‘I’m horrified’: Montana asked voters if babies born alive should be given medical care; 226K people voted ‘no’

When the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade with its Dobbs decision, everyone in America knew that abortion would become a focal point for Democrats who had little else to run on in the midterm elections.

And while the liberal states of California and Vermont predictably passed “limitless abortion” laws on Tuesday, Montana shocked the nation when it voted down measure LR-131 — the “Born-Alive Infant Protection Act” — which would have required doctors to provide medical care for babies who survive an abortion.

The Born-Alive Infant Protection Act would have stipulated “that infants born alive, including infants born alive after an abortion, are legal persons.”

As such, it required “health care providers to take necessary actions to preserve the life of a born-alive infant.”

Unbelievably, more than 226,000 Montanans voted to refuse care to a newborn and, instead, allow them to die.

“I don’t know how to process this,” tweeted defense attorney Marina Medvin.

And Medvin was not alone in her disgust.

“Welcome to America,” declared Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk.

“I’m horrified that even ONE person would vote in Montana to deny babies healthcare after they’ve already been born,” stated Planned Parenthood director turned pro-life advocate Abby Johnson. “They’re basically saying they want the babies left out to die.”

“We need Jesus to save our nation,” she added. “Desperately.”

And Daily Wire Senior Editor Cabot Phillips warned that we as a nation “deserve” what is surely coming to us after such an unimaginable vote.

“Montana has voted to let babies die on operating tables if they survive an abortion attempt,” he tweeted. “We deserve the judgment we will face for our wickedness.”

It’s such an evil outcome — and we at American Wire dare anyone to tell us otherwise — that conservative podcaster Jesse Kelly suggested that Montana voters may have misinterpreted the ballot’s language and mistakenly voted the measure down.

“Lotta people angry and horrified about Montana voting to let a baby die after birth,” he tweeted. “But the devil is in the details and this is how horrific stuff passes sometimes when it shouldn’t.”

“Read that,” he urged his followers. “That’s how it read on the ballot. How would you vote?”


It’s a nice thought, but not one Kelly’s fellow tweeters are buying.

“I think there are just a bunch of pieces of sh*t out there who think we should kill infants,” replied conservative commentator Matt Walsh. “The wording doesn’t seem all that confusing to me.”

According to LifeNews.com, the more likely explanation lies with former Virginia Democrat Gov. Ralph Northam, whose comments “in support of infanticide prompted the ballot measure.”

Northam “introduced to the nation the idea [that] infanticide can now be considered post-birth abortion,” said former Montana state Senator and orthopedic surgeon Dr. Al Olszewski. “Now, we have to state in Montana that all children born in Montana automatically receive personhood rights.”

Pro-abortion activists quickly went to work to frame the measure as “propaganda” and an attempt by the state to interfere in “health care decisions.”

“LR-131 is a piece of propaganda, part of a false narrative created by those who are against individuals and families who want to make health care decisions without interference from the state,” Dr. Tim Mitchell, a Missoula maternal-fetal medicine specialist, said at a press conference at the Montana State Capitol. “The outcomes this initiative claims to exist simply do not happen.”

This, LifeNews points out, is a lie.

Noting that “few states keep track of such things,” the outlet reports, “Between 2016 and 2018, three states reported 40 babies were born alive after botched abortions. According to the state health data, 11 babies were born alive in Minnesota, 10 in Arizona and 19 in Florida. Texas reported six babies were born alive in botched abortions in 2019. In Michigan, state health reports from 2008 through 2013 indicate that 11 babies were born alive after abortions.”

“According to the latest abortion report from the Minnesota Department of Health,” LifeNews continues, “five babies were born alive in abortions in the state in 2021.”

Even so, Mitchell called the legislation “really cruel,” arguing that families would no longer be able to hold their dying babies because doctors would be forced to provide them unnecessary medical care.

Montana state Rep. Matt Regier (R-Kalispell) was the lead sponsor of the bill, which states that infants should be treated when “medically appropriate and reasonable.”

“Are you intentionally trying to kill the baby or not?” he asked. “I know the opponents want to make it a gray area, but it’s not.”

Back on Twitter, podcaster Matthew J. Peterson acknowledged that both Kelly and Walsh have a point, but urged them to follow the money.

“What’s missing in yer convo is that Ds spent $400M plus against this and a few similar other props,” he replied to the duo. “I don’t think that was…countered.”

“So you each have a point but what they did is disgusting and they bought it, bigly, with what @glennbeck accurately called ‘blood money’ tonight,” he tweeted.

Meanwhile, California and Vermont voters “overwhelmingly approved” measures that allow for “limitless abortions,” the Daily Wire reports.

In California, where Governor Gavin Newsom tossed $200 million into the state budget to fund 15 abortion-related bills this year alone, Proposition 1 passed, “which changes the California Constitution to say that the state cannot deny or interfere with a person’s so-called reproductive freedom and that people have the fundamental right to choose to have an abortion and use contraceptives,” according to the Daily Wire.

Coupled with AB 2223, which lifts current Roe v. Wade era restrictions that allow abortions before the baby is able to survive outside the womb and in cases in which the mother’s health is in danger, and, according to Susan Arnall, vice president of legal affairs at the Right to Life League, anyone who kills an infant who has suffered “in utero” injuries after it is born alive would be protected as long as the mother agrees with the “pregnancy outcome.”

“That is why AB 2223 is the true danger,” Arnall told the Epoch Times. “AB 2223 will eliminate California’s current Roe v. Wade era restrictions on abortion, creating an unlimited right to abortion for all nine months of pregnancy, including after the live birth of a baby. It does this with the language ‘perinatal death due to causes that occurred in utero.’ This phrase is vague and totally undefined.”

“AB 2223 will prevent any investigation into the cause of a baby’s death, erasing justice for the unwanted baby born alive,” she stated.


And in Vermont, Proposal 5, “which gives individuals a right to so-called personal reproductive autonomy,” passed “by a margin of 72%-22%,” the Daily Wire reports.

“We knew it was an uphill battle to actually be able to successfully share the truth of what the ramifications of this amendment would be,” said Rep. Anne Donahue (R-Northfield), a spokesperson for Vermonters for Good Government. “I still believe that if Vermonters really understood the implications, they would not have supported it.”

According to Calvary Chapel Chino Hills Pastor Jack Hibbs, the measures are nothing short of “demonic.”

“The biggest battleground and the most significant war that’s taking place in this nation is the demonic murder of children in the womb,” he told the Epoch Times, “and California is leading the way.”

Melissa Fine


We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

Latest Articles