politics

Sole House Dem to oppose Article 22 defeated in primary

By Guy Page

Mike Yantachka, the veteran Democratic lawmaker from Charlotte who fought hard for climate change legislation but was the sole Democrat to oppose Article 22, lost in the August 9 primary to a pro-Article 22 challenger.

Yantachka lost 701-640 to Chea Waters Evans, a longtime journalist and editor of the Charlotte Bridge online community news outlet.  

Yantachka has served in the Vermont House since 2011. A member of the House Energy and Technology Committee, he was a leader in the Democratic caucus for several climate change-related initiatives.

Yantachka also is a devout Catholic who has served as a eucharistic minister. After initially supporting Prop 5, on February 8 this year he was the only Democrat to vote no on a roll call vote, which passed by 107-41. Upon passage by the Legislature, it became Article 22. The proposed amendment to enshrine ‘reproductive liberty’ in the Vermont Constitution will go before voters November 8. 

At least three Republicans – Scott Beck of St. Johnsbury, Matt Walker of Swanton, and Felisha Leffler of Enosburg – voted for the Article 22. Of the three, Leffler chose not to seek re-election. Neither Walker nor Beck faced a contested primary. 

The Charlotte News, the more established community news outlet for the small, upscale, highly Democratic Chittenden County suburb, commented April 12 on the results as follows:

“It is not too much of an assumption to attribute Yantachka’s loss his vote on Proposition 5, a state constitutional amendment to protect abortion rights. After hearing from residents, Yantachka reconsidered his position and said he regretted voting against it.

“In 2019, Yantachka voted for the amendment but became concerned about late-term abortions and enshrining the right in Vermont’s constitution.

“Evans was persuaded to run for the seat because of Yantachka’s vote opposing the constitutional amendment.”

A social media post by Yantachka was quoted in the News: “Upon reflection, I should have supported Prop 5,” adding that he realized his vote had “given the impression that I do not trust woman to make good decisions regarding their reproductive choices.”

Categories: politics

8 replies »

  1. I applaud Representative Yantachka’s politically courageous decision to oppose Proposition 5, now Article 22. We need more principled statesmen in Vermont. he was correct in opposing the amendment. First, even from a “pro-choice” perspective the proposed amendment is vague (no mention of “abortion”) and therefore dangerous in that it could lead to unintended consequences. Second the amendment is unnecessary because Vermont enacted a statute prohibiting any legislation restricting abortion. Vermont law prohibits abortion restrictions, period. Third, there have been no restrictions on abortion since 1972 in Vermont. We don’t need to tinker with our constitution. Alas, after his courageous decision, it is perplexing and disappointing that he would then backtrack and express regret for the decision.

    • Sorry Tom but I hate to break it to, but Yantachka is a shameless political grifter with no political backbone at all. He was 100% in on the covid scam and had questionable conflicts of interest (he ‘volunteered’ at a local paper that he also wrote for.)

      Good riddance to him. At least he learned what happened when you go against the wokies in this state.

  2. He could have bowed of out of politics doing the right thing, holding his head high and living true to his claimed faith, because he correctly stood for life, but instead, he decided to bow down to the death culture. Perhaps he will have a chance once again someday to be a part of the party who wants to make it a part of our Constitution, the document that gave Vermont life, to kill wonderful human creations just seconds before they get the chance to breath their first breath of clean Vermont air. He will be called to answer to a higher authority for his cowardly statement of regret. Maybe before he leaves this earth he will get on his knees and tell the Lord he regrets what he said after his loss and ask for forgiveness receiving eternal life instead of eternal separation from God, a fate worse than death.

  3. A DEVOUT Catholic actually said this? Who is pissing on my pants?

    “A social media post by Yantachka was quoted in the News: “Upon reflection, I should have supported Prop 5,” adding that he realized his vote had “given the impression that I do not trust woman to make good decisions regarding their reproductive choices.”

  4. Given that “Evans was persuaded to run for the seat because of Yantachka’s vote opposing the constitutional amendment” the real message here by the Democrats is, either vote the party line or we will do everything within our power to have you unseated.

    • The pressure to comply with party platforms is the reason our country is so socially and politically fragmented. This is especially true for democrats. Pragmatism of individual issues is considered to exemplify some kind of mental defect when it should instead be encouraged. Noncompliance with a core issue is verboten and will earn you namecalling if you are lucky and at the other extreme will get an army of “antifas” throwing objects at you and your family.

  5. Catholics want prop 5??? No they don’t!!! Not if they know what’s good for them and their children because the politicians want to take away parents rights and give them to planned parenthood regarding abortions and gender reassignment treatments and surgeries—-parents will have no say in it. Their children are already being bombarded with free condoms in schools and if they get a sexually transmitted disease-they can go to planned parenthood for treatment without a parent even knowing. Prop 5 if passed will give young people abortions and gender reassignment hormones, puberty blockers that will sterilize them and then surgery without a parents consent. Prop 5 will decriminalize sex traffickers and pedophiles. Even an undocumented should not be in favor of passing this amendment if it means the man who raped them or their child should get off scott free!!
    Ask yourself what will happen to children who go down this path of an abortion at an early age or take puberty blockers and are now sterile—but now have changed their minds like so many do…….they are in crisis!!!! They are now dealing with what many many adult woman who have abortions and they will have to deal with depression, anxiety and suicide ideation on a daily basis!!!
    Late term abortions are asking doctors and nurses to kill and dismember babies because that’s what they are—babies. They can breath on their own and are considered viable which means they can live outside the womb. And if prop 5 passes they will go after doctors and nurses who refuse to perform these procedures because if religious beliefs and take away their licenses to practice in Vermont, REALLY!!!!
    And because the Dems passed that bill S265 Criminal Threatening bill and if parents go to a school board meeting to complain they risk getting arrested and put in jail for 4 years!!!!
    This amendment vote is not a done deal. There has to be a great number of pro-choice Vermonters that are saying these guys have gone too far and will vote NO on Prop 5. I hope so. Mary H

  6. Article 22 is a giant can of worms and a Pandora’s Box filled with evil and eventual consequences that were actually intended by the writers of this terrible language. The Vermont Constitution will hang its head in shame if it is voted into law. There is plenty in this language for both pro-choice and pro-life people to be very wary of. People who support this language have no concept of how to read legal language. They are voting themselves into sexual and gender perversity if this passes. Abortion at any time for any reason. Infanticide down the road. Trans procedures performed on young children without parental knowledge or consent. The language is too broadly written and contains no age limits, no definitions and barely any restrictions. What a poor way to write a Constitutional amendment. .

Leave a Reply