NHDP Statement on NHGOP Event with Rand Paul

NHGOP Doubles Down on Tea Party Extremism Rejected in 2012 with Paul's Backward Agenda for Granite State Women

Concord - New Hampshire Democratic Party Chair Ray Buckley released the following statement on Republican Senator Rand Paul's fundraiser in Concord this evening. 

"If any Republicans are still wondering tonight what went wrong in 2012, they need look no further than their keynote speaker.  Rand Paul has compared equal pay for equal work laws to the Soviet Politburo, co-sponsored the Blunt amendment allowing employers to deny women preventive health care and contraception, wants to defund Planned Parenthood, and defended Republican Todd Akin after his offensive rape comments.

"There can no longer be any doubt that the New Hampshire Republican Party has turned its back on traditional Granite State values, in a desperate attempt to become the face and voice of the irresponsible Tea Party and radical social conservatives.  There is no other explanation for honoring Rand Paul, someone so extreme even fellow Republican Senator John McCain called him a 'wacko bird.'"

RAND PAUL OPPOSES EQUAL PAY

Rand Paul Voted To Block The Paycheck Fairness Act Saying It Be Harmful. "Kentucky's two Republican senators yesterday helped their party block the Paycheck Fairness Act, which would have given women new tools to combat pay discrimination in the workforce. Kentucky women make just seventy seven cents to every dollar a man makes. The same holds true nationally. To shrink that gap Democrats offered the Paycheck Fairness Act, which is intended to protect women who want to compare their salaries with the men they work with in order to see if there's a disparity. And it forces employers to prove any salary differences are job-related - not gender based. But Kentucky Republican Senator Rand Paul says the legislation would do more harm than good." [WKMS, 6/6/12]

Headline: "Rand Paul Compares Paycheck Fairness To Soviet Politburo" [Huffington Post, 6/5/12]

• Rand Paul Compared Paycheck Fairness To The Soviet Politburo Saying Americans Would Be Ceding Freedom If Judges Had Say Over Pay. "Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) suggested Tuesday that a bill designed to bring women's pay up to the level of men's wages would have created some sort of paycheck Politburo... But Paul, a staunch libertarian, said passing a law that would have given judges more leeway to determine if a woman had been paid unfairly would be a step toward reviving the Soviet Union's notorious central governing body here. The United States' free market, he argued, works much better at setting wages at the appropriate level. 'Three hundred million people get to vote everyday on what you should be paid or what the price of goods are,' Paul told reporters on Capitol Hill. 'In the Soviet Union, the Politburo decided the price of bread, and they either had no bread or too much bread. So setting prices or wages by the government is always a bad idea.' Asked specifically about the lingering pay gap between men and women, the Kentucky senator did not back down, insisting that Americans would be ceding freedom if judges had more say over pay." [Huffington Post, 6/5/12]

 

PAUL WAS A SUPPORTER AND CO-SPONSOR THE OF BLUNT AMENDMENT

Rand Paul Co-Sponsored The Blunt Amendment. On 9/14/11 Rand Paul co-sponsored the Respect for Rights of Conscience Act of 2011.  [S.1467, 112^th Congress, 9/14/11]

Rand Paul Said He Would Vote For The Blunt Amendment Saying "You Should Not Be Forced To Buy Insurance That Goes Against Your Religious Principles." Rand Paul said of the Blunt amendment: "I think many Democrats are going to also vote with Republicans. I will vote to say that, yeah, this is a freedom of religion issue. You should not be forced to buy insurance that goes against your religious principles." [America's Newsroom, Fox News, 2/15/12]

Rand Paul: "If You Have A Moral Objection To Either Birth Control Or Abortion That You Shouldn't Be Forced To Buy Insurance That Has And Pays For Things." Rand Paul said of the Blunt amendment: "Yeah, I see it as a religious freedom issue and that if you have a moral objection to either birth control or abortion that you shouldn't be forced to buy insurance that has and pays for things." [America's Newsroom, Fox News, 2/15/12]

PAUL WOULD DEFUND PLANNED PARENTHOOD

Rand Paul Would Defund Planned Parenthood. "It is unconscionable that government would facilitate the taking of innocent life. I strongly oppose any federal funding for abortion and will stop the flow of tax dollars to groups like Planned Parenthood, who perform or advocate abortions." [Issues: Sanctity Of Life, Rand Paul's Official Senate Office Website, accessed 5/20/13]

Rand Paul Signed A Fundraising Letter For Americans For Life Calling For The Defunding Of "The Corrupt Planned Parenthood." "Americans for Life is leading a rapidly growing number of pro-life Americans like you who are fed up with their dollars funding the corrupt Planned Parenthood! And momentum is building quickly. Unfortunately, this is going to be a tough fight. You see, a stubborn Congress stands in the way. It will take every ounce of strength you have to break through the barriers in place designed to eradicate any legislation aimed at saving babies. You see, many of my colleagues in the Senate and House are beholden to Planned Parenthood and cowed by the pro-abortion propaganda hurled by the mainstream media. But that's not going to stop me. I hope it won't stop you. Will you take a stand now against the taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood?" [Rand Paul, Americans For Life Fundraising Letter, accessed 5/20/13]

PAUL STEPPED IN TO SUPPORT REPUBLICANS WHO MADE OUTRAGEOUS COMMENTS ABOUT RAPE

Rand Paul Stepped In To Defend Indiana Republican Senate Candidate Richard Mourdock Who Said Pregnancies Caused By Rape Were Something "God Intended To Happen." "Kentucky Senator Rand Paul is stepping in to the Indiana Senate race to defend Republican Richard Mourdock, who ignited a firestorm Tuesday when he said that pregnancies caused by rape are 'something God intended to happen.'  A top Paul advisor told Business Insider that the Senator's political action committee, RAND PAC, is making a 'six-figure' media buy in Indiana and plans to go on air Friday with an ad attacking Mourdock's Democratic opponent Joe Donnelly for voting against a bill that would have blocked foreign aid to Pakistan."  [Business Insider, 10/24/12]

Rand Paul Supported Missouri Republican Senate Candidate Todd Akin With An Ad Buy After His Infamous "Legitimate Rape" Comments. "According to the advisor, the ad will be similar to one that RAND PAC ran in Missouri earlier this month to support Republican Todd Akin, another embattled Senate candidate who was ostracized by the party for his now-infamous 'legitimate rape' comments." [Business Insider, 10/24/12]

NHDP - NHGOP Credibility Eroding with Hypocritical Attacks

Concord - New Hampshire Democratic Party Communications Director Harrell Kirstein issued the following statement responding to the latest hypocritical attack from New Hampshire Republican Party on SB152. The NHGOP's press release ignores the fact that the majority of Republican State Senators voted for SB152 as did nine Republicans in the House this afternoon.

"Like the Wizard of Oz, Chairwoman Horn is desperately hoping no one looks behind the curtain to notice her partisan press releases continue to attack Republicans in both the House and Senate who voted for SB152. It is clear that Horn and the NHGOP's statements have no basis in reality or fact but are just an endless series of pathetic partisan attacks attempting to distract from the epidemic of inappropriate and shameful comments made by New Hampshire Republicans. The only thing missing from the NHGOP's act are a smoke machine and emerald goggles to blind New Hampshire voters from the blatant hypocrisy coming from the New Hampshire Republican Party."

NHDP - Senate Republicans Must Name Their 300M Budget Cuts

NH Families and Small Businesses "Flat Out" deserve to know what 300 million Senate Republicans have put on the chopping block

Concord - If Senate Republicans plan to double down on the failed O'Brien-Bradley budget scheme from two years ago, the people of New Hampshire deserve to know what they plan to cut.  Last week, Republican Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Morse claimed the state budget the House sent to the Senate had a $300 million dollar hole and added that "flat out, the budget is going to look a whole lot different when it leaves the Senate than it does now." But Morse and Senate Republicans detailed only a small percentage of the 300 million they want to cut from the state budget, by vowing to cut funds for LCHIP and a scholarship program for underprivileged students.

"It is time for Senate Republicans to 'flat out' name their cuts," said New Hampshire Democratic Party Communications Director Harrell Kirstein.  "If Republicans plan to devastate education, kill hundreds of  New Hampshire jobs, put winter snowplowing at risk, downshift to local communities, and slash hospital funding - again - they should be honest with the people of New Hampshire about what exactly they plan to cut.  The very least Republicans can do is eliminate the uncertainty and let Granite State families and small businesses can brace themselves for another round of reckless and irresponsible Republican cuts."             

In the last budget, House and Senate Republicans made the largest cut to public higher education in American history.  They killed hundreds of New Hampshire jobs, downshifted millions of dollars to local communities, and cut services for seniors and people with disabilities in order to pay for tax giveaways to big tobacco.

"The Bradley-O'Brien budget was an epic disaster for the people of New Hampshire and for Republicans on ballot in 2012.  It's no surprise that Senate Republicans want to hide their plan to double down on this failed approach from Granite Staters, but that doesn't make it right," continued Kirstein.  "Will Senate Republicans eliminate all funding for higher education, pushing through another double-digit tuition increase? Will they cut additional aid to cities and towns, raising local property taxes? Will they cut health care for seniors, people with disabilities and children?  The people of New Hampshire 'flat out' deserve to know."

NHDP - ICYMI: Sunday Editorials Take Kelly Ayotte to Task for Gun Vote, Again

Concord - In case you missed it, the Granite State's Sunday Editorial pages took Republican Senator Kelly Ayotte to task for voting against bipartisan commonsense background check legislation, again.  The Nashua Telegraph, Concord Monitor, Valley News, and Keene Sentinel all criticized Ayotte's pathetic excuses for her vote against 90% of her constituents.

Concord Monitor Editorial: Ayotte's misdirection isn't working

May 12, 2013

"Magicians rely on misdirection to fool audiences and pull off their tricks. So do politicians when asked tough questions, as Sen. Kelly Ayotte has been at venues like her town hall meeting in Tilton this month. At that event Ayotte relied on misdirection and a magician, former congressman and current state Sen. Jeb Bradley. The one-time professional magician screened audience questions for Ayotte and made many of the ones about her anti-gun control vote disappear. Nice trick."

[Full Text Link: http://www.concordmonitor.com/home/6096580-95/editorial-ayottes-misdirection-isnt-working]

Nashua Telegraph Editorial: Ayotte misses mark with gun points

May 12, 2013

"It makes no sense to say just because the NICS doesn't catch everybody that we shouldn't try to catch anybody. Conspicuous by its absence in Ayotte's commentary is any indication of whether she would be willing to support extended background checks under any conditions. She doesn't address the glaring illogic of current law that exempts a significant portion of gun sales. What if all the initiatives she supports came true, would that be enough to convince her that gun show background checks are a good thing? Inquiring minds want to know."

[Full Text Link: http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/opinion/editorials/1004313-465/ayotte-misses-mark-with-gun-points.html]

Valley News Editorial: Ayotte's Preference; Senator Focuses on Mental Health

May 12, 2013

"Here's what we don't understand: Why do the limitations of improved mental health screening give no pause to Ayotte and other advocates of the Protecting Communities bill, but very similar flaws stop them dead in their tracks when it comes to a wider application of background checks? The gun lobby, no doubt, could explain."

[Full Text Link: http://www.vnews.com/opinion/editorials/6066814-95/editorial-ayottes-preference-senator-focuses-on-mental-health]

Keene Sentinel Editorial: Faced with hollow arguments, reformers must keep pushing

May 5, 2013

"In a simple, bulleted slide show - and later in her answer to the single question from the audience about guns that she allowed during the hour-long meeting - Ayotte ticked her way through the same National Rifle Association-approved list of talking points she's relied on for weeks."

[Full Text Link: http://www.sentinelsource.com/opinion/editorial/faced-with-hollow-arguments-reformers-must-keep-pushing/article_0e5822f6-1607-5b24-b2b4-a5c6db53eccf.html]

This isn't the first time New Hampshire's editorial pages have harshly condemned Kelly Ayotte's vote.  Previously, the Concord Monitor called her statement opposing the bipartisan Manchin-Toomey compromise "utter nonsense." The Keene Sentinel said "Either way, Ayotte owes the people of New Hampshire an explanation. What she's said so far - that the bill would unduly burden law-abiding gun owners - doesn't cut it."  The Valley News wrote her "non-explanation was so vague it raised a number of questions" adding that it wasn't "one anybody would mistake for convincing." The Portsmouth Herald editorialized, "If we don't like how she voted Wednesday it's up to all of us who care about this issue to show Sen. Ayotte she was mistaken by voting her out of office."

NHDP - ICYMI: Kelly Ayotte, staunch advocate for gun safety? Not.

Key Point: "It's interesting that Republican Senators who voted No on Manchin-Toomey - such as Ayotte and Jeff Flake - are not staking out a harder stance here by saying only that, hey, I will never apologize for defending the Second Amendment, and you liberals can just suck on it. Instead, even though they are not willing to support expanding the background check system to close a loophole that poses a threat to public safety, apparently because the NRA won't let them, they recognize that support for improving background checks is the politically necessary position to take - and is indeed the one that is tantamount to defending children and families from gun violence."

Full text is below and available here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/05/13/kelly-ayotte-staunch-advocate-for-gun-safety-not/

Washington Post: Kelly Ayotte, staunch advocate for gun safety? Not.

By Greg Sargent, Published: May 13, 2013

A bit of a dispute has broken out over just how much pressure Kelly Ayotte is feeling over her vote against the Manchin-Toomey compromise to expand background checks. The gun control forces have organized to pressure her at town hall meetings and on the air, but conservative media have argued that the pressure on her from the left has been exaggerated.

It's interesting, then, that the major efforts to defend Ayotte by gun rights groups and fellow Republicans tend to emphasize her supposed support for background checks. That seems like a pretty good sign of which way the political winds are blowing on the issue.

Here, for instance, is a new ad that Marco Rubio's Reclaim America PAC is running in New Hampshire. It says this: "Safety. Security. Family. No one understands these things like a mom. Ayotte voted to fix background checks, strengthen mental health screenings and more resources to prosecute criminals using guns."

That message echoes a recent NRA ad that thanks Ayotte for her vote, but also says: "Kelly Ayotte voted for a bipartisan plan to make background checks more effective." Ayotte herself recently defended her vote on the same grounds that she supports.

It's hard not to notice that the thrust of these defenses center on Ayotte's support for background checks, and not her opposition to expanding them.

It's true that Ayotte did vote for an alternative proposal, sponsored by Chuck Grassley, that would have beefed up state sharing of mental health data with the feds, without extending the background check to private sales via commercial portals on the internet and at gun shows. But some gun control groups believe the Grassley approach would actually undermine the overall background check system. What's more, it needs to be stated again that Senators can support improving data sharing while simultaneously expanding the background check to close the private seller loophole, which unquestionably remains a major problem, as detailed in two terrific New York Times pieces recently - here, and here. There is no need to choose between the two.

It's interesting that Republican Senators who voted No on Manchin-Toomey - such as Ayotte and Jeff Flake - are not staking out a harder stance here by saying only that, hey, I will never apologize for defending the Second Amendment, and you liberals can just suck on it. Instead, even though they are not willing to support expanding the background check system to close a loophole that poses a threat to public safety, apparently because the NRA won't let them, they recognize that support for improving background checks is the politically necessary position to take - and is indeed the one that is tantamount to defending children and families from gun violence.