The Times recently reported the death of Constance E. Cook, a former assemblywoman from upstate New York who co-wrote the measure that legalized abortion in that state in 1970, three years before the U.S. Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade did so for most of the rest of the country.
While the history of Roe is widely known — and, indeed, widely revisited on a regular basis — it is often forgotten that New York and four other states (California, Washington, Alaska, and Hawaii) had already made abortion legal within their borders. It was these early adopters, in fact, that provided one key piece of evidence in Steve Levitt and John Donohue‘s argument that legalized abortion ultimately led to a drop in crime (for a measure of an abortion-crime correlation in these states in conjunction with a similar relationship in the other, later states, helped establish a causal link between abortion and crime).
One thing to know about Constance Cook: she was a Republican. That meant something different in 1970 than it does today, especially in New York, but still it is an interesting historical note.
The Times obituary, written by Dennis Hevesi, also includes this fascinating section about the New York Assembly vote that led to the law’s passage:
Midway through the roll call, Assemblyman George M. Michaels, a Democrat from a heavily Roman Catholic district in central New York, quietly voted no. The count ended at 74 to 74, with one Assembly member absent. The speaker, Perry B. Duryea Jr., a Montauk Republican, had not voted, in keeping with the tradition that the speaker votes only if it affects the outcome. Before the clerk could bring the vote to a close, Assemblyman Michaels stood and asked to change his vote.
“I fully appreciate that this is the termination of my political career,” he said. He was right.
and 
. You can also watch it on 
I’m extremely honest, and maybe too academic, and Margaret Sanger is still honestly my hero. Ha.
The pretense at being concerned with “unborn babies’” lives, and not with women’s lives, is a front for keeping women chained to pregnancy, to keep them in their place, because they are too threatening if they can heave sex without fear of pregnancy (like men!).
Life – especially a female life – is apparently supposed to begin at conception and end at birth, or at least by adulthood.
It’s never really about lives. It’s never really about babies.
I would like to have more information on Assemblyman Michaels. What prompted him to change his vote? My assumption, based on the tone of the article, was that he felt the bill should pass, but voted to represent the opinion in his district. He was probably confident and/or hopeful that the bill would pass even if he voted no, insuring that he could have his cake and eat it to (the measure passes but he is not perceived by his constituents to have supported it). It is also possible that he changed his vote to appease his fellow Democrats, realizing that if the count stood as it did the Republican Speaker would have broken the tie and probably in a way that was not agreeable to Michaels’ fellow Democrats. It’d be interesting to hear more about Michaels’ rationale for changing and to discuss whether that is part of the political process or a perversion of it.
“but who are you to tell an idividual that they must bear an unwanted child?”
Eric, you said Child. Was that supposed to be Fetus?
In perspective, one day before the baby is born it is abortion; one bay later it is murder. Nothing much fro NY, CA etc. to be proud of.
a small correction – not ”50,000,000 lives”, but ”50,000,000 children in foster care”.
Fifty million abortions? I don’t trust statistics thrown around by pro-lifers.
Whatever the figure, if that means there’s less people on the planet, it’s a good thing.
Interestingly enough, the Bush administration didn’t want information about contraception given out, and it didn’t want abortions either.
Over $1 billion has been wasted on the promotion of abstinence programs, and it hasn’t worked…http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/apr/16/schoolsworldwide.usa
Another example of Bush wasting taxpayer dollars.
The accpted scientific consensus is that a fertilized egg is a unique individual human being.
That’s incorrect. The scientific consensus is that a fertilized egg has about a 35% chance of becoming a unique individual human being, if nothing interferes. It is unique, but it is not a human being, no more than a set of cancer cells which are also DNA-unique from the host, or for that matter an unfertilized egg or sperm.
Historically, quickening (when motion was felt) was thought to be the time when the “spirit” entered the fetus. Since conception was not possible to detect until quite recently, quickening is when one was certain that a live fetus was being carried.
MB-
That is flat-out false. Having an abortion that late in the process is illegal and impossible. Twisting the facts in such absurd ways make it impossible to have intelligent debate around these topics.