Republican gubernatorial candidate Brian Dubie would not be pinned down on the abortion rights question in yesterday’s on-air VPR debate.
When Democrat Peter Shumlin asked him whether he’d sign or veto legislation restricting a woman’s right to choose, Dubie, who is staunchly pro-life, ducked the question by saying his campaign is all about jobs.
“I’m not going to answer every hypothetical,” Dubie said. “It’s a federal issue. The state of Vermont is not going to overturn federal law. What you’re trying to do is divert Vermonters from the issues.”
Shumlin replied, “I’m not buying it.”
The thing is, it’s not hypothetical. Legislation requiring parental notification or parental consent for minors to get abortions has apparently been introduced in the Vermont statehouse annually for the last two decades. Governors and legislative leaders supportive of abortion rights have continually stopped these bills in their tracks.
Today, Vermont is one of only 17 states without parental notification and/or parental consent laws on the books.
Would it be different if the governor was pro-life?
Dubie was cagey too when Seven Days asked him the abortion question during an interview for a candidate profile I wrote back in July. But after he was pressed, Dubie gave a clear, if somewhat noncommittal, answer. Here’s how it went:
Seven Days: Do you support as policies either a parental notification or parental consent law for Vermont?
Brian Dubie: Well, you know. This comes up from time to time in the legislature. My agenda is to grow jobs. That’s my agenda. So really the agenda that I’m putting forward as Vermont’s next governor is to grow jobs. Tha’s why I’m running for governor.
SD: But if this legislation were to find its way through the legislature, you’d be in the governor’s office. You’d be in the position of either signing, vetoing or doing nothing.
Dubie: I’m supportive of involving parents in everything as it relates to their children. I have always been supportive of parental involvement in educational issues, certainly in health issues. I would be generally supportive of that legislation. My agenda is to grow jobs.
This article appears in Sep 15-21, 2010.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
“You’re seriously hijacking a thread to make a false claim about what I wrote?”Oh, so you weren’t claiming that because the Governors of those states were in a position to exercise their views on abortion this year, that it somehow follows that Dubie could be in a similar position? If not, what was your point?Who cares how many states had bills introduced? It takes one member of the legislature to introduce a bill. Absolutely, a bill addressing abortion in some manner could be introduced in Vermont. That’s not the issue. The issue is whether it would ever make it to the Governor, and unless and until there’s a tectonic change in the Vermont legislature, that is never going to happen. Same goes for any weak attempt to claim that similar language might slip through in a revamp of the health care system – the Vermont legislature will never let it happen. You, of course, know this, and the fact that you’re trying to attack Dubie on this issue really betrays how weak the Dem case against him is.
“The creation of these exchanges has the potential to be influenced directly by the next governor of Vermont”Has the “potential”? To be “influenced by”? Could you possibly be more vague? Explain concretely how Gov. Dubie would do this.And, by the way, since you correctly pointed out that the President has already ordered that no public funds would be used for abortions under a federal universal health care mandate, please explain how any state action to ban such expenditures is not already a moot point?I’m pro-choice and the only thing you’ve convinced me of is either that you’re a hysterical single-issue voter, or that you are cynically using this as a wedge issue simply because you prefer the Democrat in this race.
“You’re seriously comparing Nebraska, “Louisianna” (sic), and Oklahoma to Vermont? Have you ever actually been to any of those places?” You’re seriously hijacking a thread to make a false claim about what I wrote? The examples I gave; Nebraska, “Louisianna” (sic), and Oklahoma are just the latest to place restrictions on a legal medical procedure for women. At least twenty-two states have bills introduced in 2010 to increase counseling or waiting periods while eighteen states have introduced bills to expand the use of ultrasound during this same period. This year also saw a debate in Congress over abortion coverage through insurance sold in future government-run health marketplaces (exchanges) which nearly derailed passage of the health care law. Even though President Obama issued an executive order stating that no public funds would go for abortions, several states are seeking to ban abortion coverage from plans sold through their exchanges. The creation of these exchanges has the potential to be influenced directly by the next governor of Vermont and provides another reason why it is imperative that we get a straight answer out of the candidates on this issue.
Jase, babes:Lay off on the ridiculous self-righteousness.And congratulations for mindlessly sticking to your talking points and completely “ducking” my questions on how the Governor of Vermont can affect: 1) Supreme Court reversals of its own prior decisions; 2) laws passed by Congress; and 3) constitutional amendments. After all, YOU were the one who raised these 3 issues. Now you choose to ignore the obvious fact that the Governor of the state of Vermont has nothing to do with them.
You’re seriously comparing Nebraska, “Louisianna” (sic), and Oklahoma to Vermont? Have you ever actually been to any of those places?
I had to go all the way back to April of 2010 to find examples of a governor of a state being in a position to impinge on the rights of women to receive a safe, legal, “constitutionally protected” medical procedure. It happened in Nebraska, Louisianna, and Oklahoma to name a few. Brian Dubie has told the voters of Vermont that he is too busy to address this “wedge issue”, while you’ve attempted to prove that these “scary” scenarios (in your own words) “are not only highly unlikely, if not impossible, but also have absolutely, positively NOTHING whatsoever to do with the governor of Vermont”. The people of the state of Vermont have a right to know what a gubernatorial candidate’s views are on the issue of a woman’s right to choose, but also how they would act if one of these plausible “hypotheticals” were to arise. I agree with you that this is bull____, except the bull____ is the continued obsfucation of this issue by you and Brian Dubie.