What follows is an Op-Ed piece I submitted to the school newspaper:
It has been interesting to follow the debate over Proposition 26, more commonly known at “The Personhood Amendment,’’ both in my encounters with those who are advocating for and against the ballot measure around campus and in the pages of the Reflector.
The previous opinion pieces published in The Reflector have considered this topic almost exclusively on moral and ethical grounds and it is highly unlike that anything I might add to the matter on those grounds would alter anyone’s view.
But I do believe there is another way of considering thistopic that is, at the very least, equally relevant.
As I consider the debate over Proposition 26, the more I begin to see it not merely as a debate over an issue that has divided Americans for the past 40 years, but as a microcosm of what makes Mississippi, well, Mississippi.
Last week, I spent some time observing two groups who were arguing on either side of Proposition 26. The Pro-26 and Anti-26 groups had set up shop just feet from each other on the Drill Field. I listened as advocates for both sides made their pitches to passer-by students. Predictably, each group
accused the other of distortions, disinformation and exaggerations.
Finally, I approached a member of each group and asked what would happen if the Proposition passed, which, I suspect, is the likely outcome.
After listening patiently to both parties, I am convinced that both sides are wrong.
What will happen if Proposition 26 passes?
Nothing.
Proposition 26, if passed, cannot be implemented because it will never pass Constitutional muster. State laws cannot usurp federal law and, clearly, Proposition 26 will certainly be challenged in the Courts and there is no reasonable expectation that it can meet the legal challenges.
Pro-26 advocates argue that they do have the Constitution on their side, noting that anything that any powers not implicitly given to the federal government are ceded to the states. But that argument has been repeatedly refuted over the decades. In fact, Mississippi, along with many other Southern states, used the “state’s rights’’ argument to secede from the Union in 1861 and later to fight Civil Rights legislation in the 1960s. Obviously, the tactic failed miserably in both cases. The “State’s Rights’’ argument is a thin limb for Pro-26 supporters to cling to.
Mississippi is just one of 32 states that have proposed some sort of new definition on
“personhood,’’ which is primarily a legal strategy devised to overturn Roe v. Wade. Mississippi’s version is broader than most – too broad, it seems. Neither National Right to Life, the nation’s most prominent anti-abortion organization, or the Catholic Church, whose views on abortion have never been ambiguous, offer support for Mississippi’s amendment.
In fact, there is some belief that Mississippi’s proposition might ultimate damage the anti-abortion cause.
James Bopp Jr., the top lawyer for National Right to Life, told the New York Times that the amendment is regrettable from a pro-life perspective. “From the standpoint of protecting unborn lives it’s utterly futile,” he said, “and it has the grave risk that if it did get to the Supreme
Court, the court would write an even more extreme abortion policy.”
So, no, I won’t be voting for Proposition 26 on grounds that have nothing to do with the moral and ethical implications it represents, but because it will serve no useful purpose.
I stated that if Proposition 26 passes, nothing will happen. But that’s not true, of course. Something will, indeed, happen. What willhappen is that Mississippi taxpayers will spend millions of dollars over the next decade fighting a legal battle whose outcome is about as predictable as an Ole Miss-Alabama football game – with the state playing the role of Ole Miss. And the state will spend
these millions of dollars at a time when it is busy slashing budgets for health, education and programs for the poor.
But that’s the way it’s always been with Mississippi: We seem incapable of fighting any battles other than the ones we are certain to lose. In the meantime, the issues that should command our attention are neglected while we wage against a quixotic war on hot-button issues that have
little real impact on the real issues that Mississippians have faced seemingly
forever.
I am native Mississippian, and 52 years old, a non-traditional student both chronologically and, I suspect, philosophically. All my life, Mississippi has ranked last (or first, provided being first means worst) on just about every measurable “quality of life’’ issue. That’s “Our State:’’ Last in education,
first in poverty, last in health care, first in obesity.
So what do our political leaders do when they consider Mississippi’s regrettable state? They push legislation on things like voter ID, abortion, gun laws, etc. – measure that appeal only to passions, but do little – nothing,really – to move Mississippi up or down any of those lists. It’s almost as if our “leaders’’ are simply shrugging their shoulders and saying, “well, somebody’s gotta be last, right?
Might as well be us.’’
And yet the same people – or different people with the same views – are elected over and over again.
I hope to live long enough to see a real leader emerge in our state someday, someone who has real ideas and is determined to focus on that list and move Mississippi, at long last, in a hopeful direction. Of course, how he will be elected is another matter entirely.
Mississippi is like a house with a badly leaking roof. Our leaders respond by calling for
bigger pots.
If futility could be ranked, I know just where Mississippi would stand on that list.
Proposition 26 is just the latest example.
Slim Smith is a seniorCommunications major from Tupelo.
