The Catholic Standard & Times -Pro-choice resolution aborted

Pro-choice resolution aborted

By Lou Baldwin
Special to the CS&T

It had to be one of the shortest-lived resolutions in Philadelphia City Council history. On June 7, a deeply-divided Council passed a non-binding resolution declaring Philadelphia “a pro-choice city,” implying that Philadelphians were united in backing legal abortion.

Exactly one week later, on June 14, the Council, rushing to summer adjournment, paused to rescind the same resolution by a large margin with barely a whimper from its backers.

“It should never have happened and I’m glad we were able to put it in the shredder,” said At-large Councilman Frank Rizzo, Jr., the sponsor of the June 14 repeal resolution. “I spoke out against it at the time of the original resolution, and hopefully this will send a message and it won’t happen again. It was a divisive issue.”

Several Councilmembers credited Cardinal Rigali for the change.

“I was very surprised we were able to get 13 votes. That’s significant,” said Councilman Juan Ramos, who considered introducing a resolution himself if someone else didn’t. “I think Cardinal Rigali’s intervention made the difference. It was his leadership and style, and I called him to thank him for it.”

Cardinal Justin Rigali, who led the outcry against the first resolution, issued the following statement following its annulment:

“I applaud the members of Philadelphia City Council who worked to rescind last week’s troubling resolution. The members who supported today’s resolution are to be commended for reflecting carefully upon this issue and showing the courage to revisit it.

“I appreciate that Council has considered seriously the sensitivities of all Philadelphians and has rightly voted to take these sensitivities into account. It is my hope that this occasion will lead to a more productive dialogue and ultimately to greater reverence for the sanctity of all human life.”

The whole affair began the previous week when At-Large Councilwoman Blondell Reynolds Brown introduced her resolution, crafted in part by Philadelphia Planned Parenthood, declaring Philadelphia a pro-choice city. At the time, at least six of her fellow Councilmembers asked her to withdraw the resolution, saying it did not reflect the opinion of all Philadelphians, and that abortion is not an issue which comes before Council — its regulation is controlled by the federal and state government and the courts, not local legislative bodies.

Brown refused to withdraw her resolution and although it was vehemently opposed by several councilmembers, it passed by a single vote. That in itself was unusual, because resolutions, unlike statutes, do not have the force of law and are usually passed unanimously or by a large majority; the council simply goes along with the presenting council member.

Philadelphia has 17 members of Council; 10 are elected by and represent individual districts while seven are elected by and represent the city as a whole.

Voting in favor of Brown’s original resolution were district councilmembers Jannie Blackwell, Darrell Clarke, Frank DiCicco Donna Reed Miller and Daniel Savage, along with at-large members Brown, W. Wilson Goode, Jr., William Greenlee and James Kenney.

Three on the Council who voted for the pro-choice resolution — DiCicco, Kenney and Greenlee — are Catholic, and presumably had once been taught that killing innocent babies is more of a moral issue than a political issue.

Voting against labeling Philadelphia pro-choice were district councilmembers Carol Ann Campbell, Joan Krajewski, Brian O’Neill, Marian Tasco and Anna Verna, the Council President. They were joined by at-large members Jack Kelly, Juan Ramos and Rizzo.

What was especially unusual in this case was that not all who opposed the resolution consider themselves pro-life. For example, Marian Tasco, who represents the 9th District, stated she was pro-choice, but nevertheless recognized many of her constituents were not. She would not vote for a resolution that implied they were; it would be disrespectful to their opinion and such a resolutions shouldn’t come up, she said.

Tasco’s view would prove critical when the counter-resolution took shape.

Clearly, most members of council were caught off-guard when the resolution was passed. Although resolutions are rarely rescinded, it can happen. Several members who vocally opposed the resolution, vowed either to amend it or repeal it. However, it was passed during the next-to-the-last week before summer recess, and Philadelphia Council meets as a legislative body only on Thursdays; the rest of the week is devoted to constituent services and committee meetings. June 14 would be the only chance to undo the damage before fall, and there was already a daunting backlog of ordinances and resolutions up for consideration on the final session before summer recess.

Two members who had been most outspoken against the pro-choice resolution set to work circulating new resolutions. Brian O‘Neil put forth a resolution that declared Philadelphia both a pro-life and a pro-choice city, trying to satisfy everybody. Rizzo’s proposal, on the other hand, called for outright repeal of the previous week’s resolution, on the grounds that it was unnecessary, it was divisive, it disrespected Catholics and other pro-life communities, and it was a waste of City Council’s time and effort.

Both resolutions seemed to have widespread support, but Rizzo’s most closely reflected the view of the Council majority. There was still a little horse-trading to do.

For example, one phrase saying “it accomplishes nothing except to pander to a special interest group” was stricken from Rizzo’s resolution to gain Tasco’s vote.

Because of the usual pre-summer backlog, Council was an hour late in coming to order for its scheduled 10 a.m. meeting. Councilman Ramos, a Catholic permanent deacon, opened the proceedings with a prayer, which was a good omen for what was to come.

In the public seats there were a scattering of people wearing buttons prominently proclaiming “Choice.” However, it had nothing to do with the abortion issue — they were labor representatives promoting choice in the workplace.

Chief Clerk Patricia Rafferty read the titles of more than 80 proposed resolutions and ordinances at break-neck speed and they were either referred to committee or unanimously agreed upon before coming to the resolutions to change or undo Councilwoman Brown’s pro-choice resolution of the previous week. Councilman O’Neill withdrew his resolution before a vote, announcing he would support Councilman Rizzo’s resolution. Councilman Rizzo stated his case succinctly, then Councilman James Kenney, one of the Catholic members who voted for the controversial Brown resolution the previous week, spoke. “I believe in a woman‘s right to choose,” he said, but added, “that’s my personal and private belief.” He confessed he violated his own belief when he voted for the resolution, “because it’s not something that should be forced upon the public,” he said. Had he abstained the previous week, he said: “We wouldn’t be here today.”
Councilwoman Brown did not comment as her resolution was attacked.

On the call for a vote, it was not unanimous, and so for the first time that day, a roll call was needed. In the end, the vote to nullify the resolution terming Philadelphia a pro-choice city passed by a vote of 13-4. Only one Catholic, Councilman William Greenlee, opposed the Rizzo resolution. Council President Anna Verna, the last to vote, loudly and firmly voted “aye.”

“I was happy to vote against it [the pro choice resolution] — twice,” she said after the session. “I didn’t think the first vote was proper. To label the whole city pro-choice was inappropriate.”

Councilman O’Neill, who had been most vocal in denouncing the original resolution, was content with the outcome. “I had enough votes to pass it, but he [Councilman Rizzo] had more,” O’Neill said. “So I told him I would withdraw mine and co-sponsor his. I was proud to support it. This was a mistake from the beginning. Putting something like this [the city is pro-choice[ on the record is just wrong.” O’Neill credited Tasco’s opposition and Cardinal Rigali’s opposition as the two main reasons for the reversed vote.

Lou Baldwin is a member of St. Leo parish and a freelance writer.

Rescinding Philadelphia City Council Resolution 070551 “Urging Philadelphia to Adopt Status as a Pro-Choice City” as adopted by Philadelphia City Council on June 7, 2007.

WHEREAS, Philadelphia City Council adopted Resolution 070551 “Urging Philadelphia to Adopt Status as a Pro-Choice City” on June 7, 2007; and
WHEREAS, Resolution 070551 was totally unnecessary; and
WHEREAS, Resolution 070551 is divisive; and
WHEREAS, Resolution 070551 disrespects the Roman Catholic and other Pro-Life communities; and
WHEREAS, Resolution 070551 was a waste of City Council’s time and effort; and
WHEREAS, it is inappropriate for such a Resolution to represent the collective mind of the entire City of Philadelphia, when it was passed by the pathetically narrow majority of only 9-to-8; now, therefore,
RESOLVED, BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, That City Council hereby rescinds Philadelphia City Council Resolution 070551
“Urging Philadelphia to Adopt Status as a Pro-Choice City” as adopted by Philadelphia City Council on June 7, 2007.

Frank Rizzo
Councilman-At-Large
June 14, 2007
The June 14 vote to rescind the June 7 City Council resolution declaring Philadelphia a pro-choice city:

Councilmembers Voting For

Carol Ann Campbell
* Frank DiCicco
* W. Wilson Goode, Jr.
Jack Kelly
* James Kenney
Joan L. Krajewski
* Donna Miller
Brian O’Neill
Juan Ramos
Frank Rizzo, Jr.
* Daniel J. Savage
Marian B. Tasco
Anna C. Verna

Councilmembers Voting Against

Jannie Blackwell
Blondell Reynolds Brown
Darrell Clarke
William K. Greenlee

* Denotes members of Council who voted for the pro-choice
resolution on June 7 but voted to rescind it on June 14.