Reagan Dunn, current King County Council member and candidate for state Attorney General, seems to be backpedaling as fast as his arguably lazy legs can carry him away from statements he made last weekend supporting pharmacists' rights to refuse women access to Plan B and other forms of birth control.
I'm a little late to the game on this story (VACATION, WOOT!), but it's an important one and maybe you've missed it, too, so here's the backstory:
During a radio interview (around the 29-minute mark) in Bellingham on Saturday morning Dunn said that, “if somebody has a legitimate religious and moral objection to selling something like the morning after pill they ought to have the right not to sell it if they so choose." Because women can just stop ovulating—or keep their damn legs closed until God opens them on their wedding nights—if they don't want to get pregnant.
In 2007, the Washington Board of Pharmacy unanimously approved two rules requiring pharmacies to do their damn jobs—i.e., promptly fill prescriptions on site. However, a family-owned pharmacy in Olympia and two pharmacists filed a lawsuit against these rules and won. The state AG's office—the position Dunn is now running for—has appealed the case to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
But instead of standing up for Washington women, Dunn cited the "religious liberty of the Constitution of the United States and the state of Washington" in support the rights of a few narrow-minded, crucifix-clutching pharmacists. “I hope they win," he added, immediately rousing the ire of pro-choice groups across the state.
“It is incredibly disappointing that a candidate for Attorney General—the very office charged with defending the Pharmacy Board rules in court—would come out in such strong opposition to patient access at the pharmacy counter,” said Jennifer N. Brown, Executive Director of NARAL Pro-Choice Washington. Unsurprisingly, NARAL is backing Dunn's opponent, Bob Ferguson, for AG (as is the SECB).
Anyway, that was Saturday. Today the brings the fresh news, courtesy of the Seattle Times, that Dunn's anti-choice comments were totes misunderstood—he's not publicly against granting women equal access to contraception; he's only privately against it:
[Dunn] was speaking about his personal views, not his approach as state attorney general. As attorney general, he said would support the state’s appeal to the 9th Circuit, and his office would make the best arguments possible.
...Alison Mondi, a spokeswoman for NARAL, said she’s glad Dunn says he would stand up for Pharmacy Board rules.
“I still find it concerning,” she added, “that his personal views are not in line with the Pharmacy Board and what a majority of Washingtonians support in terms of protecting patient access at the pharmacy counter, and it calls into question how vigorously his office would defend the rules.”
Dunn's explanation is horseshit. Mondi's right—Washington women have a lot to be concerned about if Dunn
wins naps his way to victory this November.