The Democratic candidate for Congressional District 6, Kirsten Engel, said she is totally behind a ballot proposal to enshrine the right to abortion in the Arizona Constitution.

During a debate Tuesday night with Republican incumbent Juan Ciscomani, the former state lawmaker said Arizona narrowly escaped being subject to an 1864 law that outlawed the procedure except to save the life of the mother.

That has left the state with a ban after 15 weeks, a law with no exceptions for rape or incest. Engel said that’s unacceptable.

“Every women, every person, has to have the freedom to make their own health care decisions, with their doctor and with their family,” she said in the nearly hour-long televised debate. Engel said that also means no artificial time limits.

“Pregnancies can go bad at any point, wanted pregnancies,” Engel said, citing “devastating situations” – albeit from other states with time limits – where women have died.

“This is not something that we leave to politicians,” she said. “Last time I checked, Juan, you’re not a doctor.”

Aside from supporting Proposition 139, Engel also said if elected she would work to approve federal legislation to restore the law to the way it was before the U.S. Supreme Court in 2022 overturned the historic 1973 ruling that declared women have a constitutional right to terminate a pregnancy.

Ciscomani, for his part, supports that ruling, one that former President Trump has bragged about.

“This is a state issue,” the congressman said. The ruling, Ciscomani said, returned the decision to each state to decide the extent to which the rights that women had prior to the 2022 ruling should be retained now.

But it isn’t exactly clear where the incumbent congressman stands on where that line should be drawn now.

“I trust women,” he said.

“I cherish new life,” Ciscomani continued. “I reject the extremes on this issue.”

He does spell out what he doesn’t want.

“I reject a federal ban on abortion,” Ciscomani said.

He also said he opposed the ruling earlier this year by the Arizona Supreme Court that would have returned Arizona to that 1864 law. That was overturned by lawmakers, leaving the state with the 15-week ban.

But Ciscomani said he does not support the fact that the current Arizona law, the one that will remain if voters reject Proposition 139, does not have an except for rape or incest.

At the same time, he said there are “issues” with the ballot measure.

It would guarantee the right of a woman to terminate a pregnancy for any reason up to the point of fetal viability, something considered between 22 and 24 weeks.

“Setting the time at 24 weeks, that’s obviously nine more than what the current law says,” Ciscomani said. And abortions would be permitted beyond that point if a health care provider concluded it was necessary to save the life or the physical or mental health of the woman.

“So people are going to have to look very closely at the proposition versus the law that we have right now,” he said. “And they’re going to have to make a very personal decision on that.”

Ciscomani said that’s why it’s now being decided on a state-by-state basis.

“It’s a decision that voters in Arizona are going to have to make,” he said.

The other side of that coin, he said, is that it’s not a federal issue, meaning it’s something he won’t have to address in Congress if voters elect him to a new two-year term.

But he declined to answer a question after the debate of how, as an Arizona resident, he intends to vote.

“I will abide and I will respect whatever the will of the voters is in Arizona, as a state issue,” Ciscomani said before ending any further questions to him.

Some parts of the debate turned personal.

Ciscomani chided Engel for not living in the congressional district. She conceded the point – it is not a requirement – saying she has lived in the same house for years, it is just two blocks from the district, and she represented much of the same area when she was in the Legislature.

She in turn took a poke at Ciscomani, saying it was during the years he served in the administration of Gov. Doug Ducey that foreign companies began leasing and buying up land in rural areas to pump unlimited quantities of groundwater to grow alfalfa to be shipped to the Middle East to feed dairy cattle there.

“You’re giving me a lot of credit,” he responded, saying his job for the now-former governor was to manage the Arizona-Mexico Commission.

But there also were barbs as the discussion turned to border security and, specifically, the failure of Congress to approve what had been billed as a bipartisan package that included elements of technology like sensors, physical barriers including walls and fences, and additional enforcement personnel. It also would have tightened up the ability of entrants to seek asylum.

Engel said it was a conservative program and endorsed by the National Border Patrol Council.

“You had a chance to embrace a bipartisan deal that would have made significant steps forward and you rejected it,” she said.

“And you rejected it because of President Trump telling you and your caucus to do so,” Engel continued. “And the deal then fell apart.”

Ciscomani said that ignores the fact that while there was bipartisan support, there also was bipartisan opposition.

“You really need to temper the lies on this stage and on the airwaves,” he told Engel.

“Trump never called me,” Ciscomani said. “No one called me to tell me how to vote.”

Instead, he said, it was his own examination of the legislation that convinced him that there were “several aspects” that needed work.

“It wasn’t ready to be passed,” he said. Anyway, Ciscomani said, he never actually got a chance to cast a vote as the plan could not even get out of the Democratic-controlled Senate.

He also pointed out that the Border Patrol Council has endorsed him in the current race.

Engle, however, said if the legislation was flawed, then Ciscomani should have worked to amend it.

“This is our elected representative,” she said of Ciscomani. “And I don’t think he has much to show for himself in terms of the issue he has been talking about for years.”

Trump’s role in killing the plan was verified by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. The Kentucky Republican said earlier this year that “our nominee for president did not seem to want us to do anything at all.”