Population Research and Policy Review

, Volume 4, Issue 2, pp 115–131 | Cite as

The United States Senate votes to uphold Roe versus Wade

  • Donald Granberg
Article

Abstract

An analysis is reported of the voting of U.S. Senators in their rejection in 1983 of the proposed Hatch/Eagleton Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. That Amendment, if passed and ratified, would have reversed the 1973 Supreme Court Decision in Roe versus Wade which legalized abortion throughout the United States; the Senate, in effect, thus voted to uphold Roe versus Wade. Analyses are reported on public opinion and public policy, regional differences, characteristics of the states and personal characteristics of the Senators, including some variables of more political relevance and others of more relevance to social scientists. A regression analysis summarizes the results by indicating that, other things being equal, pro-choice votes were likely to be cast by nonCatholic Democratic Senators who were from New England, the Pacific, or Middle Atlantic region, who were from states with a relatively high income, and who had voted against a proposed constitutional amendment allowing prayer in public schools.

Keywords

Regression Analysis Social Scientist Public Policy Economic Policy High Income 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adamek, R. (1982). Abortion and Public Opinion in the United States. Washington, D.C.: National Right to Life Educational Trust Fund.Google Scholar
  2. Arney, W. and W. Trescher (1976). “Trends in attitudes toward abortion, 1972–1975,” Family Planning Perspectives 8: 117–124.Google Scholar
  3. Blake, J. (1971). “Abortion and public opinion in the 1960–70 decade,” Science 171: 540–549.Google Scholar
  4. Blake, J. (1977a). “The abortion decisions: Judicial review and public opinion,” in E. Manier, W. Liu, and D. Solomon (eds.), Abortion: New Directions for Policy Studies. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
  5. Blake, J. (1977b). “The Supreme Court's abortion decisions and public opinion in the United States,” Population and Development Review 1: 45–62.Google Scholar
  6. Blake, J. and J. Del Pinal (1981). “Negativism, equivocation, and wobbly assent: public ‘support’ for the prochoice platform on abortion,” Demography 18: 309–320.Google Scholar
  7. Bogen, I. (1974). “Attitudes of women who have had abortions,” Journal of Sex Research 10: 97–109.Google Scholar
  8. Borders, J. and P. Cutright (1979). “Community determinants of U.S. legal abortion rates,” Family Planning Perspectives 11: 227–233.Google Scholar
  9. Field, M. (1979). “Determinants of abortion policy in developed countries,” Policy Studies Journal 7: 771–781.Google Scholar
  10. Fujita, B. and N. Wagner (1973). “Referendum 20-Abortion reform in Washington State,” in H. Osofsky and J. Osofsky (eds.), The Abortion Experience: Psychological and Medical Impact. Hagerstown, Maryland: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  11. Granberg, D. (1978). “Pro-life or reflection of conservative ideology? An analysis of opposition to legalized abortion,” Sociology and Social Research 62: 414–429.Google Scholar
  12. Granberg, D. (1980). “An analysis of the House Judiciary Committee's recommendation to impeach Richard Nixon,” Political Psychology 2: 50–65.Google Scholar
  13. Granberg, D. (1981a). “Comparison of members of pro-abortion and anti-abortion organizations in Missouri,” Social Biology 28: 239–252.Google Scholar
  14. Granberg, D. (1981b). “The abortion activists,” Family Planning Perspectives 13: 157–163.Google Scholar
  15. Granberg, D. (1982). “What does it mean to be pro-life?” Christian Century 99: 562–566.Google Scholar
  16. Granberg, D. and J. Burlison (1983). “The abortion issue in the 1980 elections,” Family Planning Perspectives 15: 231–238.Google Scholar
  17. Granberg, D. and D. Denney (1982). “The coathanger and the rose,” Society 19 (No. 4): 39–46.Google Scholar
  18. Granberg, D. and B. Granberg (1980). “Abortion attitudes, 1965–1980: Trends and determinants,” Family Planning Perspectives 12: 250–261.Google Scholar
  19. Granberg, D. and B. Granberg (1981). “Pro-life vs. pro-choice: Another look at the abortion controversy in the U.S.A.,” Sociology and Social Research 65: 424–434.Google Scholar
  20. Granberg, D. and B. Granberg (1984). “A search for gender differences on fertility related attitudes: Questioning the relevance of Sociobiology Theory for understanding social psychological aspects of human reproduction,” Psychology of Women Quarterly 8: in press.Google Scholar
  21. Hatch, O. et al. (1982). Human Life Federalism Amendment. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  22. Henshaw, S., J. Forrest, E. Sullivan, and C. Tietze (1982). “Abortion services in the United States, 1979 and 1980,” Family Planning Perspectives 14: 5–15.Google Scholar
  23. Jaffe, F., B. Lindheim, and P. Lee (1981). Abortion Politics: Private Morality and Public Policy. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  24. Luker, K. (1984). Abortion and the Politics of Motherhood. Berkeley, California: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  25. Mischel, W. (1969). “Continuity and change in personality,” American Psychologist 24: 1012–1018.Google Scholar
  26. Nathanson, B. (1979). Aborting America. Garden City, New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  27. Shostak, A. and G. McLouth (1984). Men and Abortion. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
  28. Traugott, M. and M. Vinovskis (1980). “Abortion and the 1978 Congressional Elections,” Family Planning Perspectives 12: 238–246.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Elsevier Science Publishers B.V 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • Donald Granberg
    • 1
  1. 1.Center for Research in Social Behavior, University of MissouriColumbiaUSA

Personalised recommendations