 |
|
This is the kind of tipsheet members of Scott Free Florida receive on a regular basis.
Sign up here to get the facts. |
Tag Archives: history
Scott Brown ~~ Reminders
• Is against gay marriage but favors civil unions.
running against Jeanne Shaheen, Democratic Party <— Donate
In 2001, Brown called then state Senator Cheryl Jacques’ decision to have children with her female partner as “not normal” and referred to her parenting as “alleged family responsibilities.”
He later apologized
**********************************************************
In January 12, 2010
Contacts:
Andrea Miller, NARAL Pro-Choice Mass, 917-975-9325
Jesse Mermell, PPLM, 617-616-1689
Pam Nourse, MWPC, 617-451-9294
Christina Knowles, Mass NOW, 508-527-6007
Pam Nourse, MWPC, 617-451-9294
Christina Knowles, Mass NOW, 508-527-6007
Leading Women’s Advocates Denounce Brown’s Record on Choice
Organizations criticize Brown’s previously proposed legislation to deny emergency contraception to rape victims;
Decry his denial of the impact of his legislation in yesterday’s Kennedy Institute debate
Decry his denial of the impact of his legislation in yesterday’s Kennedy Institute debate
BOSTON – At a press conference today, Massachusetts’ leading advocacy organizations for women’s reproductive rights denounced Republican Scott Brown’s poor record on a woman’s right to choose. The organizations, including the Planned Parenthood of Massachusetts, NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts, the Massachusetts Women’s Political Caucus and the Massachusetts Chapter of the National Organization for Women, criticized Brown’s long record of opposition to policies that promote choice and privacy rights. The organizations highlighted Martha Coakley’s strong support of a woman’s right to choose.
The organizations blasted Scott Brown’s previously proposed legislation that, if it had passed, would have allowed hospital emergency rooms to deny emergency contraception to victims of rape. This callous approach to reproductive rights led the anti-choice Massachusetts Citizens for Life (MCFL) to endorse Scott Brown. MCFL wrote on its blog, “Our PAC has been supporting Scott Brown because he will be a pro-life vote in the Senate.”
The organizations also criticized Brown for denying the severe impact of his legislation on victims of rape in yesterday’s debate hosted by the Kennedy Institute. During the debate, Coakley repeatedly pressed Brown to acknowledge that his legislation would have allowed hospitals to deny emergency contraception to victims of rape, which he attempted to deny.
Brown was simply wrong.
“Scott Brown demonstrated in last night’s debate the lengths to which he will go to mislead the voters about his record,” said Andrea Miller, Executive Director of NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts. “He has repeatedly shown his willingness to compromise for political gain the health and well-being of some of the most vulnerable women in Massachusetts, including victims of sexual assault. Massachusetts needs a United States Senator who will be honest about his or her record and who will stand up every single day in defense of our rights, including a woman’s right to choose. Martha Coakley has been a true and steadfast champion for choice throughout her career.”
“Scott Brown is simply not telling the truth about his record — and, even worse, he’s not telling the truth about the impact his legislation would have on victims of sexual assault,” said Pam Nourse, Vice President of the Massachusetts Women’s Political Caucus Board of Directors. “Scott Brown is endorsed by anti-choice groups like Massachusetts Citizens for Life because of his co-sponsorship of waiting periods for abortions, and his record of supporting legislation that would allow hospitals to turn away rape victims seeking emergency contraception. There is no way Scott Brown can honestly call himself a defender of a woman’s right to choose. Martha Coakley is the candidate in this race who will protect and defend a woman’s right to choose. The National Women’s Political Caucus is proud to support Martha Coakley to be our next United States Senator.”
“Scott Brown says that victims of rape should just get back in the car and drive to another hospital,” said Christina Knowles, State Director for the Massachusetts Chapter of the National Organization for Women. “Legislation he filed would have denied rape victims access to emergency contraception at numerous hospitals across Massachusetts. His legislative record shows a deep lack of understanding of women’s health issues and an enormous lack of empathy for what victims of rape are going through. Throughout her career, Martha Coakley has been a staunch defender of fundamental democratic principles like equality and freedom of choice. We are confident that Martha will continue to defend these essential principles in Washington.”
“With many health care battles still to be fought and with a closely divided Supreme Court, who Massachusetts elects to the U.S. Senate on January 19 will have an impact that is felt nationally and felt for years to come,” said Dianne Luby of Planned Parenthood of Massachusetts. “It is baffling to hear Scott Brown paint himself as a supporter of women’s reproductive health. The amendment he filed in 2005 to the Emergency Contraception Bill would have forced rape survivors to travel from hospital to hospital seeking emergency contraception. That certainly doesn’t feel supportive.”
The four groups strongly criticized Brown’s record regarding critical health services for women:
• Brown was the lead sponsor of a legislative amendment in 2005 that would have allowed hospital emergency rooms to deny emergency contraception to victims of rape.
• Brown has co-sponsored the so-called Women’s Right to Know Bill, legislation that would impose a mandatory delay before a woman can obtain an abortion. This legislation is supported by Massachusetts Citizens for Life, an organization that has endorsed Brown for United States Senate.
• Brown recently filed legislation that, if enacted, would allow the removal of previously mandated insurance coverage for a wide array of health services, including critical health care for women. Among the women’s health services that his bill would allow to be removed as mandated coverage are mammograms, minimum maternity stays for new mothers, and screenings (pap smears) to detect, among other possible conditions, cervical cancer at an early, treatable stage.
• Brown opposes national health care reform that includes many benefits for women, such as ending denials by insurance companies to women who have had a Caesarean section or who suffered domestic abuse under the premise that they were “pre-existing conditions.”
Since 1972, NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts has been a leading force advocating to protect privacy and promote reproductive health. Mobilizing its 20,000 members across the Commonwealth, NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts uses the political process to guarantee every woman the right to make personal decisions regarding the full range of reproductive choices.
********************************************************
In 2007, Brown visited King Philip High School to discuss the topic of gay-marriage legislation. Students had posted insulting comments about Brown and his family on Facebook. At the meeting, Brown read the profanity-laced comments aloud and identified some of the students who wrote them.
*******************************************************
In 2008, he voted in favor of Massachusetts joining the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, a pact among northeastern states requiring power plants to reduce emissions or to buy carbon credits. He now says he would vote against the initiative as well as a federal cap-and-trade bill.
********************************************************
Marriage
I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. States should be free to make their own laws in this area, so long as they reflect the people’s will as expressed through them directly, or as expressed through their elected representatives.
********************************************************
Although initially supportive of the health care bill, Brown now objects because Massachusetts — where nearly all citizens now have health care coverage — would end up subsidizing other states’ health care costs. (Read “5 Truths About Health Care in America.”)
“Roe v. Wade is the law of the land, and I don’t plan on overturning it, but I’ve always felt that, you know, I’m against partial-birth abortions and believe in parental consent, a strong parental-notification law.”
— The Boston Globe, Nov. 20, 2009
********************************************************
Brown owns a four-bedroom, colonial-style home in Wrentham, Mass.; a six-room house in Rye, N.H.; three small condo units in Brighton, Mass.; and a time-share unit in Aruba.
*******************************************************
Abortion
While this decision should ultimately be made by the woman in consultation with her doctor, I believe we need to reduce the number of abortions in America. I believe government has the responsibility to regulate in this area and I support parental consent and notification requirements and I oppose partial birth abortion. I also believe there are people of good will on both sides of the issue and we ought to work together to support and promote adoption as an alternative to abortion…. Scott Brown is not pro-choice ppl
*****************************************************
Immigration
I recognize that our strength as a nation is built on the immigrant experience in America. I welcome legal immigration to this country. However, we are also a nation of laws and government should not adopt policies that encourage illegal immigration. Providing driver’s licenses and in-state tuition to illegal immigrant families will act as a magnet in drawing more people here in violation of the law and it will impose new costs on taxpayers. I oppose amnesty, and I believe we ought to strengthen our border enforcement and institute an employment verification system with penalties for companies that hire illegal immigrants.
Share this:
Jindal Versus Louisiana Schoolchildren … a repost
Another Republican chooses to sue the Administration
Bobby Jindal, the Republican Governor of Louisiana, filed suit against the Obama administration on Wednesday. He argues that the Department of Education has exceeded its constitutional authority by offering states grants if they choose to opt-in to the Common Core standards.
Jindal’s Complaint claims the Common Core is “an attempt by the executive branch to implement national education reform far beyond the intentions of Congress; in fact, in contradiction to 50 years of Congressional policy forbidding federal direction or control of curriculum, the cornerstone of education policy.”
While this lawsuit makes little sense for a variety of reasons, perhaps the strangest is the complete about-face Jindal made. Not only did he sign the legislation implementing the Common Core State Standards (CCSS), his administration actively pushed the legislature to enact them. Back in 2012, Stafford Palmieri, Jindal’s top education policy adviser, wrote: “I frankly don’t foresee a controversy over this and if there is one and we come out swinging about how impt [sic] this is that helps not hurts our case. We stand very firmly behind CCSS as you know,” according to emails obtained The Times-Picayune.
However, in Louisiana, Bobby Jindal is one of only a few politicians to choose politics over kids.
Back in May, a bill to repeal the Common Core didn’t even make it out of the Louisiana Senate Education Committee. And in April, the corresponding House committee shot down two Jindal-backed repeal bills. While a fraction of the state legislature tried to stop implementation by suing Education Superintendent John White, their request was denied. White, too, remains an ardent supporter of the standards.
Jindal marks the far-right on Common Core: only a handful of states are not participating in the voluntary program. If Jindal gets his way, he will join a select group of flip-floppers:
- Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin, who once supported their implementation, signed a bill this June to repeal them.
- South Carolina first adopted the standards in 2010, but also had them repealed this summer.
- Indiana led the way with its repeal in March, though its new state standards are remarkably similar.
By choosing to sue the Obama administration, Bobby Jindal enters a league of his own on the Common Core. He himself has protested unnecessary lawsuits, once remarking: “This bill will help stop frivolous lawsuits and create a more fair and predictable legal environment, and I am proud to sign it into law.” Unfortunately, he and other Republicans are gumming up the legal system instead of helping ordinary Americans.
BOTTOM LINE: When your duly elected state legislature and elected members of your Board of Elementary and Secondary Education and the Superintendent of education that you appointed all believe that the Common Core is good for Louisiana’s students, you should listen. Choosing politics – and a possible 2016 presidential run – over schoolchildren is wrong.
Share this:
Canada: Home of the Whopper
Architects of Burger King’s inversion claim it’s not about taxes
Burger King is rolling ahead with its plan to move to Canada. It confirmed Tuesday that it will purchase Tim Hortons, a Canadian coffee and doughnut chain, for about $11 billion, one of the biggest foreign acquisitions since 2012.
This makes Burger King one in a string of corporate deserters in recent years. According to new data provided by the Congressional Research Service, 47 companies have inverted in the last decade, including at least seven this year alone. These companies are able to dodge US taxes by moving their headquarters, but not their operations, to countries with lower corporate tax rates. So called “inversions” may save the companies a few bucks, but they could cost the US taxpayer tens of billions of dollars.
The Deal: Founded in Miami in 1954, Burger King operates more than 7,000 locations in the United States, but only 300 in Canada. In 1964, the Canadian fast food service Tim Hortons was founded in Ontario and now has more than one store per 10,000 Canadians. Burger King will shell out $11.4 billion for the coffee shop, but both will actually be controlled by 3G Capital, a Brazilian-US investment firm. According to the Wall Street Journal, Alex Behring, who is currently Burger King’s executive chairman and a managing partner at 3G Capital, will head the new company.
Although America has a top corporate tax rate of 35%, numerous multi-national corporations do not pay that much. Instead, U.S. corporations paid an average of 12.6%, according to the Government Accountability Office. Burger King also does not pay the top corporate tax rate, but has a tax rate in “the mid- to high twenties” according to Mr. Behring. While Burger King CEO Daniel Schwartz doesn’t “expect there to be meaningful tax savings,” Canada’s federal corporate tax rate is 15%.
Moving Forward: Burger King should reconsider its own bid for the company. Since the news broke, the public has denounced this newest corporate deserter. #BoycottBurgerKing is now commonplace on Twitter and Burger King’s Facebook was littered with comments threatening to never return. Senator Sherrod Brown added to that chorus: “Burger King’s decision to abandon the United States means consumers should turn to Wendy’s Old Fashioned Hamburgers or White Castle sliders.”
When Walgreens announced its purchase of Alliance Boots, a European pharmacy, it received similar criticism, and it has since said that it will stay headquartered in the United States. They decided that paying their fair share was more profitable.
BOTTOM LINE: When more and more American companies move out of the U.S., ordinary Americans end up footing the tax bill. Companies employing the process of inversion are taking advantage of U.S. taxpayers and cheating the system, to the detriment of our workers and our economy. It’s beyond unpatriotic and it’s time for them to stop.
Like CAP Action on Facebook and follow us on Twitter!
Share this:
An Update on the Economy, Iraq, and Ukraine
At the White House yesterday afternoon, President Obama made a statement on a number of important issues ahead of his attendance at the NATO Summit in the United Kingdom next week.
The President first talked about the American economy, noting that it’s growing “at a stronger clip” than predicted, and that we have more work to do to continue this momentum. He then discussed the current U.S. operations in Iraq, reiterating his commitment as Commander-in-Chief to “always do what is necessary to protect the American people and defend against evolving threats to our homeland.”
President Obama concluded his statement addressing the situation in Ukraine, noting that the evidence is clear: “Russia is responsible for the violence in eastern Ukraine.”
See more from the President’s remarks here:
 |
|||
|
|||
|
Be a Seed for Change 
You must be logged in to post a comment.