与四年前相比，堕胎问题在本届中期选举周期中相对低调，四年前最高法院2022年推翻“罗诉韦德案”裁决后，该问题曾成为焦点。但民主党仍在选票上推进堕胎权议程。
Abortion is a quiet issue this midterm cycle compared with four years ago, in the immediate wake of the Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling that overturned Roe v. Wade. But Democrats are still advancing an abortion agenda on the ballot.
自“多布斯诉杰克逊妇女健康组织案”将堕胎政策交还各州以来，已有10个州通过投票措施扩大堕胎权。今年又有三个州试图这样做。民主党在关键摇摆州获胜也可能扩大堕胎服务的可及性。
Since Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization returned abortion policy to the states, 10 of them have passed ballot measures expanding the right to abortion. This year three more are attempting the same. Democratic victories in key swing states could expand abortion access too.
弗吉尼亚州的“提案1”是一项公投，旨在州宪法中确立“生殖自由权”。如果医生认定堕胎“为保护孕妇生命或身心健康所必需”，或胎儿“不具备存活能力”，该提案将禁止对堕胎实施限制，甚至包括孕晚期。这比现行限制宽松得多，现行规定要求孕晚期堕胎必须在医院进行，并需三名医生证明继续妊娠会威胁孕妇生命或健康。
Question 1 in Virginia is a referendum to establish a “right to reproductive freedom” in the state constitution. It would ban restrictions on abortion even in the third trimester if a physician determines it is needed “to protect the life or physical or mental health of the pregnant individual” or that the baby “is not viable.”That’s far looser than current restrictions, which require third-trimester abortions to be performed in a hospital with certification by three doctors that continuing the pregnancy would threaten the woman’s life or health.
内华达州的“提案6”将修改州宪法，保障“堕胎基本权利”，直到“胎儿具备存活能力”——以及“为保护孕妇生命或健康所必需”时的更晚时期。选民在2024年以近30个百分点的优势通过了该公投，但必须再次通过才能生效。
Nevada’s Question 6 would amend the state constitution to guarantee a “fundamental right to abortion” until “fetal viability”—and beyond “when needed to protect the life or health of the pregnant patient.”Voters approved the referendum in 2024 by nearly 30 points but must pass it again for it to take effect.
爱达荷州选民将审议一项类似于内华达州措施的公民发起法案。该“宝石州”目前全孕期禁止堕胎，仅设有医疗例外情况。提案1将保障堕胎权直到胎儿具备生存能力，此后允许州政府对其进行监管，“医疗急症案件”除外。据《选举百科》统计，支持堕胎权团体为支持这些措施已花费数百万美元，远超反对阵营。与此同时，密苏里州立法机构请求选民朝相反方向改变政策。2024年，他们批准了一项宪法倡议，确立堕胎权。修正案3将废除2024年措施，并重新激活一项禁止大多数堕胎的成文法禁令。
Idaho voters will consider a citizen-initiated statute similar to Nevada’s measure. The Gem State currently bans abortion throughout pregnancy, with medical exceptions. Proposition 1 would guarantee the right to abortion until viability, then allow the state to regulate it except in “cases of medical emergency.”Pro-abortion groups have spent millions to support these measures, far more than the opposition, according to Ballotpedia. Meantime, the Missouri Legislature is asking voters to change policy in the other direction. In 2024 they approved a constitutional initiative creating the right to abortion. Amendment 3 would repeal the 2024 measure and reactivate a statutory ban on most abortions.
在其他州，民主党人正在竞选以扩大或保护堕胎权。在威斯康星州——该州在孕后20周限制堕胎——州长候选人大卫·克劳利表示，他将支持将堕胎权写入州宪法。在宾夕法尼亚州——该州在孕后24周限制堕胎——州长乔什·夏皮罗在竞选途中呼吁采取相同做法。这两个州最终都可能形成民主党控制的立法机构多数派，届时很可能会配合克劳利和夏皮罗先生。
In other states, Democrats are campaigning to expand or protect the right to abortion. In Wisconsin, which restricts abortion after 20 weeks, gubernatorial candidate David Crowley said he’d support adding the right to abortion to the state constitution. In Pennsylvania, which restricts abortion after 24 weeks, Gov. Josh Shapiro called for the same on the campaign trail. Both states could end up with Democratic legislative majorities, which would likely comply with Messrs. Crowley and Shapiro.
国会多数党地位的变化可能预示着联邦堕胎政策的新变向。每一位参议院民主党人及其众议院同僚中除极少数外，均共同发起了《妇女健康保护法案》，该法案将通过将罗诉韦德案确立的生存能力界线成文立法，推翻23个州的堕胎限制。它还将允许女性通过远程医疗获取堕胎药物处方并邮寄获得药物。（拜登政府的一项法规扩大了堕胎药米非司酮的获取渠道，尽管存在对女性安全的担忧。）
A change in the congressional majority could portend a new federal abortion policy. Every Senate Democrat and all but a handful of their House counterparts have co-sponsored the Women’s Health Protection Act, which would override abortion restrictions in 23 states by codifying Roe’s viability line. It would also allow women to be prescribed abortion drugs using telemedicine and to obtain them by mail. (A Biden administration regulation expanded access to the abortion drug mifepristone, despite concerns about women’s safety.)
通过该法案需要废除参议院冗长辩论规则，且特朗普总统必将予以否决，但该法案可能在2029年获得通过。
Passing the bill would require nuking the Senate filibuster, and President Trump would surely veto it, but it could pass in 2029.
共和党今年大多回避支持生命权的立场。美国食品药品监督管理局（FDA）本月表示，直到明年才会发布关于米非司酮安全性的研究，令支持生命权的团体感到失望。“我认为，对此采取强有力的行动，可能会激励一些支持生命权的选民去投票，而这些选民现在可能会因沮丧或幻灭而选择留在家里，”前“生命游行”组织主席珍妮·布拉德利·利希特说。
Republicans are mostly shying away from pro-life stances this year. The Food and Drug Administration disappointed pro-life groups this month when it said that it wouldn’t release a study on the safety of mifepristone until next year. “Strong action on this, I believe, probably would have motivated some pro-life voters to go to the polls who may well now stay home out of a sense of discouragement or disenchantment,” says Jennie Bradley Lichter, a former president of the March for Life.
利希特女士表示，共和党“似乎害怕”这一议题。但这里存在一个政治契机。民主党向选民推销堕胎投票议题时，将其包装为对权利的模糊保护。但民主党与民意之间存在差距，共和党可以利用这一点。民调一致显示，美国人支持在孕早期（第一孕期）后对堕胎进行监管。但大多数民主党的议题提案超出了这一范围。马萨诸塞州今夏通过了一项法律，允许堕胎直到分娩。
The GOP “seems to be afraid” of the issue, Ms. Lichter says. But there is a political opening here. Democrats sell abortion ballot measures to voters as vague protections of their rights. But there is a gap between Democrats and public opinion that Republicans could exploit. Polls consistently show that Americans favor abortion regulations after the first trimester. But most Democratic measures go beyond that. Massachusetts this summer passed a law allowing abortion until birth.
“为生命而生美国”（SBA Pro-Life America）组织的传播总监凯尔西·普里查德表示，该组织在全国范围内为共和党候选人助选时，正在提出马萨诸塞州的这项法律。她说，民主党“无法说出他们支持的堕胎限制条件”，并希望将这一政策推广到全国。“当你向选民指出这一点时，这对选民来说太极端了。不仅仅是共和党选民认为这太极端。”
Kelsey Pritchard, communications director for SBA Pro-Life America, said the group is bringing up the Massachusetts law as it campaigns for Republican candidates around the country. The Democratic Party “cannot name a limit that they support on abortion,” she says, and they want to make that policy national. “When you point that out to voters, that’s far too extreme for voters. It’s not just the Republican voters that think that’s too extreme.”