Republican Massachusetts Senate Candidate Opens Up on Forced Waiting Periods

During Wednesday night’s debate against Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA) for a June 25 special election to fill Secretary of State John Kerry’s vacant seat, Republican candidate Gabriel Gomez gave some indication of how he would vote on reproductive health policy, a topic that he has been reluctant to discuss in detail on the campaign trail.

When they were Republican Senate candidates in Massachusetts, both Mitt Romney and Scott Brown took pains to stress that while they are personally “pro-life,” they had no interest in changing policy; they refused to discuss the issue in much more depth than that. Gomez has been taking a similar approach in this campaign. He’s been repeatedly evasive about his stance on access to birth control, and especially his views on the failed Blunt Amendment that would have allowed private employers to bar employees from accessing contraception without a co-pay.

However, at Wednesday’s debate Gomez gave some indication of how he might vote on reproductive rights issues. When asked about his stance on the constitutional right to abortion, Gomez started out by being typically evasive. But when asked about a hypothetical federal law that would impose a forced waiting period and politician-approved information on women seeking abortions, he said, “I think asking someone to wait 24 hours before they can actually go have an abortion is not asking a lot.”

There is currently no such federal law, though 26 states impose forced waiting periods on women before they can access legal abortion care. Reproductive rights advocates argue that these waiting periods force women to endure unnecessary burdens in arranging transportation, additional time off work, support for care-giving responsibilities (more than 60 percent of women seeking abortion already have children), and a place to stay overnight; as of 2005, 87 percent of counties lacked an abortion provider, and 35 percent of U.S. women lived in those counties.

During the debate, Gomez said he would not apply a litmus test in voting for Supreme Court nominees, unlike Rep. Markey, who pledged to vote only to confirm justices who would uphold Roe v. Wade. “If [a Supreme Court nominee is] pro-life and you vote for them, they’re going to have the ability to overturn Roe v. Wade and that’s your vote,” Markey said. “And you just said to the women of this state that you support, and you would support, a Supreme Court nominee who could do that. And I don’t think that serves the best interests of the women in this state.”

The Planned Parenthood Advocacy Fund of Massachusetts noted in a statement that 73 percent of Massachusetts voters believe that abortion should be legal in all or most circumstances. “Passing restrictions on safe, legal abortion such as unnecessary, onerous waiting periods or approving the nomination of a Supreme Court Justice who opposes Roe v. Wade is changing the law—and not for the better,” said the group’s director of public affairs, Tricia Wadja.

In the hours before the debate, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee issued a press release blasting a Gomez campaign spokesperson for using Twitter earlier that day to dismiss concerns about contraception as “inside baseball.”

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

For more information or to schedule an interview with contact

Follow Erin Matson on twitter: @erintothemax

  • cjvg

    Does he really think women just get up one day and think “yeah today I feel like having an abortion, lets go do that right now”?
    Women who decide to abort have thought about their options long and hard and eventually came to the conclusion that this was the best course of action for them!
    No woman has a an abortion as a spur of the moment, after all it is a health care procedure that is likely going to have some unpleasant or even painful side effects.

    • EmbraceYourInnerCrone

      Its a health care procedure which MAY have side affects, but actually may be relatively quick and not painful. And for some women its not something they have to think long and hard about because for some women they decided a while ago they did not ever want children, OR that they did not want any more children and that if they became pregnant they would get an abortion.

      So, if they get pregnant accidentally (birth control has been known to fail) they don’t have to think about it, they already thought about it and they schedule the abortion

      It sucks to get pregnant accidentally but, fyi at least in the United States it is not always easy or cheap to get your tubes tied, even if you really, really want to. And not all male partners are willing to get a vasectomy.

      Not trying to be confrontational but I will admit to sometimes being annoyed by the presumption that its ALWAYS a difficult, painful decision and everyone has to think a long time before making the decision.

      • cjvg

        I never said that it was a difficult or painful decision!
        I said that the woman in question already thought long and hard about it, if she made up her mind a long time ago or if she did so at the time she found out that she was pregnant is irrelevant!

        My point is that these kind of life decisions are generally well thought out personal convictions, and not really comparable to buying ice-cream like mandated waiting periods are suggesting

  • friv 3

    The details are well-explained and very concise.