With Election Day drawing near, the outcomes of each state’s Senate race have a potentially strong impact on the future of the Supreme Court and abortion issues.

One justice is likely to retire during the Bush administration, which means the Senate will approve or reject the president’s nominee for the Supreme Court, said James Hutter, associate professor of political science.

The Senate has 50 Democrats, 49 Republicans and one independent, meaning Democrats may have more influence in appointing the next justice. However, there are eight states where the Senate races are between anti-abortion and abortion-rights candidates, including Iowa.

Rep. Greg Ganske, the Republican Senate candidate, has voted for the following abortion and family legislation issues: banning human cloning; banning family planning funding; banning partial-birth abortions; and barring the transport of minors across state lines to get abortions. He also voted to make it a federal crime to harm a fetus while committing other crimes, according to voting records.

“What is most important is that the Senate gives President Bush a fair hearing for his nominees,” said Curt Mercadante, press secretary for Ganske’s campaign. “Democrats are not giving the nominees a fair shake.”

It seems to be the Democrats are giving litmus tests to all potential nominees, he said. A litmus test requires Supreme Court nominees to agree with one’s political views, and it occupies the time of the Senate which keeps them from approving qualified judges, Mercadante said.

Sen. Tom Harkin, a Democrat, has consistently voted against bills banning abortion. ACcording to his voting record, he has voted against upholding a ban on military base abortions, against banning partial birth abortions and against disallowing overseas military abortions.

“Tom Harkin has a solid record of voting for women’s issues, including the right to choose,” said Joe Shannahan, spokesman for the Harkin campaign.

Having politicians who are aware of current abortion issues is important to many voters.

According to the Iowa Right to Life Committee Web site, www.irlc.org, “removing the protection of the law [as a result of Roe v. Wade] has combined with decaying ethical standards, ignorance of the facts of unborn human development, and the promotion of abortion as a solution to social problems by pro-abortion groups.”

In 1973 the Supreme Court decided in Roe v. Wade to legalize abortions, declaring constitutional rights apply only after birth; hence abortions do not violate one’s legal right to life.

In accordance with the high court’s decision, states cannot regulate first-trimester abortions. However, states can regulate but not ban second-trimester abortions and can ban third-trimester abortions.

Other legislation that stems from the Roe v. Wade verdict is “parental consent,” meaning each state can decide if a teenager needs a parent’s permission for an abortion. In 1992 the Supreme Court ruled that spousal consent cannot be required by the states.

Legislation also passed for “informed consent.” This allows each state to determine rules about 24-hour waiting periods before an abortion and information about when viability occurs after the first trimester.

In the past, “human life amendments” have been introduced to the Senate but have never passed. The amendment would be a constitutional one capable of overturning Roe v. Wade.

“Roe v. Wade has been challenged in the past. The last vote was 5-4,” said Judith Rutledge, vice president of governmental affairs for Planned Parenthood of Iowa. “This is a critical issue. Young women could lose a freedom they have grown up with.”

She said “there is no reason to believe [President Bush] won’t nominate a conservative justice.”

If Republicans gain control of the Senate they will have the opportunity to pass a “human life amendment.” The Supreme Court will then have to decide if the amendment is constitutional.

“If Roe v. Wade is overturned, women will continue to have abortions but in an unsafe way,” said Jacquelyn Litt, associate professor of sociology and women’s studies. “Abortion won’t go away.”

Hutter said the issue of abortion will probably be reviewed.

“The Supreme Court must have many opportunities to review its decisions,” Hutter said. “It is likely that this will come in to review. However, you can’t always predict how they will vote.”