believes the current version is running stronger because Latinos overwhelmingly favor it and are expected to vote in higher-than-usual numbers in November.