Coakley issues a challenge to Capuano

The issue dominated the US Senate race much of the past week, but Coakley put forth her strongest argument yet on a day when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi came to Boston to give a strong endorsement to Capuano and praise his health care stance.

“There are other matters where, of course, you would be involved in compromise,’’ Coakley said in an interview. “This is one, whether as a congresswoman or a senator, I wouldn’t have compromised on. This is an important issue for me; it always has been.’’

As to the argument made by Capuano and others that they voted initially, with plans to change the bill later, she said, “You can’t guarantee that you can do it later. What says that Congressman Capuano won’t make the same decision? He already made the decision that moving it along in the House was more important than standing up for choice. And that’s fine. He can explain that and try and iron it out. . . . I, for one, am not comfortable saying we’ll pass this and we’ll fix it later.’’

A Capuano spokeswoman said Coakley “is demonstrating again a lack of understanding of the legislative process.’’

“Congressman Capuano voted to keep health care reform alive,’’ said the spokeswoman, Alison Mills. “If Martha Coakley had her way, health care reform would be dead.’’

Capuano also scored the key backing yesterday of the person who negotiated the health care deal. Pelosi, the nation’s top female politician, said yesterday at the Omni Parker House in downtown Boston that Capuano was a strong congressional leader who cast a courageous vote on health care legislation.

“Any one of us could have found one reason or another not to vote for the bill,’’ Pelosi said. “But that was not any excuse for preventing this historic moment from taking place.’’

“The vote on the floor is a vote to move the process forward,’’ Pelosi added, directly rebuffing Coakley’s position. “Why would we defeat that and then lose an historic opportunity to go forward? Then you see what happens in conference and then reserve judgment as to whether you want to support the bill at the end of the day.’’

The two candidates are now on the same page: Both say they would vote against a final bill that included the abortion provision. But the continued squabble over Capuano’s vote last week illustrates the themes of their campaigns, with Capuano arguing that he knows best how Washington operates and Coakley making a strong appeal to women.

Coakley had previously articulated how she would vote as a senator, but she had not made clear how she would have voted if she had been in Capuano’s shoes Saturday, when the House narrowly approved the health care bill, 220 to 215.

“It’s not an acceptable compromise,’’ she said. “I still stand by that.’’

Coakley appeared to have shifted her comments in recent days after saying definitively Monday - first on radio station WTKK-FM, then in an interview with the Globe - that she would vote against a bill that includes the abortion amendment.

But in an interview with NECN that aired Thursday night, Coakley appeared to backtrack, saying “I’m not going to answer that question’’ when asked if she would vote against a the bill if the abortion amendment is included.

In an interview with the Globe, Coakley said she was declining to answer the question because she did not think it would be an issue, because the abortion language would be removed. She also said she felt she had answered the question in earlier comments that did not air on television.

“Maybe I didn’t do it as artfully as I should have,’’ she said.

The other two Democratic candidates for the Dec. 8 primary, Alan Khazei and Stephen Pagliuca, have called the positions of Coakley and Capuano alarming, saying Edward M. Kennedy’s successor should vote for the health care overhaul, even if it must mean limiting insurance coverage of abortions.

Khazei, though, has also waffled. Monday he said he would vote for the legislation if the abortion provision were included, but dodged the question in an interview the next day.

Meanwhile, Coakley, perplexed that her personal finances had raised eyebrows, also said yesterday that she spends money on her home and lifestyle.

“We don’t have kids, so I don’t save for college education,’’ she said. “We’ve put our money into our equity in our home. We like to travel, and we have a comfortable lifestyle. I don’t find it that unusual. . . . I am comfortable. I believe I am secure. We certainly live a relatively modest lifestyle.’’

“I’m not apologizing for it,’’ she added.

Coakley’s lack of financial assets caused some consternation this week when the state’s 56-year-old top law enforcement official reported on US Senate financial disclosure forms that neither she nor her husband owned any asset above $1,000. She later said they failed to report a $12,000 retirement account for Coakley and $200,000 to $250,000 in savings and inheritance held by her husband, but said that was a simple error.

Coakley bought a house in the 1980s, she said, but sold it when she ran for Middlesex district attorney in 1998 and for at least nine months went without a salary. Then, she married, helped pay for a wedding and honeymoon, and bought and furnished a home in Medford.

Her state pension, built with more than 20 years of state service, would guarantee her nearly $70,000 a year if she begins collecting it at age 65. That pension is not required to be reported on the federal forms. She also is not required to report her home, which is assessed at $525,000.

Still, her savings stood in stark contrast to those of her fellow candidates, which ranged from $347,000 to $765 million.

Coakley released her second television ad yesterday, highlighting cyber-security in an apparent effort to appeal to parents and suburban voters. Images of children playing in a front yard, with the camera suddenly swinging into a young girl sitting on bed typing on a laptop.

“The stranger,’’ she says, “might be right in their room.’’

The 30-second spot, titled “Protect,’’ highlights Coakley’s work as attorney general to guard children from online predators.

“I know what it takes to protect children,’’ she says.

Matt Viser can be reached at maviser@globe.com.