ARTICLES

Right to Kill State

Catholic Senator Defends Abortion Clinics

By Maria Kennedy

In a letter to the editor in the March 13 Sacramento Bee, California state senator Deborah Ortiz (D-Sacramento) gave her thoughts on the United States Supreme Court decision in the Scheidler vs. N.O.W. (National Organization for Women) case. In its decision, the court declared that pro-life demonstrators could not be tried as racketeers under the federal government's RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations) statute. In her letter, Ortiz warned pro-lifers that they should not think that because the Supreme Court ruled in favor of pro-lifers, it would give "a green light for those who would attack abortion clients or providers in California." Ortiz reminded the readership that a bill she sponsored, which was signed into law last year, "enacted laws that protect patients and doctors against violence at health facilities."

During an interview with this writer, Gina Montoya of Senator Ortiz's office said that the letter was prompted by the senator's intention to "make it clear that there are still laws that protect clinics." When asked if the senator expected increased protests at abortion clinics, Montoya replied, given the Scheidler decision, "our hope is that it should not affect them too much." Montoya said when the Scheidler case was first filed, "there was no federal FACE law" in place. FACE, the Federal Access to Clinic Entrances law, prohibits the physical obstruction of an abortion clinic. Montoya said that the senator wanted to make sure that California clinics would be protected against violence -- hence her bill to protect abortion clinics and providers, which passed last year. Montoya added that Ortiz wrote the letter because they had heard that, after the Scheidler decision, pro-life groups would be increasing their protests. "Some of the extremists said there were going to be big blockades [at abortion clinics]," said Montoya.

Ortiz's legislation came on the heels of a report authored by Greg de Giere of the senate office of research. De Giere's report, "Crimes against Reproductive Rights in California," was first published in May of 2001 and subsequently revised in January 2002. In his report, de Giere cites incidents of violence against abortion clinics. When I spoke to de Giere, he said that he had conducted a survey of abortion clinics to assess the types of violence they experience. When asked for a copy of the survey, de Giere replied, "when we took the survey, we promised the clinics that nobody but me would see them, so I shredded them before we published my report. Sorry!"

In an interview with Troy Newman of Operation Rescue West (whom de Giere cites as an extremist who needs to be monitored), I asked about the Ortiz bill and the fact that it was authored by a politician who publicly declares herself Catholic. "How dare she [Deborah Ortiz] condemn the peaceful, non violent actions of fellow Catholics for actions commended by heroes of the Faith like Mother Teresa and Pope John Paul II," said Newman

But in response to Newman, de Giere said, "the pope has never called for blockades of clinics;" and he added, "the senator disagrees with her Church on this" (abortion rights).

De Giere said that while the Ortiz bill was pending before the legislature in 2001, the California Conference of Catholic Bishop worked with the senator's office to offer several amendments to the bill which would lessen its impact on pro-lifers who wanted to protest peacefully in front of abortion clinics. "They suggested an amendment which she put into the bill," said de Giere. That amendment was to ensure that law-abiding pro-lifers acting from a religious conviction would not be targeted by over-zealous police agencies. The amendment reads: the law "shall not stigmatize anyone solely because of his or her political or religious beliefs, because of his or her advocacy of any lawful actions, or because of his or her exercise of the rights of free speech or freedom of religion, and that nothing in this act, and no actions by anyone pursuant to this act, otherwise harm anyone because of his or her beliefs."

Al Hernandez of the California Catholic Conference told me that the issue of Catholic politicians, especially Latinos, being at odds with the Church's teaching on abortion was problematic. "It happens over and over again," said Hernandez, adding that often bishops are hesitant to reprimand Catholic politicians publicly because they fear a backlash. "If a bishop takes a public posture such as excommunication, it often works in favor of the politician." Hernandez agreed that the issue was more pronounced among Catholic politicians. "Most Latino politicians feel this is a very personal issue, and they don't want to impose their point of view."

Hernandez noted that perhaps the reason Latinos, who are by and large pro-life, do not speak out on the issue is because of finances. "Within the Latino community, the majority are struggling financially," he said. Hernandez said that Planned Parenthood and the abortion industry target Latinos because they have a high fertility rate; "I have brought out this issue, but it's hard work," he said. "There is a discrepancy, there is a very ugly side to the abortion industry, there is a wing of the pro-abortion industry who have a racist, discriminatory view [of Latinos]."

When asked how the Church should address the issue of Catholic politicians who openly support abortion rights, Hernandez replied, "we need to do a better job of educating them on the Church's teaching."

One of the provisions of the Ortiz bill is specialized training for law enforcement officers in "anti-reproductive crimes" The agency charged with providing this training statewide is the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training. According to a declaration filed by Jody Buna of the commission, it is her "responsibility to supervise the development and production of a telecourse, which will be produced by KPBS Television of San Diego." The declaration outlines how the telecourse includes input from "subject matter experts" in the field of anti-reproductive rights crimes. The list of experts included "representatives from Choice Medical Group; a representative from the Anti-Defamation League; the Feminist Majority Foundation, a representative from the National Abortion Federation; representatives from Planned Parenthood; a lobbyist/ legislative advocate involved in the enactment of SB 780 [the Ortiz bill] and a representative from the senate office of research."

According to the declaration, Dana Cody, an attorney with the Life Legal Defense Foundation, contacted Buna requesting to "join the panel of subject matter experts." Because Cody's "stated organization, which she identified to be the Life Legal Defense Foundation does not appear to be experienced in eliminating anti-reproductive crimes," she was only reluctantly invited. After Life Legal Defense Foundation filed suit against the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training and the state of California, Buna left a telephone message on Cody's answering machine telling her that she was not going to be allowed to attend a February 26 meeting with the subject matter experts.

In a March 26 interview, Cody told me that another attorney with Life Legal Defense, Katie Short, "did get to go," although Cody said that "it was totally accidental." Almost as an afterthought, the producers of the video decided to include pro-life input in the telecourse, so they contacted California ProLife Council. According to Cody, California ProLife Council told the producers that Life Legal Defense Foundation would be a better source -- on account of their legal representation of pro-lifers who are often harassed by clinic workers and law enforcement.

Katie Short noted that, although the pro-abortion advocates received a generous expense account, including hotels and meals, she was contacted on short notice and told, "be in San Diego on Monday morning." Short said that only her mileage was reimbursed. "We could track down at least three multi-day meetings with the pro-aborts. There was no meeting with anyone from [the commission], there was no consultation process between [the commission] and pro-lifers. There was just a 20-minute, on-camera interview." Short pointed out to me that it is important for pro-lifers to be consulted when making telecourses involving "anti-reproductive rights crimes" "If they [the police] just hear one side, when they get called out to a clinic they might be molded [in their opinion]. Showing a big gory sign isn't an anti-reproductive rights crime."

Cody expressed surprise at how harshly Senator Ortiz treated pro-lifers, given the fact that Ortiz claims to be Catholic. Cody pointed out that, during one exchange with Ortiz over her bill, Chris Cipperly, Respect Life Coordinator for the diocese of Sacramento, was questioned by the senator, "why, do you want to go out and bomb a clinic?" Cipperly did not return a call for comment.

Monsignor Edward Kavanaugh of Sacramento told me that he was disappointed with Ortiz. "Life is sacred from the moment of conception; that's our belief," said Kavanaugh. "She needs to get her act together and get with the Lord. I know her well, she attended St. Patrick's here. I have spoken with her several times and told her to get her act together and do the right thing. She agrees with me in every thing except 'a woman's right to choose.'"

Monsignor Kavanagh noted that his parish, where Ortiz grew up, is heavily populated with Latinos. "We have over five hundred baptisms per year. She should be helping them," he concluded.

TOP