This article first appeared in the St. Louis Beacon, Aug. 29, 2012 - By his words, Republican U.S. Senate nominee Todd Akin has done more than touch off a national controversy about rape. He has also resurrected the issue that many national and statewide candidates – of both parties – would prefer not to talk about: abortion.
Missouri has for decades been at the center of the national battle over reproductive rights and abortion, one reason a national anti-abortion group chose the state this week to launch a TV ad campaign against President Barack Obama’s support for abortion rights.
Meanwhile, local activists with Planned Parenthood’s political arm showed up at Akin’s Ballwin office on Wednesday to deliver 40,000 petitions signed by women and men upset by his recent remarks that women who are victims of “legitimate rape” rarely get pregnant.
Akin has apologized, but the battle continues over whether abortion should remain legal – and if there should be any exceptions, such as for rape or incest.
(Start of update) M'Evie Mead, who led the protest contingent with Planned Parenthood Advocates, said the group and its allies were concerned about the views espoused by Akin and his allies. Mead emphasized that the group wasn't getting involved in the Republican debate over whether Akin to continue his candidacy. (End of update)
The aim of the petitions, said Planned Parenthood Advocates in a statement, is to highlight the fact that similar anti-abortion views are held by GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney and running mate Paul Ryan and to make clear that “millions of women and men will be working day and night this election season to keep them out of power.”
(Ryan, like Akin, has opposed any exceptions to abortion. Romney has said he supports exceptions for rape, incest and to save the life of the mother.)
The Susan B. Anthony List, which opposes abortion, announced Tuesday that it was spending $150,000 to run TV ads in Columbia, Kansas City and St. Louis to attack what it said was “the president’s best-kept secret: his extreme record on abortion.”
The ad features a woman, Melissa Ohden, who says she is an abortion survivor.
Susan B. Anthony List president Marjorie Dannenfelser said in a statement, “Melissa Ohden’s powerful story draws a stark contrast to (Obama’s) unbending support of abortion and the abortion industry and reveals the human face to this debate.”
A Susan B. Anthony spokesman said that Missouri was chosen as the first state to air the spot because, as the release observed, “Missouri has recently been at the center of the conversation on abortion.”
But one might not know it by the statewide candidates of both parties on this fall’s ballot, most of whom – with the possible exception of Akin -- generally appear to be avoiding the subject.
Akin not alone in opposing rape exception
The state GOP platform mirrors the Republican Party’s national platform in its opposition to abortion – and its call for a constitutional amendment declaring that life begins at conception.
Still, most of Missouri’s Republican statewide candidates don’t say much about it, beyond a brief use of the phrase “pro life’’ in their public speeches.
In fact, of the six GOP statewide candidates, only two – Akin and Dave Spence, the Republican nominee for governor -- mention the issue on their campaign websites.
Both Akin and Spence say on their sites that they believe that life begins at conception -- although the Kansas City Star has reported that Spence is trying to distance himself from Akin.
Akin has said that he supports a few exceptions, only for ectopic pregnancies (where the embryo is growing in a fallopian tube) or to save the mother’s life. And he also opposes the “morning-after pill,” which can prevent conception if taken within a few days after unprotected sex.
Spence supports exceptions only for “the life and health of the mother,’’ a spokesman said.
But the other four Republican statewide candidates – Lt. Gov. Peter Kinder, Shane Schoeller for secretary of state, Cole McNary for state treasurer and Ed Martin for attorney general -- make no mention of abortion on their websites, although all four have stated at rallies that they are “pro-life.”
Martin previously had highlighted his opposition to abortion when he ran for Congress in 2010. And in a 2006 article in the New York Times, Martin is quoted as a lawyer for the public-interest law firm Americans United for Life, which has sought to curb abortion and, in Illinois, represented some pharmacists who objected to filling prescriptions for emergency contraction.
"We see contraception and abortion as part of a mind-set that's worrisome in terms of respecting life,” Martin was quoted as saying in the article.
Martin and his campaign declined repeated calls seeking more details about his current stance.
The silent treatment
Pam Fichter, president of Missouri Right to Life, also takes note of the lack of campaign discussion of abortion – by either party. “They don’t like talking about abortion,” she said.
Right to Life opposes all abortions, without exceptions, and requires all candidates seeking an endorsement to fill out private questionnaires that are not made public.
The state Right to Life chapter has endorsed only three of Missouri’s Republican statewide candidates: Akin, Spence and Martin.
The other statewide candidate receiving Right to Life support is Cynthia Davis, a former Republican legislator who now is the Constitution Party’s candidate for lieutenant governor.
Fichter said that several Republican statewide candidates – notably Schoeller and McNary -- were denied endorsements because they supported the Missouri Science Innovation and Reinvestment Act, or MOSIRA, which offered tax breaks to encourage technology firms to expand operations in the state.
Missouri Right to Life contends the act – passed by the legislature and signed into law by Gov. Jay Nixon in late 2011 – would encourage the kind of embryonic stem-cell research that abortion opponents oppose.
“MOSIRA was an endorsement-buster for us,” said Fichter. Right to Life is among the anti-abortion groups that have been battling the act in court -- so far, successfully -- on procedural grounds.
Planned Parenthood Advocates, the political arm for Planned Parenthood of the St. Louis Region, doesn’t endorse candidates. Rather, it focuses on issues.
A similar stance on state and local candidates is taken by NARAL Pro-Choice Missouri.
Both abortion-rights groups say they’re concerned about efforts to overturn Roe vs. Wade, to bar preventive services such as offered by Planned Parenthood, and the conservative push for “personhood” measures.
Planned Parenthood Advocates says the latter “would give full rights to fertilized eggs and could ban some forms of birth control and fertility treatments.”
Democrats mostly mum
The national Democratic Party plans to highlight at its convention next week that the party generally supports abortion rights and that it shares the belief that conservatives are using the issue to curb women’s rights.
However, the Missouri Democratic Party makes no reference to any specific issue stances, including abortion, on its website. A spokeswoman said that delegates will vote next week on the national party's platform, which makes reference to reproductive rights.
None of Missouri’s statewide Democratic candidates highlight the issue of reproductive rights on their websites, either, although all have indicated at some point during their political careers that they support the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1973 decision – known as Roe vs. Wade -- that legalized abortions until the fetus is able to live outside the womb.
The down-ballot statewide Democratic candidates include: Susan Montee for lieutenant governor, Attorney General Chris Koster, state Treasurer Clint Zweifel and Jason Kander for secretary of state.
But when it comes to abortion, most of the attention has been on U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., and on Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon, since both hold positions where they play a role in implementing federal or state policy on the issue.
Said McCaskill communications director Caitlin Legacki: “Claire believes we should work toward preventing unwanted pregnancies, not criminalizing women and their doctors. Abortion should be rare, safe and legal. These difficult decisions should be made by women in consultation with their doctor, their families, and guided by their faith. Further, the morning-after pill should always be available to rape victims.”
Nixon, who previously served 16 years as Missouri’s attorney general, has stated over the years that he does consider himself “pro-choice.”
And since the controversy over Akin’s comments broke, the governor has stated bluntly that he disagrees with any GOP efforts to restrict abortions in the case of rape. He told reporters, “Rape is a devastating crime, and a woman who is the victim of this horrific and violent act should be able to make her own health-care decisions.”
However, as governor, Nixon has allowed some additional abortion restrictions to go into effect – but without his signature. (The governor could have signed the bills into law or vetoed them.)
Nixon had said at the time that he did so because of the overwhelming votes in the General Assembly in favor of the measures.
In 2010, Nixon allowed the enactment of a law that requires abortion clinics to offer women patients the option of viewing an ultrasound or listening to the heartbeat of the fetus. Clinics also are to provide a state-produced document that states: "The life of each human being begins at conception. Abortion will terminate the life of a separate, unique, living human being."
In 2011, Nixon allowed another law to get into effect that is aimed at preventing abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy unless it is determined that the fetus is not viable or the mother faces death or “irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function." Two physicians are to verify the circumstances.
But this summer, Nixon did veto a bill to allow employers to exclude insurance coverage for abortion, contraception or sterilization.
The bill had been sought by some religious groups, although critics note that the measure would allow employers to deny such coverage for any reason.
In his veto letter, Nixon emphasized that Missouri law already “provided strong religious protections” that allow employers to exclude coverage for abortion or contraceptives on religious grounds. He cited the existing provisions.
Nixon contended that the vetoed bill, SB 749, also would allow insurance companies to deny such coverage even if the employer or employee had no religious objections.
Some in the Nixon administration have cited concerns about the bill’s expansion to exclude coverage for sterilization even if the procedure was needed for medical reasons.
The General Assembly’s veto session is slated to begin Sept. 12. Republican leaders have made clear for months that they hope to override Nixon’s veto of SB 749.
As yet, it’s uncertain if the flap over Akin’s comments will have an impact on that plan.
