This week there have been a couple of posts over at Intelligent Discontent about Jesse Laslovich and abortion rights. One post, combined with some of the comments under it, says basically that a democratic primary “should not be about labels but issue positions“. Another lauds Laslovich for making critical remarks about Ravalli County Republicans, for their refusal to accept family planning money.
These blog posts seek to immunize Laslovich from criticism that he is not fully pro-choice and that he is not as strong an advocate for women as Pam Bucy.
But facts are stubborn things. Pam Bucy, Laslovich’s opponent and a favorite of mine, is a tremendous advocate for women and their right to privacy. Bucy has been an attorney for Planned Parenthood. As the Assistant AG to Mike McGrath and at the request of Jon Tester, Bucy wrote the AG’s opinion granting that insurance companies must cover birth control when they cover other prescription drugs–like Viagra, and the fact that Bucy has also made financial contributions to choice organizations –more times than can be linked to here. Jessie Laslovich has voted generally pro-choice throughout his career, but he is not on a level with Bucy in this regard.
In two separate sessions, in 2003 and again in 2009 and Laslovich took votes in the Senate in favor of what this session was a Keith Regier bill (the one in which Regier compared women to cattle), which gave personhood to fetuses and was vetoed by Schweitzer for its unconstitutionality.
I applaud Laslovich for speaking out against Ravalli Rs, but actions are what matter, not words. And when action was at hand, he voted for a right-wing pro-life bill.
So given this contrast, and given the fact that I started blogging primarily to give women a voice on the Montana blogoshpere where I did not believe we were sufficiently represented, I will side with Bucy as a far greater advocate for women and choice.
This is not to say that Laslovich isn’t a good democrat and strong on many issues important to us. But Bucy wins out on protection of women’s rights from a clear contrast.