News pertaining to Prop 5/Article 22:
Proposal 5 has nothing to do with Roe V. Wade
“Although advocates of Proposal 5 often cite respect for Roe v. Wade as a rallying cry, what they are calling for is, instead, a radical departure from that Supreme Court precedent…”
Prop 5/Article 22 Is a Can of Unintended Consequences
“This November, Vermonters will be asked to vote on whether or not to amend our state constitution to add language creating a right to “personal reproductive autonomy.” This amendment is called Proposal 5 (it would add Article 22 to the Vermont Constitution) and is being hyped by politicians and the media as a means of protecting at the state level the abortion rights conferred by Roe v. Wade at the federal level. This is inaccurate, and, from a legal standpoint, dangerously so.”
Letter to the Editor: “Prop 5 would cut out parents’ role.”
“If parental notification to parents is eliminated, in essence the government has taken over in the role of raising the child, leaving the parents’ voice in any decision on their life null and void. The parent may as well give full custody to the state, and be free of the responsibility….”
Donahue: Proposal 5 threatens health care provider conscience protection
“There should be deep concern about the impact that Proposal 5 could have on our state’s hospitals, health care delivery and workforce crisis through overturning such protections. There are inaccurate perceptions about the scope and intent of this constitutional amendment, as reflected in a November article in VT Digger which described its purpose as to “protect the abortion rights spelled out in the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision.””
Lamberton: “Abortion” Amendment does not reflect Vermonters’ values.”
“When our Legislature returns to Montpelier in January, the House will vote on whether or not to advance a constitutional amendment, Proposal 5 (aka Article 22), for a public referendum. We will all vote on it in November 2022. This amendment is being sold to the public as a guarantee of Roe v. Wade protections for abortion, but it actually goes much further than Roe v. Wade, allowing for abortion on demand throughout all nine months of pregnancy, with zero legal protections for unborn children even after viability outside the womb.”
Behind closed doors, Proposal 5 leaves Roe v. Wade in the dust
“…It would restrict our laws from advancing along with scientific knowledge. Enshrining this wording in our constitution goes way too far, much beyond what even most pro-choice people believe to be a reasonable right to choose and far beyond what Roe v. Wade states.”
Vermonters Likely to Vote on Adding Reproductive Rights to State Constitution in 2022
“…Two hundred fifteen plants and animals have legal protection in Vermont. And right now, an unborn child all the way through to the ninth month of pregnancy has zero protection or regard under Vermont law. Proposal five would inscribe that in granite.”
Rob Roper: Everyone Should Hate Proposal 5
“When the Vermont House of Representatives returns in January, one of the first orders of business they will take up is a constitutional amendment called Proposal 5. Proposal 5 is being sold as a statewide protection for women’s rights guaranteed under Roe v. Wade. This isn’t an accurate portrayal of what Proposal 5 would do. In fact, Proposal 5 is a legal mess that no one on either side of the abortion debate should be okay with…..”
Prop 5 enshrines abortion in state constitution
“When Vermont legislators return to session in January, leaders in the Senate and the House have said that the passing of Prop 5 will be an immediate priority…”
Proposition 5 passes Vermont Senate
“The Vermont Senate has passed a proposal, Proposition 5, which would amend the Vermont constitution to guarantee “personal reproductive liberty” to Vermonters. The proposal, in conjunction with a House bill already passed this year, would protect abortion in the state both legislatively and constitutionally, making removing those protections much more difficult. Both the bill and the amendment are in reaction to the appointment of Brett Kavanaugh to the US Supreme Court, due to concerns over his stance on the Roe v. Wade case that protected abortion nationally….”