DATE: Thursday, October 16, 1997            TAG: 9710160548

SECTION: FRONT                   PAGE: A1   EDITION: FINAL 

TYPE: DECISION 97

SOURCE: BY WARREN FISKE 

        STAFF WRITER   

DATELINE: MCLEAN                            LENGTH:   88 lines

IN DEBATE, BEYER PUTS THE FOCUS ON ABORTION BUT GILMORE SAYS HIS WORDS ABOUT NOTIFYING SPOUSE WERE OVERBLOWN.

Democratic gubernatorial nominee Donald S. Beyer Jr. on Wednesday criticized his Republican opponent, James S. Gilmore III, for briefly saying he would give ``serious consideration'' to a law requiring women to notify their husbands before receiving abortions.

During a debate before the Fairfax County Chamber of Commerce, Beyer said he was unimpressed that Gilmore quickly withdrew his support for a spousal notification bill Monday after learning that such laws have been ruled unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court.

That Gilmore would even consider such legislation, Beyer said, suggests that the Republican views ``women as property.'' Beyer added: ``What I'm amazed with is (Gilmore's) instinctive determination to use the power of government to tell people what they can and cannot do in their homes.''

Gilmore replied that the matter has been taken out of proportion and accused Beyer of using abortion as a ``scare tactic'' in the campaign.

Gilmore's comments about spousal notification were aired Monday evening during an interview on WWBT-TV in Richmond. Less than two hours later, he issued a written statement saying he would oppose such a bill after being reminded by pro-abortion rights groups that spousal notification is unconstitutional.

``I said I thought it should be sensitively and fairly considered and the fact of the matter is that I did give it sensitive and fair consideration after the interview,''

Gilmore said during Wednesday's debate. ``I went back and read the (Supreme Court) decision and I concluded that this should not be an issue in this campaign.''

After the debate, Beyer cast doubt on his opponent's explanation. ``He backed away from it because it's extraordinarily insulting to women,'' he said.

Gilmore, who resigned as state attorney general last spring to focus on his gubernatorial bid, said people should not be surprised that initially he was unaware of the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling on spousal notification. ``I don't read every case on issues that are ruled unconstitutional,'' he said after the debate. He then walked away from reporters.

Other than the controversy over abortion, the hourlong debate broke little new ground in the increasingly acrimonious campaign.

The candidates showed a little more civility than they displayed in a raucous two-hour debate Oct. 6 in Richmond. There, Beyer said Gilmore - a former prosecutor in Henrico County - authorized plea agreements that treated too lightly 35 cases involving sexual abuse of children. After Gilmore accused him of making misleading comments, Beyer acknowledged he had erred about the number of cases with written plea agreements.

Wednesday, Beyer again defended the thrust of his criticism: that 35 child molesters received light sentences when Gilmore was a commonwealth's attorney.

``I'm not an expert in all these legal technicalities . . . but it's just plain wrong,'' Beyer said.

Gilmore dismissed Beyer's statement last week that he misspoke because of an ``adrenaline rush.'' He said Beyer ``absolutely misled the people.''

On other discussion points at Wednesdays event, general themes remained the same.

Beyer suggested the abortion flap offers proof that Gilmore is beholden to religious broadcaster Pat Robertson, who has contributed $100,000 to Gilmore's campaigns since 1993.

Gilmore, in return, accused Beyer of flip-flopping on issues such as tax relief and abolishing parole, and of waging a negative campaign that has been ``dishonest with the people of Virginia.''

Beyer, a Northern Virginia car dealer, seemed to be the hometown favorite with the Fairfax Chamber of Commerce. Many in the crowd of at least 500 who watched the debate snickered when Gilmore, who lives in Henrico County, repeatedly accused Beyer of lacking candor.

The candidates were in agreement in pledging that they would not seek to raise gas taxes to fund transportation needs. Both said they would lobby Congress for a greater share of federal road building funds.

They disagreed, however, on whether localities should band together and form transportation authorities that could raise local taxes to build and improve roads.

Beyer was open to the idea. ``If local governments want to cede some of their taxing authority to (transportation authorities), then that's fine with me,'' he said.

Gilmore was squarely against the concept. ``I don't believe there should be an authority that can raise taxes on the people of Virginia,'' he said. ILLUSTRATION: [Color Photos]

James S. Gilmore III

Donald S. Beyer Jr. KEYWORDS: GUBERNATORIAL RACE CANDIDATES DEBATE

Send Suggestions or Comments to webmaster@scholar.lib.vt.edu