E-Mail This Article to a Friend BACK TO THE BACK ALLEY The bleak state of abortion rights BY KRISTEN LOMBARDI

As anyone who cares about abortion rights knows, these are not friendly times. In fact, given that President Bush recently signed into law the first-ever federal ban on late-term-abortion procedures, the political climate is outright hostile these days. Last week, NARAL Pro-Choice America released a comprehensive review, "Who Decides? A State-by-State Report on the Status of Women’s Reproductive Rights," which found that a woman’s right to choose stands at an all-time low. Overall, the report gave the nation a D for its dismal attempts to protect abortion services. Massachusetts didn’t fare much better. It received a C, thanks to laws that require a 24-hour waiting period and a mandatory lecture for women who have an abortion, among other restrictions. Earlier this week, the Phoenix spoke with Melissa Kogut, of the local NARAL chapter, about the bleak state of abortion rights here and nationwide.

Q: John Kerry is already being called "that Massachusetts liberal." But the Bay State got just a C from NARAL. What does that tell you?

A: People think Massachusetts is one of our country’s most liberal states. But our House of Representatives is closely divided on this issue. It’s controlled by a Speaker, Tom Finneran, who’s outspoken in stopping women from exercising their right to choose. He’s now promoting the so-called Woman’s Right To Know bill, which would require the state to produce a Web site, a brochure, and a call-in voicemail to recite a list of abortion-education options, including photos of a fetus from the time of fertilization until birth.

Q: To which states do we compare?

A: We’re in the company of Florida, Iowa, Montana, Nevada, North Carolina, Oklahoma, and West Virginia. Most people would be surprised to see a state with such a liberal reputation in such conservative company.

Q: Of the state restrictions on abortion, which do you rank as worst?

A: When I think about this, I think about who is impacted most. The fact that there’s no requirement for hospitals to provide abortion services means that most hospitals in this state don’t provide them. That affects low-income women. Meanwhile, young women under 18 can’t get an abortion without getting the consent of one parent. If she can’t, she can go before a judge who will decide if she’s mature enough to have an abortion, even though no one tries to determine if she’s mature enough to become a parent. What this means is that teens may travel across state lines to get an abortion. Or do something more risky, like get an illegal abortion.

Q: What has Bush’s obvious disdain for abortion rights meant here?

A: He has been the most activist president on this issue that we’ve had. His recent signing into law of the ban on abortion procedures will have a chilling effect across the country. There’s nothing any state can do if this law goes into effect. While similar language was struck down in a US Supreme Court decision a few years ago, the hope of legislation proponents is that there will be a different make-up on the bench by the time it comes before the court. The bill bans basic legal procedures after the first trimester with no regard to fetus viability and no exception for the mother’s health if it’s in jeopardy. And that’s just one visible way in which this administration has had an impact.

Q: What’s the message you want people to take away from this report?

A: That we cannot just expect our elected officials are going to do the right thing without an active, vocal, and visible public. Right now, our focus is to mobilize people to go to the March for Women’s Lives, in Washington, DC, on April 25. Massachusetts will be delivering thousands of people there because we need to send a strong message that we will not let our rights be taken away from us.