Ahead of election, racial equity, Supreme Court, abortion access are priorities for Banner readers

Issues around racial equity, Supreme Court appointments and abortion are top-of-mind for Bay State Banner readers ahead of November’s election.

In a survey of 22 respondents, conducted by the Banner, those issues were the top three most frequently ranked as readers’ top priority.

Racial and ethnic equity clocked in at the top, with about 32% of the respondents identifying it as their biggest concern.

For respondents who didn’t select it as their top priority, abortion issues and racial and ethnic inequality tied for their second highest priorities. Health care was most frequently chosen as the third highest concern.

Separately, respondents identified other concerns, like student loans, LGBTQ+ rights and the character of the candidates as topics guiding them this November.

Among voters at-large across the U.S., priorities differed. Nationally, the economy was the most pressing issue for voters, according to a Pew Research report published last month. In that research, 81% of all voters surveyed identifying it as a “very important” issue. (For Banner readers, the economy ranked as the fourth most frequent choice for top concern.)

Racial and ethnic inequality was at the bottom of concerns for voters nationwide, tied with climate change in last place of the 10 issues listed, with 37% of voters surveyed identifying it as “very important.”

Across the country, priorities for self-identified supporters of Vice President Kamala Harris and those of former President Donald Trump differed widely. Harris supporters were more likely to identify issues like health care, Supreme Court appointments, abortion and climate change as “very important.” Trump supporters were more likely to prioritize immigration, violent crime and foreign policy.

Nationally, Harris voters were more than three times more likely to identify racial and ethnic inequality as “very important,” at 56% of respondents, compared to 18% of Trump supporters.

Racial equity at stake

Issues around racial equity have dotted both major campaigns. Ken Reeves, president of the Cambridge branch of the NAACP, pointed to pushes from Republicans to limit the teaching of Black history and racial issues in classrooms and to limit immigration.

The exact ways in which the election could affect racial equity in the country remain to be seen, but Tanisha Sullivan, president of the NAACP New England Area Conference, pointed to Project 2025, a blueprint created by conservative think tank the Heritage Foundation for a Trump presidency, as a point of concern.

That plan outlines steps against diversity equity and inclusion efforts, as well as shifts and limits for how the Department of Justice enforces civil rights laws.

While Trump is not officially affiliated with Project 2025, many of its authors have served in his campaigns or administration and many of the policies outlined in it are similar to ones proposed by Trump.

“We don’t know the full impact of this election, but we do know there are very clear signals that some of the ideas reflected in Project 2025 could be devastating for Black people, working people and other communities that have been fighting for power and access for generations,” said Sullivan in a statement to the Banner.

Reproductive rights

When it comes to abortion access and reproductive health care, advocates said this election is going to be pivotal in how and if U.S. residents can access care. The issue has been a priority for many voters — especially left-leaning voters — since the Dobbs v. Jackson Supreme Court decision in June 2022 overturned Roe v. Wade and removed the constitutional right to an abortion.

Supporters hold signs advocating protections for abortion access at a press conference in April 2023, when Gov. Maura Healey announced steps to continue access to mifepristone, a drug commonly used in medical abortion, following a ruling of a federal judge in Texas that attempted to limit access. Access to abortion and other reproductive health care was identified by Banner readers as a priority in November’s election. PHOTO: AVERY BLEICHFELD /BAY STATE BANNER

“This November’s election is going to determine the future of reproductive freedom and abortion access in our country,” said Rebecca Holder, president of Reproductive Equity Now, an organization working to increase equitable access to reproductive health care.

A Trump presidency, Holder worries, could mean a nationwide abortion ban. Though Trump has been less vocal about federal-level regulations on the topic in this campaign compared to his previous bids for the White House, in his last presidency he took steps to limit abortion access.

Project 2025 outlines ways to limit or ban access to forms of abortion and other reproductive health care if Trump wins.

On the state level, Massachusetts took steps to protect access to reproductive care in the wake of the Dobbs decision. In July 2022, on the heels of the decision, the state Legislature passed a law protecting access to emergency contraception and strengthening legal protections with a focus on shielding providers and out-of-state patients in Massachusetts seeking abortions.

In February 2023, Attorney General Andrea Campbell launched a statewide abortion legal advice hotline, and that April, Gov. Maura Healey signed an executive order protecting access to mifepristone, one of two drugs commonly used in medication abortions, following a decision from a federal judge in Texas that threatened to limit access.

But Holder said a Trump presidency could mean limits to abortion and other reproductive health care even in a places where state and local governments have implemented protections.

“We know that if there’s a second Trump term, he can ban abortion nationwide, and that will impact Massachusetts,” she said.

She pointed to concerns around Trump appointing a new commissioner at the Food and Drug Administration who could take mifepristone of the market nationwide under the Comstock Act, a 1873 law that could be interpreted to ban the mailing and transportation of the drug across state lines.

Under the Biden Administration, the Department of Justice determined that the act only applies when the sender intends for the drug to be used in an illegal abortion, and because there are legal uses of the drug in every state (for example, it can also be used to manage miscarriages), there is no way to determine the intention of the sender.

But that determination is not binding, and future administrations could interpret it differently. Anti-abortion groups have pushed for the law to be treated as a ban on mailing and distribution of the drug.

“He can do a lot,” Holder said, “even if his party does not win both houses of Congress.”

Decision time is now

Reeves called the upcoming election a “time of tough decision-making,” saying he had heard voters — especially Black voters — expressing doubts about how Democratic policies have benefited them over the past four years.

“The Democrats should be clear that people are not missing what is or isn’t happening in America under Democratic leadership,” Reeves said.

Still, he encouraged voters to go for Harris, calling her the better option compared to Trump.

“If it’s a choice between the imperfect Democratic machine and the devil himself, we recommend the Democratic machine,” he said.

For Sullivan, the election cycle generally has highlighted the fear and disappointment that Americans are experiencing and the need to not just make it through Nov. 5, but to make sure the country moves forward and continues to exist.

“While we will continue working to turn out the vote, we are also focused on the days after,” Sullivan said. “We are committed to keeping our sleeves rolled up and continuing the work to make this country one where all Americans can thrive.”