NARAL

Pro-Choice Massachusetts PAC

2004 Candidate Questionnaire

for State Legislative Candidates

Candidate's Name: Douglas L. Krick

Candidate's Committee: Committee to Elect Krick

Office (Incumbent/District Name): State Representative (14^th Suffolk / Angelo Scaccia)

Campaign Address: 79 Chittick Road #2

Town/City: Boston Zip: 02136

Campaign Phone: 617-686-2564 Email: doug@krick.us

Campaign Manager: Jarrett Grace Party Affiliation: Libertarian

Opponents: Angelo Scaccia (D), Camillo “Cam” Giangrande

I request that the NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts Political Action Committee consider my candidacy for endorsement for the primary and general election.

6/3/04

(Candidate's Signature) Date

In the interests of being clear on my positions and policies, I have decided to include additional information to prevent miscommunication.

1) Row v. Wade, the 1973 landmark Supreme Court decision, legalized abortion and required the state to prove a “compelling state interest” for any restrictions on abortion prior to fetal viability (when a fetus can survive outside the womb), Roe v. Wade also determined that states could ban abortions after viability, except when a woman's life or health is at risk.

a) Do you support a woman's right to choose an abortion enunciated in Roe v. Wade?

Yes. I whole-heartedly support the right to abortion. The question that is at the root of

the problem is, “When does life begin?” I don't have any answers for that one. No one does, even the clergy is split on the issue. There are no scientific answers that can be produced to determine when a fetus becomes a sentient individual. Until that specific point of sentience can be answered though the application of the scientific method, I don't trust the state or federal government to make that decision for me, you, or anyone else.

That doesn't even take into consideration cases where a mother's life is at risk, or other medical concerns that may apply to any given case. This includes the trauma of having to give birth to someone that is the result of rape. Abortion is a very sensitive matter, and one that the state is not qualified to pass judgment on.

b) Will you oppose attempts to restrict abortion, for example: mandating waiting periods, requiring religion-based counseling, and requiring onerous restrictions for clinics? If no, please explain.

Yes. Waiting periods have no place in medical care. Mandatory religion based counseling is a violation of the U.S. Constitution. No clinic should face onerous restrictions. My job is to get government out of the way, so the medical professionals can do their job.

2) In Massachusetts, women under the age of eighteen seeking an abortion are required to obtain the consent of a parent or to get a waiver by a judge. While most teenagers involve their parents – even in states without laws mandating parental involvement – many cannot. Teenagers who cannot discuss this with their parents must either travel out of state or obtain a judicial bypass from a judge to obtain an abortion. The result is almost always a delay that increases both the cost of the abortion and the physical and emotional risk to the teenager. The American Medical Association opposes mandatory parental consent laws, stating that “because the need for privacy may be compelling, minors may be driven to desperate measures to maintain the confidentiality of their pregnancies.”

Will you oppose further restrictions for a young woman seeking an abortion?

Yes. Abortion is an individual decision, that should be made by the potential parents, and only by the potential parents.

3) For over two decades, federal funding for abortion services has been excluded from virtually all health care programs subject to federal control. The discriminatory exclusion of abortion may result in women having more risky abortions later in pregnancy or turning to unsafe, illegal alternatives. Additionally, some women are forced to carry unwanted pregnancies to term. Massachusetts provides state Medicaid funding for abortion services as a result of a State Supreme Judicial Court injunction.

Will you support continued Medicaid funding for abortion?

Yes. As long as Medicaid is bears the responsibility for taking care of the health needs of the individual, it needs to take care of all of those needs. On the other hand, public health is not something that the state should be involved in. Better methods can be made available, and should be used. I've seen public housing. I don't trust public health. So while in the perfect world, I would end the Medicaid program, I recognize that the world is not perfect and would fit my actions to face the reality in front of me instead of an Utopian image that can never be reached. The State Supreme Judicial Court has ruled, and as a legislator, it is my job to follow the law.

4) In 2000, the Supreme Court held that Nebraska's ban on so-called “partial birth” abortion was unconstitutionally broad and failed to protect a woman's health. Even after the Supreme Court held that Nebraska's abortion ban was unconstitutional, Congress recently passed a similar ban and it was signed into law by the President. This ban, with criminal penalties for doctors and no exception to protect a woman's health, is so vaguely written it can apply to safe abortion procedures used as early as 13 weeks. A similar ban is bing considered by the Massachusetts legislature.

Will you oppose legislation that bans safe and legal abortion procedures including bans on so-called “partial-birth” abortion?

Yes. I will oppose any and all laws banning “partial birth abortions”, a practice that is poorly and deceptively named by the anti-abortionist movement in this country. Among other reasons, these abortions can be medically necessary to allow parents to be able to conceive children. Children that aren't missing things like brains, or other body defects that would prevent a live birth.

5) Offering comprehensive sexuality education in the public schools has been proven to reduce unintended pregnancies and thereby reduce the need for abortions while abstinence only programs have never been proven defective and may result in riskier behavior by teenagers.

Do you support comprehensive, age-appropriate, family life/sexuality education in the public schools, and oppose “abstinence only” sexuality education programs?

Yes. In the Utopian world, we would only have private educational systems. As I mentioned previously, we don't live in utopia, and that goal can never be reached – no two people will agree on what utopia is, let alone implement something that everyone agrees on. So I recognize that we have public schools, and support for those public schools is mandated by the Massachusetts Constitution. I intend to follow that constitution and support public schools. The question then becomes, “What kind of education should we have in the schools?” The education must be based on impartial standards, with as many possibilities opened to the students as possible. To reach that goal, we must provide a complete education. Birth control through abstinence is a far cry from a complete education. It also borders on allowing the church to interfere with the state, which is a violation of the U.S. Constitution. Therefore sex education cannot be limited to, “Just say no.” That is incomplete and irresponsible.

6) Increasing women's access to emergency contraception (EC), also known as the “morning after pill”, is one of the most promising avenues for reducing unintended pregnancy and the need for an abortion. It is a concentrated dosage of ordinary birth control pills. When taken within days of unprotected sex, EC can reduce a woman's chance of becoming pregnant by up to 89%. EC is safe, effective, and easy to use. It does not cause an abortion and will not harm an established pregnancy. Unfortunately, many women in Massachusetts face difficulties in obtaining EC in a timely manner. Currently, EC is available only by a doctor's prescription. For women who lack a primary care physician or those living in rural areas, reaching a physician in a timely manner can be difficult or impossible.

a) Will you support legislation to require [publicly funded (inserted by candidate)] hospital emergency rooms to make emergency contraception available to women who have been raped?

Yes. I would support legislation to require publicly-funded emergency rooms to carry the “morning after pill”. It is part of providing complete health-care. To do any less would be to fail in my responsibilities to see that the Massachusetts residents get the best service possible. For the state to deny people the right to needed medication is criminal. On the flip side, I would oppose legislation that mandated privately-funded emergency rooms from carrying emergency contraception. I would oppose such legislation for two reasons: 1) It is the my job to get the state out of the way, rather than to instruct it to interfere with a private institution. 2) Some privately run facilities are run by churches. Just as the church cannot dictate policy to the state, the state cannot dictate policy to the church. To complicate matters further, not all religions are organized, let alone recognized by the state.

b) Will you support legislation that will allow pharmacists to dispense emergency contraception through a collaborative agreement with a physician?

Yes. There is no reason for the state to deny anyone any medication. Period.

7) Staff and patients of reproductive healthcare facilities are often subject to harassment and intimidation. For many women, a reproductive healthcare facility is the only place where they receive primary and preventative healthcare services.

Do you support the enactment and enforcement of laws that help prevent violence, intimidation and harassment directed at reproductive healthcare providers and patients?

Yes. No one has the right to intimidate or harass others. There are no exceptions to this rule. Legal protests are acceptable, but when the line is crossed into intimidation, harassment, or violence, a line is crossed. We cannot tolerate the crossing of that line, and expect our society to remain free and open. Due to the nature of these laws, I would want to see any specific legislation before I committed to it, but in principal, I do agree.

8) Family planning and teen pregnancy prevention programs were drastically cut in the FY04 state budget;. Without access to affordable family planning services, women and families cannot access critical health care services, such as pregnancy prevention, cervical cancer screening, and sexually transmitted disease prevention and treatment. Family planning prevention programs improve public health and save insurance and Medicaid dollars.

Will you make it a priority to restore funding for the family planning and teen pregnancy prevention programs?

No. The best methods for this are outside governmental circles. If we can slash enough of the state budget (and we can) that things like the income tax are unnecessary, then people will have enough funds to be able to afford such things on their own without a governmental subsidy. Every dollar we spend on things that we don't need to provide by the state government is one less dollar that is taken out of the hands of the people that need the money the most. I don't expect to be able to slash programs to the extent that I would like, but I can prevent the state from stepping back into circles that it didn't belong in in the first place. The money is better spent keeping people alive, than on something that people can educate themselves on without assistance from the state. Please be aware that I would rather spend money on matters such as this instead of spending the money on a study of the migratory patterns of fish. (That study was done as part of the “Big Dig” project.) As such, it is not a priority to cut or keep off the books. There are abuses in the state budget that are far worse.

9) Proposed legislation would improve excessive consent and reporting requirements on all women seeking abortions and on physicians who perform abortions in Massachusetts – including a requirement that women be shown photos of he developing fetus at two week gestational increments from fertilization to full term. Every woman should be fully informed about any medical procedure she undergoes. This bill imposes onerous obligations upon doctors who perform abortions in Massachusetts, interferes with the doctor-patient relationship, and places yet another obstacle in front of women seeking abortions in Massachusetts.

Will you oppose the so-called “Woman's Right to Know Bill,” legislation that imposes excessive consent and reporting requirements on women seeking abortions and physicians who perform abortions in Massachusetts?

Yes. We don't show heart patients the step-by-step process of a quadruple bypass before the surgery. We don't show patients the blow-by-blow of what is involved in removing a cancerous lump. There is no need to show patients the steps involved in an abortion before the procedure. There is no need to tell the medical community how to do their jobs. They are more qualified to make those decisions than anyone in the state house.

10) How do you plan to handle the question of reproductive freedom in your campaign? Will you make it a major issue? Do you expect an opponent to do so? Would you be willing to attend a NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts training session for candidates and elected officials to learn more about the issue?

Given the make-up of my district, I don't see any advantages to making abortion a major issue in my campaign. If anything, I would run the risk of alienating more voters than I would attract. But I will not shy away from the issue. I am putting my answers to this questionnaire as well as others out in the public eye for everyone to see. They will be posted at <http://www.krick.us>. Should I receive the endorsement of NARAL, that endorsement will also be prominently posted on the website as well as on my campaign handouts. I would be proud to receive it. By doing this, I will have the effect of making my stance even more well known, bringing the issue to the front.

I do not see my opponents supporting NARAL, or it's positions in the campaign, or while they are in office. In talking with individual voters during my signature drive, I believe Rep. Scaccia's main voter base is from the Catholic community. I have had voters refuse to sign my paperwork, and pledge to vote for Scaccia in the election due to their religious beliefs, and that I would uphold the right of the individual to have an abortion instead of bringing religion into the state house.

I have not spoken with my Republican opponent on this issue, but in what talks I have had with him, I believe he will hold the traditional party-line and oppose abortion as well. I hope I am wrong about both of my opponents, but that is my assessment.

I plan on attending your Pro-Choice Massachusetts training session. I believe that you have a lot of good information that will prove valuable in the race for the State Representative seat.

As a State Representative, I pledge that I will vote for individual freedom on every issue every time. Including the right to make your own reproductive choices. No exceptions. No excuses.