Abortion rights key to Ashcroft fight For attorney general nominee

Abortion rights key to Ashcroft fight
For attorney general nominee, it's the defining issue of career
By Dan Eggen
THE WASHINGTON POST

WA?SHINGTON, Jan. 9 - John D. Ashcroft, a hero to abortion opponents and a possible presidential candidate, had a problem on his hands. The first-term senator from Missouri had just won a 1998 straw poll among conservative Republicans in South Carolina, besting Texas Gov. George W. Bush by 2 to 1 and confirming his status as a leading candidate among the Christian right.

BUT BACK IN WASHINGTON that May, Ashcroft's aides were sending out a different message in a letter to constituents. It said that Ashcroft recognized "the right of a woman to choose to have an abortion in cases of rape and incest," despite his long opposition to such exceptions. Antiabortion activists were livid, and Ashcroft scrambled to shore up his base. "The form letter is wrong," Ashcroft said flatly in a statement to the conservative newsletter Human Events. "If I had the opportunity to pass but a single law, I would fully recognize the constitutional right to life of every unborn child, and ban every abortion except for those medically necessary to save the life of the mother."

Since his first run for public office in 1972 - a year before the Roe v. Wade decision legalized abortion nationwide - Ashcroft has made unrelenting resistance to the practice a central tenet of his political and legal life, casting his opposition as a religious and moral imperative. Now, with abortion rights groups preparing a campaign against his confirmation as attorney general, those views are likely to prove central to his political future as well.

PREEMINENT ABORTION OPPONENT
Ashcroft's statements and actions over the last three decades show that even among abortion opponents in the U.S. Senate and elsewhere on the national stage, his views are among the most fervent. As Missouri's governor, Ashcroft proposed legislation that would have barred women from having more than one abortion in a lifetime, except to protect a mother's health. The measure, which was not enacted, would have required doctors to inquire whether a woman had undergone a previous abortion under threat of loss of their medical licenses. Ashcroft also backed proposals as governor to outlaw abortions sought for financial reasons, to avoid marital difficulty or to avoid interrupting a career. He has repeatedly called for reversal of Roe, describing the decision as "a miserable failure" that "challenged God's ability to mark when life begins and ends."

In 1998, Ashcroft and two other senators sponsored a proposed amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would ban nearly all abortions, including cases of rape, incest and serious injury to the mother. That same year, Ashcroft signed a letter with seven other senators objecting to coverage of birth control by federal health care plans because contraceptives such as birth control pills and intrauterine devices are "de facto abortifacients" - meaning they end viable pregnancies, rather than prevent them. Abortion rights advocates argue that Ashcroft cannot be trusted to uphold court rulings and federal laws that enshrine a woman's right to end a pregnancy. They fear that Ashcroft will not enforce laws protecting abortion clinic patients from harassment, and will use abortion as a litmus test in crafting legal opinions and recommending judges for the federal bench.

"He has a demonstrable and unbroken record of opposition to the right to choose, of unremitting hostility to a fundamental constitutional right," said Elizabeth Cavendish, legal director for the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League. "The guy has been thinking about how to take away a woman's right to choose for a quarter century. It's hard to imagine him acting contrary to that record." Ashcroft's supporters dismiss such charges, pointing out that he has spoken publicly against violent protests at abortion clinics. He voted in favor of a measure last year that bars violent clinic protesters from filing for bankruptcy as a protection from lawsuits, GOP officials said.

Many antiabortion activists, however, have high hopes that Ashcroft would use the attorney general's post to chip away at Roe.
"We do not have to be concerned about what he will do with the abortion question," said Pam Manning, president of the Missouri Right to Life Committee, who has worked with Ashcroft for two decades. "It will automatically be handled if you uphold the Constitution and do not expand the Constitution, and John Ashcroft will do that. We are very hopeful."

'FIRST AND FOREMOST: ENFORCE THE LAWS'

Ashcroft's aides referred all questions to Bush transition officials. "Senator Ashcroft understands that his responsibility is to first and foremost enforce the laws, and he intends to do that," said Mindy Tucker, spokeswoman for President-elect Bush. Tucker also said Bush does not intend to push for dramatic changes relating to abortion and will expect Ashcroft to follow his lead. Bush supports a ban on abortion with exceptions in cases of incest, rape or to save the life of the mother, Tucker said, but "does not think America is ready to overturn Roe v. Wade." However, as attorney general, Ashcroft could intervene, for example, in a future court case on the procedure that critics call a "partial birth" abortion, which he has repeatedly attempted to ban.

In the 1980s, the office of Attorney General Edwin N. Meese III argued in favor of new abortion restrictions in Webster v. Reproductive Health Services. A Supreme Court ruling in that 1989 case let stand bans on abortions in public medical facilities and is considered one of the antiabortion movement's biggest legal victories. Legal experts said the extent to which Ashcroft can influence abortion policy as attorney general depends largely on how actively he and Bush want to take on the issue. The attorney general is frequently asked for legal opinions by federal judges and can intervene in other federal cases unbidden. Charles Fried, a Harvard University law professor who argued for the plaintiffs in Webster as solicitor general, said the influence of attorneys general on policy, legal rulings and appointments has varied dramatically. "I don't think, for instance, Janet Reno was very influential on judicial appointments, while Ed Meese was extremely influential," Fried said. "It's a question of the personal relationships and of the disposition of the person holding the office."

UNBROKEN LIBERAL OPPOSITION
Abortion rights groups have joined with organizations such as the NAACP, the Sierra Club, Human Rights Campaign and Handgun Control in an attempt to derail Ashcroft's nomination. Ashcroft's public opposition to abortion stretches back to his first political campaign in 1972, when he narrowly lost a Republican primary for a congressional seat in southwest Missouri.
A deeply religious man whose father and grandfather were Assemblies of God ministers, Ashcroft argued before the U.S. Supreme Court for new abortion restrictions as Missouri's attorney general in 1982. Later, as governor, he helped craft the Missouri law that led to the Webster ruling.

In 1995, as a freshman senator, he quickly emerged as a leader in efforts to pass laws requiring parental consent for minors seeking abortions, a prohibition on partial-birth abortions and a ban on using federal funds for abortions at managed care facilities. NARAL ranks Ashcroft as one of the lowest scoring senators in its annual voting scorecard, saying that 43 of 44 votes he cast during his six-year term were "anti-choice votes." He earned perfect ratings in most years from the National Right to Life Committee and the Christian Coalition, and ranked third among all congressional candidates in the 2000 election cycle as a recipient of money from antiabortion groups. He received a "Courage and Integrity Award" in 1999 from the American Life League, a Stafford, Va.-based group that opposes all forms of abortion and contraception. "I can't recall ever having a serious disagreement with him," said Judie Brown, the group's president.

Ashcroft's views on abortion have caused him to oppose some presidential appointments as well. The Missouri senator led campaigns against two abortion rights supporters who were candidates for surgeon general, Henry Foster and David Satcher. Foster was defeated, but Satcher was confirmed over Ashcroft's objections.

THE CASE OF RONNIE WHITE
In addition, abortion played a role in Ashcroft's decision to quash a federal judgeship last year for Missouri Supreme Court Justice Ronnie White, who may be called to testify at Ashcroft's confirmation hearing. Although the Senate debate was dominated by criminal justice issues, Ashcroft said in a 1998 statement that he also opposed White because of "the nominee's manipulation of legislative procedures" in 1992, when White helped kill an antiabortion bill as a Missouri state legislator.

Ashcroft's opposition to judicial activism undergirds many of his stands on abortion over the years and forms the bedrock of his legal argument against Roe. He has also been unafraid to use sharp language and broad rhetoric. In a 1997 speech, for example, Ashcroft accused "renegade judges" and a "robed, contemptuous intellectual elite" of usurping congressional and state powers on abortion and other issues. "To the so-called leaders who say abortion is too politically divisive, let me be clear," Ashcroft said in another speech that year at a Christian Coalition event. "Confronting our cultural crises is the true test of our courage and true measure of our leadership. It is time for us to reacquaint our party with the politics of principle. We must not seek the deal; we must seek the ideal."

In the 1998 speech that preceded his South Carolina straw poll victory, Ashcroft capped a stirring condemnation of abortion by holding up two pictures of his grandchild, including one showing a sonogram image before birth, according to media accounts. "If the Supreme Court had seen these pictures, would they say it was okay to destroy this grandson of mine?" Ashcroft asked, according to an account in Human Events. "I say no. I say Americans must protect unborn children in the law."

Yet Ashcroft has also periodically downplayed his stance on abortion, particularly in times of political peril. In his bitter Senate race last year against the late Missouri Gov. Mel Carnahan, Ashcroft launched early attacks on Carnahan's veto of a partial-birth abortion bill but did not focus on the issue later in the campaign. Ashcroft was narrowly defeated by Carnahan, who died in a plane crash weeks before the election. Carnahan's widow, Jean Carnahan, was named to serve in his place. Spokesman Tom Wyche said Carnahan has not decided whether to support the nomination of a man who feuded with her husband for years. But Carnahan has serious concerns about Ashcroft's stand on abortion, Wyche said. "It's safe to say that the issue is one on which they have a disagreement," he said. "What is important in terms of this confirmation is whether or not he is going to enforce the laws of the land, even if they may happen to be in conflict with his personal beliefs."

Longtime conservative Phyllis Schlafly, a Missourian and Ashcroft admirer, called such questions "insulting," saying liberal opposition to Ashcroft is based on ideology, not fairness. "They don't want any pro-lifers in any post whatsoever," she said. "They're against Ashcroft because he's a pro-lifer and he's a religious man. It's as simple as that."

© 2001 The Washington Post Company

*****************************************************************************************
As attorney general, Ashcroft's trial would be abortion issue
By Eric Lichtblau/Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
January 10, 2001 Web posted at: 11:30 a.m. EST (1630 GMT)

WASHINGTON (Los Angeles Times) -- In nearly three decades in politics, John Ashcroft has struggled to balance his public life against his private faith--the need, as he once wrote, "to invite God's presence into whatever I'm doing, including politics."
If Ashcroft is confirmed as attorney general, nowhere will that balancing act be more critical than in the debate over
abortion, and that is sparking widespread worry and warnings from women's groups in the nation.

The son of a Pentecostal minister and a champion of the religious right, Ashcroft believes that abortion is wrong in
nearly all cases. Indeed, his dozens of votes and proclamations seeking to severely restrict abortion--first as attorney general and governor of Missouri, then as a U.S. senator--have been a hallmark of his career, his record shows. Ashcroft, 58, makes no excuses for his passionate views on abortion, decrying the politics of moderation. "I don't apologize for being unyielding when I speak on behalf of a balanced budget or in opposition to big government or in favor of protecting the lives of unborn children," he wrote in his 1999 autobiography.

Despite his religious beliefs, Ashcroft and his supporters say that his mission as attorney general will be to enforce the law--whether that means prosecuting someone who attacks an abortion clinic or assessing an appeal of a reproductive-rights case. Ashcroft has already convinced some skeptics. After meeting with Ashcroft earlier this month, Sen. Olympia
J. Snowe (R-Maine) said that, although she disagrees with him on abortion rights, "I am confident that he will be a faithful steward of our nation's laws as attorney general. He will not be creating laws. He will be charged with enforcing the laws of
the land."

The key question surrounding Ashcroft's nomination, observers said, is how his strong beliefs and political ties on abortion might shape his performance as attorney general. Critics warned that he could leave his imprint in three crucial ways: By urging the White House to appoint U.S. Supreme Court justices and federal judges who might oppose Roe vs. Wade and other case law, by advising Congress on the legality of anti-abortion legislation and by backing away from enforcement of a 1994 law making it a federal crime to obstruct access to abortion clinics. As a broad-based coalition of liberal causes launched an initiative Tuesday to "stop Ashcroft," protecting abortion rights was a priority.

"The fundamental right of every American woman is at risk," warned Kate Michelman, president of the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League. "Sen. Ashcroft has dedicated his entire public career to undoing that right." His record is long and unrelenting. Using legislative, judicial and political means, Ashcroft has pushed repeatedly to enforce far tougher restrictions on what types of procedures abortion clinics can provide, at what point in a woman's pregnancy, under what circumstances and with what funding. Although the results of his efforts have been mixed, Ashcroft has vowed not to give up the fight. "If I had the opportunity to pass but a single law," he told a conservative newsletter in 1998, "I would fully recognize the constitutional right to life of every unborn child and ban every abortion except for those medically necessary to save the life of the mother."

As Missouri attorney general, Ashcroft defended all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court a 1979 Missouri law that restricted where, how and when abortions could be performed. In a split decision, the high court upheld some of the restrictions and invalidated others. As governor, Ashcroft signed a law declaring that life begins at conception and imposing numerous restrictions on facilities and personnel used for abortions. The Supreme Court, in its 1989 Webster vs. Reproductive Health Services decision, said that Missouri and other states could impose such regulations but stopped short of overturning the 1973 Roe vs. Wade decision that ensured the abortion right. Ashcroft then named a panel of anti-abortion activists to try to revamp state law. And as a U.S. senator, he voted to end so-called partial-birth abortions in a measure ultimately vetoed by President
Clinton, and he opposed a measure declaring access to abortion as an important constitutional right.

He also tried to block David Satcher's appointment as U.S. surgeon general because of Satcher's views on abortion. Some politicians in Missouri suspect that abortion rights drove Ashcroft's controversial derailment of state Supreme Court Justice Ronnie White's nomination to be the first black judge on the federal bench in Missouri. As a state legislator, White had helped kill an anti-abortion bill in 1992 while Ashcroft was governor. The abortion issue often appears to influence Ashcroft's thinking. Asked in 1998 about a proposal for an international criminal court, he branded it an "outrage"--in part because he said such a court could make banning abortions a crime. "For heaven's sake, that could make withholding of an abortion a crime against humanity, when many Americans believe that providing an abortion is a crime against humanity," he said.

His critics depict Ashcroft as an extremist. The liberal People for the American Way group has attacked Ashcroft for supporting a ban on abortions even in cases of rape or incest. The group said that his call to pass a constitutional "human rights amendment"--defining human life as beginning at the point of "fertilization"--could outlaw common forms of contraception, such as the pill and IUDs. He also has opposed requiring federal health insurance plans to cover prescription contraceptives. Ashcroft's Senate votes generally earned him 100% ratings from groups such as the National Right to Life Committee and the Christian Coalition. Liberal and civil rights groups, in contrast, have consistently put him at the very bottom of their approval ratings.

But it is Ashcroft's alleged inaction in the face of recent waves of violence against abortion clinics and providers that most irks some abortion rights activists. M'Evie Mead, project director of a Missouri abortion rights group called Show Me Choice, went to Ashcroft's office in 1999 to add her concerns to those of other abortion rights activists in the state who for several years had been protesting the appointment of an anti-abortion leader to the state Republican committee in 1996. The committee member, Tim Dreste, was one of a dozen anti-abortion activists ordered by an Oregon court in 1998 to pay $107 million in damages for making "illegal threats" against abortion providers and distributing "wanted" posters containing their names and personal data. Mead spoke with a member of Ashcroft's staff, who told her that the senator would get back to her. But Ashcroft never responded, Mead said. Under pressure from state Republicans, Dreste was forced off the committee months later. But there was no indication that Ashcroft played any role. "Ashcroft's silence in that case was very telling," she said. "Whether he agrees or not with the extremists in thinking that killing abortion providers is a good thing, he appears to extend a hand to people who do think that way."

Ashcroft is not granting interviews before his confirmation hearing, which could start as early as next Tuesday. And Bush transition officials declined repeated requests to discuss his record on abortion. David O'Steen, executive director of the National Right to Life Committee, said he believes the attacks on Ashcroft from abortion rights groups are political hatchet jobs. "I think their position is that no pro-life person should hold office in the United States," he said. Ashcroft's critics countered that his ties to groups such as O'Steen's would give the anti-abortion community and the religious right undue clout in his Justice Department.

In his unsuccessful bid for reelection last year, Ashcroft collected more money from the clergy and religious groups--$23,577--than any other congressional candidate, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. He also received about $25,000 in direct contributions and expenditures from anti-abortion groups and their affiliates. An aide to a leading Senate Democrat said that for the last eight years the Justice Department has "gone the extra mile" in responding to efforts to intimidate abortion providers and asked whether "a similar degree of concern would be shown by Ashcroft."
But Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, said it would be possible "for Ashcroft to serve as attorney general and to protect the right to choose despite his own personal views in opposition."

Others are not so sure. "Abortion as a political-slash-legal issue will be back" at the Justice Department under Ashcroft, said Stuart M. Gerson, a top Justice Department official in the administration of George W. Bush's father. Battlefields will likely be drawn around efforts to restrict access to RU-486 and to review federal funding for late-term abortions, he said.
Patricia Ireland, president of the National Organization for Women, said that women's rights activists are already gearing up for the fight, should he be confirmed. "This is one of John Ashcroft's core, visceral issues," she said, "and I'd be hard-pressed to think that he's not going to try to find a way to gut abortion rights."

(Red emphases mine--Ramsey)