Oregonians are nearly as protective of abortion rights as they are of endangered salmon. Voters thumped the two anti-abortion initiatives put before them in 1990, and more recent legislative attempts to restrict abortion rights have also been rejected. Yet abortion rights will be threatened this year. Lon Mabon and the Oregon Citizens Alliance are back and have filed an initiative they hope to get on the ballot in November. Two years ago, Mabon and the OCA looked like they were circling the drain: They couldn't collect enough signatures to get an anti-abortion initiative on the ballot; former members ridiculed Mabon as a megalomaniac; and the OCA leader was humiliated when he won less than 10 percent of the votes in the 1996 GOP Senate primary. This year, Mabon and the OCA are out aggressively collecting signatures--with the help of the Oregon Christian Coalition--for an initiative that would ban so-called "late term" abortions, or those occurring after the 12th week of pregnancy. On its face, the initiative has a good chance of succeeding. While Oregonians favor legal abortion (about 60 percent consistently identify themselves as "pro-choice" in polls), many feel that abortions should be done early or not at all. National polls show that voters favor a ban on late-term abortions by better than a 2-to-1 ratio. "It could be very competitive," Portland pollster Bob Moore says of the OCA initiative. "It depends on the quality of the campaign by both sides, turnout, and the specific language of the particular measure." Others scoff at the OCA's chances of collecting the 97,681 valid signatures needed to qualify for the ballot, never mind the group's ability to raise enough money to run a strong TV campaign. (Mabon refuses to talk to WW, but he claims to have collected more than 60,000 signatures already.) "The OCA is so nowhere," says one GOP official. "The problem is they've been deserted by so many true believers. No one in this party is talking about them." Democrats, however, are likely to make the OCA a campaign issue before the group's initiative ever qualifies for the ballot. Some Democratic strategists are almost giddy at the prospect of using the initiative to corner pro-life candidates, forcing them to either join the unpopular OCA and limit abortion rights, or oppose the OCA and protect rights. "Lon Mabon becomes an albatross to hang around the neck of some candidates," Democrat pollster and consultant Lisa Grove Donovan says with a smile. "Frankly, the OCA initiative becomes fodder for their opponents." Aside from whatever success the OCA will have, abortion is likely to play a big role in several political races in 1998, including the 1st Congressional District--which stretches from Southwest Portland to the coast along the Columbia River--where Democrat incumbent Rep. Elizabeth Furse is retiring. The Republican primary pits pro-choice Metro Councilor Jon Kvistad against pro-life Molly Bordonaro, a 29-year-old Portlander who finished a strong second in the GOP primary two years ago. Bordonaro's pro-life position is expected to help her in the primary, because conservative activists tend to dominate GOP primary elections--they helped Christian conservative Bill Witt win the last two GOP primaries in this district. "It could very easily be the defining issue in the 1st District," says political analyst Jim Moore. "It could be that Bordonaro and Kvistad agree on a whole bunch of things and abortion becomes the defining issue." If Bordonaro prevails, however, the abortion issue could work against her in the general election. While there are virtually the same number of registered Republicans and Democrats in the district, a woman's right to choose abortion is a key issue with an important bloc of voters--pro-choice women registered as Republicans and independents. "We know from prior experience that the issue has been death for Republicans. It was particularly damaging to Bill Witt [who lost twice to the loudly pro-choice Furse], and Tony Meeker before him," says political scientist Bill Lunch. "It explains, in part, why a district that looks Republican on paper has remained in Democratic control." Bordonaro's best chance in the general election would be to follow the blueprint created by Gordon Smith in late 1996, when he showed how an anti-abortion candidate could win the votes of pro-choice soccer moms. At the time, polls showed Smith in desperate need of female votes in the suburbs. So he donned a sweater, looked solemnly into a TV camera and told viewers that although he was pro-life, he was not a single-issue zealot. The strategy worked. Smith won more suburban female votes, and the 30-second sweater ad was credited with making the difference in the election. Smith's ploy was so successful, in fact, that in Virginia last year, Jim Gilmore, a pro-life Republican, used a carbon copy of the sweater ad to come from behind and win the governor's race. "The sweater ad may be the Republican political consultant's cutting-edge weapon," warns abortion-rights activist Lisa Horowitz. Bordonaro has hired Smith's former strategist, Dan Lavey, to help her, begging the question of when Bordonaro will air her own version of the sweater ad. Abortion might also play a role in the district's Democratic primary between Washington County Commission Chairwoman Linda Peters and lawyer David Wu. Although both Peters and Wu are pro-choice, Peters is trying to use her gender and connections to stand out as the more solidly pro-choice candidate. "Linda is interested in being a strong leader on this issue, and she's put together a strong pro-choice team. I see Linda being a frontrunner on the choice issue," says Horowitz, who is executive director of the Oregon chapter of the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League. The abortion issue might also figure in several state legislative contests. In a Washington County state senate race, Christian conservative Charles Starr is challenging pro-choice incumbent Jeannette Hamby in the GOP primary. Hamby's moderate politics are more in sync with the district's voters, but Starr stands a chance at an upset because, as Lunch says, conservatives are "disproportionately represented in Republican primaries." Horowitz is also worried about losing house seats in the Washington County suburbs: pro-choice Republican state Rep. Tom Brian is retiring, and the two announced Republican candidates in this solidly GOP district, lawyer Max Williams and police officer Jason Broeckel, are pro-life. In Multnomah County, NARAL even has to worry about Democratic candidates: In the Democratic primary for an open seat in Portland's 9th Senate District, pro-choice state Rep. Frank Shields squares off against pro-life state Rep. Lonnie Roberts, who appears to be on the wrong side of the issue. "In a Democratic primary to be anti-abortion is death," says Lunch. The legislative battles--on both the state and the federal level--are important to pro-choice and pro-life movements because U.S. Supreme Court rulings since Roe vs. Wade allow states and Congress to set limits or restrictions as long as they do not create an "undue burden" for women. The Oregon Legislature hasn't yet imposed any restrictions (although a 1995 parental notification bill did pass the Senate before it was narrowly defeated in the House when nine pro-choice Republicans voted to kill it). But 26 states now enforce parental notification laws for minors seeking an abortion, and 32 states prohibit the use of public funds for abortions. Chipping away at abortion rights is part of a new strategy of "incrementalism" advocated by former Christian Coalition leader Ralph Reed. The idea that abortions should be legal but increasingly rare was embraced last year by Congress. The U.S. House and Senate passed eight laws restricting abortion rights in 1997, including a ban on "partial birth" abortions (vetoed by President Clinton), a ban on abortions at overseas military hospitals, a ban preventing government employees from choosing health insurance that covers abortions, and a ban on abortions in federal prisons. It's no wonder abortion-rights activists consider the 105th Congress the most hostile since the Roe vs. Wade ruling in 1973. Anti-choice forces hold a majority in both the Senate and House.
|
