Cambridge and Abortion Rights

With the Supreme Court's July decision in Webster v. Reproductive Health Services still fresh in in the minds of pro-choice and anti-abortion activists, the question of abortion rights looms large for many of today's 28 candidates for the Cambridge City Council.

Although candidates for the ninemember board, most of whom are backed by at least one of six civic slates, say that the abortion issue it important to voters, they disagree about its potential effect on today's council race.

Most council hopefuls say they feel that the city's housing concerns, and the controversial Proposition 1-2-3, have overshadowed the issue of reproductive rights, but others say they believe candidates' abortion stands will remain a major factor in voting decisions.

Esther Hanig, a candidate on the Cambridge Civic Association (CCA) and tenant slates, says her constituents have been very anxious to determine her position on abortion.

"I think it's been a real important issue," Hanig says. "A lot of people have asked me whether I was prochoice before they would even take my literature, and clearly that happened right after the Webster case."

"Next to the housing issue my number two asked question is reproductive rights," says Alan D. Bell, who is running on the "Today's Independent" and the Citizens for Proposition 1-2-3 slates.

Bell, a self-described liberal progressive, adds, "I would say 98 percent of the people who ask me are pleased with my position, which is that I believe that a woman should have every right to exercise control over her reproductive rights regardless of term of pregnancy, race or age."

Another tenant slate candidate, Paul J. Johnson, says that Cambridge does not have much control over the issue of reproductive rights.

"The council could limit the [reproductive] programs of the Cambridge City Hospital, but Cambridge has become a pro-choice community and [therefore] that's not likely," Johnson says.

"Besides, Cambridge does not have any abortion clinics and unlike Brookline we haven't had people coming in and making [abortion rights] an issue," he adds.

Johnson says housing concerns have taken precedence over the abortion question. "Those issues have sort of pushed other issues like abortion and recycling, which I think are important to the city, to the back burner," he says.

Other candidates says they see the Webster decision as a signal that the fight for reproductive rights would be thrown back to the states. These candidates say that this means all elected officials in all areas of government should take a stand on the abortion issue.

Robert Heroux, who is running on the Small Property Owners Association and Citizens for Proposition 1-2-3 slates, says "[The Webster decision] really muddled things by throwing the battle to the state level. [Abortion] is such a basic societal right, it's unfortunate."

In August, Councillor and Vice Mayor Alice K. Wolf introduced an order to reaffirm the city government's support of abortion rights, which was defeated because it did not receive the requisite five votes needed to pass.

Wolf, who is currently serving her third term on the council, says that she presented the order as a means of counteracting the effects of the Webster decision.

Wolf says she believes that it is important for local officials to make clear their feelings on the issue so they can communicate constituents' views to state and national politicians.

"Political leaders at every level should take a stand on this issue," Wolf says. "We have a responsiblity as community leaders to encourage legislators to take a stand for pro-abortion rights."