Gore Explains Change in Abortion Stand

His record on abortion rights under continuous assault, Vice President Al Gore acknowledged Saturday that he has changed his views on the polarizing subject since the 1980s, when he described abortion as “arguably the taking of a human life” and favored limits on federal payments to cover the costs of abortions for poor women.

The admission came as Democratic candidate Bill Bradley, behind in the polls in the final weekend before the New Hampshire primary, challenged Gore’s abortion record for the fourth day and tried to extend the assault to the larger issue of Gore’s trustworthiness.

Asked whether he continued to believe that abortion amounted to the taking of a human life--as Gore wrote to constituents in 1984 and 1987--the vice president emphasized that he had used the word “arguably.”

“Yes, my position has changed,” said Gore, who has since come to support federal funding for abortions. “I think on the narrow question I’ve always supported Roe vs. Wade. I’ve always supported keeping abortion legal and I’ve always been attacked by the anti-choice groups for this position.”

And, he added: “I would not use that phrasing today.”

Bradley, who in recent days has repeatedly accused Gore of misrepresenting his record and of nasty campaign tactics, demanded Saturday that Gore explain his change of heart on abortion rights. He also continued to air a commercial describing himself as the only candidate who has not wavered in his abortion views.

“That is a profound journey, not like changing your position on whether taxes should go up 10 cents or 15 cents,” Bradley said at a campaign appearance at the Manchester YMCA. “This is a question of . . . what’s important in our life today and how our own sense of what’s right and wrong governs our public actions.”

Before the Iowa caucuses, the former New Jersey senator had dismissed Gore’s criticism of some of Bradley’s Senate votes, insisting that the presidential election concerned the future and not the past. But as his poll numbers fell in Iowa--and throughout the campaign here, where he trails the vice president--Bradley has centered his criticism on the past. The abortion dust-up revolves around votes that date back to Gore’s 1977-85 tenure in Congress and his eight later years as a senator from Tennessee.

For much of the day Saturday, the chief weapons of the Democratic campaigns were the reams of paper they handed out to bolster their side of the argument.

Bradley’s staff distributed copies of the Gore letters in which he said he had opposed federal funding of abortions because “it is wrong to spend federal funds for what is arguably the taking of a human life.” In 1984, Gore voted for legislation that would have limited federal funds for abortion and defined a fetus as a person--which would have made the procedure murder.

Gore’s staff retaliated with copies of 15-year-old comments by Gore in which he favored abortion rights.

The vice president’s mixed record on abortion rights is nothing new; in his unsuccessful 1988 campaign for the presidency he also was criticized by opponents within his party for being insufficiently supportive of abortion rights.

Indeed, his ambivalence shone through a 1987 Times survey of the views of the presidential candidates. Asked whether he supported or opposed the landmark Roe vs. Wade decision legalizing abortion rights, Gore said simply that he “would do nothing to undermine” the court judgment. In that survey, he also said he opposed federal funding of abortions for women receiving government assistance.

In this presidential contest, Gore has long touted his support for abortion rights, and indeed in the months when his campaign languished he was nurtured by the support of Democratic women, who largely favor abortion rights.

Bradley and his surrogates on Saturday argued that Gore’s switch on abortion cast into doubt his principles on a host of other issues.

“He’s not being honest,” said Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), who showed up at a Gore event to personify the Bradley response. “If he can’t admit the obvious, if he is telling us something untrue now, then how do we believe him on something else?”

In acknowledging that he has shifted his views over the years, Gore did not elaborate on when his views had changed. Refining as he went, he tried instead to emphasize his generic support for abortion rights.

“I think that, uh, uh, the initial question has to remain who makes that decision, and I think a woman is the only--the woman involved is the only person who should make that decision,” he said.

“Once you arrive at that position, then the question is up to her, and I think it is wrong for the government to try to order women to do what the government says is the right decision in each of these situations when they don’t know the circumstances. They can’t judge the circumstances. It should be up to the woman. That’s my view.”

On another matter which Bradley has criticized, Gore on Saturday repeated his apology for attending a fund-raiser at a Buddhist temple in Southern California--an event which surfaced during the investigations of the Clinton-Gore 1996 campaign’s financial arrangements.

“I made a mistake,” Gore said. “I have learned from that mistake.”

*

Gerstenzang reported from the Gore campaign and Gold from the Bradley campaign. The article was written by Times political writer Cathleen Decker.