BELLE FOURCHE - Like most West River residents, Billie Jane Hamblin will cast her vote on Initiated Measure 11 on Tuesday with an attitude of independence.

And in Hamblin's case, that will extend even to her own Catholic bishop.

"I love the church, but I don't want my bishop telling me it's OK to kill some babies to save others," Hamblin said. "That's my independent streak."

That type of don't-tell-me-what-to-do attitude will be reflected in voting patterns across the state's 22-county West River region come Election Day. And no issue or candidate race will show it more dramatically than Measure 11.

The proposal would ban abortions in South Dakota except in cases of rape and incest or when necessary to protect a woman's health or save her life. It's a profoundly emotional issue that inspires conflict among friends and families and even within churches.

It's also one that might seem to have widespread support in western South Dakota, a conservative, largely Republican landscape where patriotic zeal, pro-family proclamations and a general abhorrence for the act of aborting a fetus would seem to create an environment of strong support for the abortion ban.

It doesn't. Or at least, it hasn't.

By 56 percent to 44 percent, state voters in 2006 rejected a proposed ban that would have allowed abortions only when needed to save a woman's life. And it wasn't just because of the pounding it took in Sioux Falls, Brookings, Vermillion and other East River communities with a more liberal philosophical and political slant.

Referred Law 6 got hammered out here in the conservative west, too, by a margin that settled the issue emphatically.

Seventeen out of 22 West River counties voted against the abortion ban in 2006, while 19 of 44 East River counties supported it. And in the West River counties overall, Referred Law 6 was rejected by a wider margin - 60 percent to 40 percent - than it was statewide.

That surprised many who worked against the abortion ban, even though pre-vote polling had indicated opposition out west. Jeff Masten, a former state Democratic Party chairman who worked against the ban through the South Dakota Campaign for Healthy Families, said the surveys changed the thinking of campaign strategists.

"When we got into it, we thought the east side of the state, where the liberals are, would bury that initiated measure, and we'd have to scrape for votes out on the west side," Masten said. "But it worked the other way. There is an independent streak out in the west side of the state. My jaw dropped when we saw how those numbers came in."

In fact, the strongest support for the ban in 2006 came east of the Missouri River, where the bulk of the state's 153,000 Catholics live. The initiative also did well in parts of East River where Christian churches carry community strength, including regions of Hutterite and Mennonite influence.

The church impacts aren't as pronounced in the more scattered, independent west. But the Catholic Diocese of Rapid City nonetheless was instrumental in gathering signatures to put this year's version of the abortion ban on the Nov. 4 ballot and encouraging its support.

When the petitions appeared in her church in Belle Fourche, Hamblin examined the sign-up tables and listened as a local priest read a letter from Bishop Blase Cupich of the Catholic Diocese of Rapid City.

The letter and interpretations by priests called the proposed ban "imperfect law" because of its exceptions. And the diocese position was that Catholics could vote against it because of that if their consciences demanded it. But the diocese also called the proposal a "gradualist approach" that was acceptable for Catholics to support.

Hamblin rejected that idea, as well as what she considered to be pressure from other Catholics who said ending most abortions in South Dakota was an important step, even if some remained legal. But the exceptions - particularly those for rape and incest - continued to trouble her. And she also worried about how the health exceptions would be applied.

"I couldn't believe it. I couldn't believe that the bishop was saying it would be OK to kill a few babies to protect hundreds of others," she said. "That is not what I've ever begun to think is the Catholic way of thinking. It does not make sense to me that you can kill these exceptional babies."

Hamblin, 82, spoke of those concerns Thursday morning, during a weekly prayer group meeting in her home that also included a reading of the ballot explanation for Initiated Measure 11. The Catholic women were united in their desire to end abortions, but some will vote in favor of Measure 11.

"I'm with Billie, that one abortion is too many," Joan Craig said. "But this is a step."

It's a step that some West River voters will not be willing to take for reasons other than Hamblin's.

Machine-shop owner Jeff Blake was waiting for his lunch at the Belle Inn cafe Thursday when asked about the proposed abortion ban. Exceptions or not, he's emphatically opposed to the ban.

"It's not my decision to say whether a woman should have a kid or not," Blake said. "That's a life-long decision. It's none of my business."

Nearby, 40-year-old homemaker Vicki Larson sat with her husband and daughter and thought hard about the question before shaking her head.

"I myself, I wouldn't have an abortion. And I don't think it should be used for birth control. But I don't think it's for the government to decide," she said. "I had a friend who had an abortion. And it was very hard on her. But she just couldn't do it" (continue the pregnancy).

In a booth near the window, retiree Renada Wendland said she still hadn't decided how she would vote.

"My mind says abortion is wrong. But when I read the measure, I can also see where it would be good to turn it down," she said. "I'm sitting on the fence."

The West River fence-sitters could be important on Tuesday if the vote is closer, as expected, than it was two years ago.

Brandi Gruis, a spokeswoman for VoteYesForLife.com in Sioux Falls, said proponents of the measure have expanded their West River outreach this campaign. Most of the votes are still over in the more-populated east. But it's essential for the ban supporters to win more support in the cantankerous west.

Gruis said they are trying to counter the keep-government-out argument with one of their own: "It's not government intrusion. It's the government's role to protect innocent human life."

Masten said that will be a tough argument to sell in the independent west.

"I don't see any reason why the numbers would change out here this time," he said. "I think the no's will prevail on the west side of the state. The question is whether proponents will get a big enough margin out of Sioux Falls and the more predominantly Catholic counties over east to make a difference."

Contact Kevin Woster at 394-8413 or kevin.woster@rapidcityjournal.com