On the August 25 broadcast of KVOR-AM's The Joseph Michelli Show, guest host Jeff Crank did not challenge Republican gubernatorial candidate Bob Beauprez's false claim that, during a discussion of hypothetical legislation to ban abortion, Democratic gubernatorial candidate Bill Ritter said he would support an exception allowing abortion if a fetus had Down syndrome. Beauprez apparently was referring to an August 11 debate sponsored by KBDI Channel 12, KCNC CBS4, and the Rocky Mountain News. In fact, Ritter made no such statement during the debate.

As Colorado Media Matters previously noted, only Beauprez
-- not Ritter -- suggested that Ritter's statements about a “fetal anomalies” exception to a hypothetical abortion ban would apply to fetuses with Down syndrome. Ritter did not mention Down syndrome during the debate. In fact, in responding to Beauprez's characterization of his position on abortion, Ritter cited an entirely different condition as an example of a fetal anomaly that could be exempted from any abortion ban: a fetus that develops without a brain stem.

When Crank, an unsuccessful Republican candidate for Congress in Colorado's 5th District and El Paso County co-chair of Beauprez's campaign, asked Beauprez to highlight his differences with Ritter, Beauprez falsely stated that Ritter said he would support exceptions for “Down syndrome and other abnormalities.” Crank did not challenge Beauprez's false claim:

BEAUPREZ: There's a couple other substantial differences, and they've come out in our debates. You know, Bill Ritter professes to be pro-life. In a recent debate that we had he said, “Well, I'm pro-life but I think there ought to be exceptions: rape, incest, life of mother. And then he threw in an amazing, an amazing statement. Just volunteered: ”And fetal anomalies."

And I looked at him and I said, “You mean like Down syndrome?”

BEAUPREZ (speaking as Ritter): “Well, yeah, Down syndrome and other abnormalities. We ought to make exceptions for them.”

BEAUPREZ: And I said, “You still call yourself pro-life?”

BEAUPREZ (speaking as Ritter): “Oh yeah, sure I do.”

CRANK: Right.

BEAUPREZ: You know, you just can't say it and have it be so. Either you are or you're not.

In fact, while discussing during the debate whether as governor he would sign a hypothetical bill to outlaw abortion, Ritter said, "[I]t depends on how it looks when it comes to my desk -- but I think it's important to understand the existence of exceptions: rape, incest, even fetal anomalies." Ritter did not say at that point which fetal anomalies should be excepted, nor did he say all fetal anomalies should be excepted.

Later in the debate, Beauprez said he interpreted Ritter's statement to mean that aborting a fetus because it has Down syndrome is “OK.” Referring to Ritter, Beauprez stated: “I don't know where his line is, because he's openly said he's very pro-life. But I think I just heard him say that fetal abnormalities -- which I guess means if you find out you've got a child with Down syndrome -- that's OK. That's a big problem to me.”

Although Ritter did not directly address Beauprez's assertion about Down syndrome, Ritter did respond by saying, “And to say 'fetal anomalies,' some might involve hydrocephal -- or children born without brain stems or being in utero without brain stems.” Ritter added that his decision on whether to sign a hypothetical bill banning abortion would depend, in part, “on what the [excepted] fetal anomalies are or aren't.”

From the August 11 debate on Denver PBS affiliate KBDI Channel 12:

RITTER: So it depends on how it looks when it comes to my desk -- but I think it's important to understand the existence of exceptions: rape, incest, even fetal anomalies. And the second part of it is, does it or does it not contain criminal penalties?

JIM BENEMANN (moderator): Congressman?

BEAUPREZ: Fetal anomalies, too?

RITTER: Well, I think that --

BEAUPREZ: But we're still pro-life, huh, Bill?

RITTER: Yeah, I would absolutely say that, Bob.

BEAUPREZ: If Roe v. Wade were overturned at the federal level, and a bill were put on my desk that still protected the life of the mother, I'd sign it.

[...]

BENEMANN: Congressman, for you this is a fairly black-and-white issue, apparently.

BEAUPREZ: It is.

BENEMANN: Do you see too much gray in Mr. Ritter's position?

BEAUPREZ: Oh my goodness. I don't know where his line is, because he's openly said he's very pro-life. But I think I just heard him say that fetal abnormalities -- which I guess means if you find out you've got a child with Down syndrome -- that's OK. That's a big problem to me. The so-called morning-after pill. I believe that that is clearly a fertilized embryo; we believe that life begins there. That's why I have a problem with that. Taxpayers have spoken repeatedly and said that we don't want taxpayer, at least, funding of abortions, and he says he's going to restore funding to Planned Parenthood. I have a problem with that. I am fairly black-and-white, and I think people need to know that.

[...]

BENEMANN: Bill, do you feel as if you've backtracked on this issue since you've become a governor -- candidate for governor?

RITTER: No, I have talked about this since 1993 when I was first appointed. And it really is important to understand that fetal anomalies, for instance -- and that's why it's difficult. Because you ask a question that's a hypothetical -- what'll happen is the legislature will have a discussion -- and we're still talking about a hypothetical that Roe v. Wade's overturned -- they'll have a discussion. And to say “fetal anomalies,” some might involve hydrocephal -- or children born without brain stems or being in utero without brain stems. And there will be this vetting that will happen in the legislature, and it will come to the governor, and for the governor to say, “I'll sign this or sign that” right now without saying, “I'll look at it and I'll make a decision about what the exceptions are, how broad they are,” and if rape and incest are not two of them, then I'm not going to sign it. And it depends on what the fetal anomalies are or aren't. But those are all part of leadership and part of looking at the public-policy discussion.