Scott Brown’s Die Young and Broke Campaign Launch (A Statement By Granite State Progress)

Scott Brown in 2010
Image by Wiki Commons
Scott Brown in 2010 Image by Wiki Commons

Scott Brown in 2010
Image by Wiki Commons


Brown wants New Hampshire families to forgo benefits he used himself

CONCORD, NH – Scott Brown will formally announce his campaign bid for U.S. Senate in New Hampshire tonight with a hypocritical ‘Die Young and Broke’ campaign theme – otherwise advertised as Live Free or Log On. Statement from Granite State Progress Executive Director Zandra Rice Hawkins:

“Scott Brown had no problem logging on when he was collecting health care from the federal government for his own family. Brown even told his hometown paper the Boston Globe that he was keeping his younger daughter on his health plan through age 26, a popular provision available to all families thanks to the Affordable Care Act. Yet, Brown is encouraging Granite State families to forgo health care coverage with a misleading campaign slogan. He might as well be saying die young and broke from lack of health care coverage or medical bankruptcy because that’s what he’s endorsing.”

“Scott Brown’s failed Massachusetts talking points don’t jive with the real benefits tens of thousands of Granite Staters are experiencing thanks to Obamacare. Like Scott Brown’s daughter, 10,000 New Hampshire young adults have remained on their parent’s health insurance plan thanks to the Affordable Care Act. In the last month New Hampshire exceeded expectations for marketplace enrollment and passed Medicaid expansion with a bi-partisan coalition because true Granite Staters know that access to quality, affordable health care coverage means living free from a lifetime of health care problems or escalating medical debt.”

Scott Brown’s campaign also released a press release earlier this week that stated that health care premiums in New Hampshire have risen 90%. WMUR debunked the number, reporting that the flawed figure was based on the opinion of a single New Hampshire broker and that New Hampshire premiums will actually decrease by 8% this year.

“Perhaps Scott Brown’s formal campaign launch will mean that he’ll finally invest in a campaign researcher instead of just the staff he hired to pick out popular New Hampshire venues for his staged photo ops,” Rice Hawkins said.

 

Sources:

Boston Globe: Brown says daughter, 23, insured under health law, May 1, 2012

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, How the Health Care Law is Making a Difference for the People of New Hampshire, Updated August 1, 2013

Scott Brown: Study Showing Rising Insurance Premiums a Sad Reminder of Obamacare’s Consequences

WMUR: Hear the one about NH health insurance rates going up 90 percent? April 9, 2014

Scott Brown’s Wall Street Cronies Launch New Ads Trying To Buy Him New Hampshire’s Senate Seat

Scott Brown Pledge Meme!

No Wonder Scott Brown Is Refusing To Sign The People’s Pledge

Concord – As Scott Brown’s Wall Street cronies launch new ads for him in New Hampshire, Shaheen for Senate Campaign Manager Mike Vlacich says these ads are proof that Scott Brown is ready to let corporate special interests bankroll his campaign so he can vote to protect their interests in the Senate, not New Hampshire’s. Vlacich said he was ready to meet anywhere at anytime with representatives of the Brown campaign to sign the People’s Pledge to stop outside third party ad spending.  Brown proposed and signed the same People’s Pledge in his 2012 Senate campaign.

“Scott Brown is running from his own People’s Pledge, and it is because he is counting on the big banks to buy him New Hampshire’s Senate seat, with ads like this,” said Vlacich. “The people of New Hampshire know Jeanne Shaheen. They know they can depend on her to fight for them and make a difference for New Hampshire.”

“We are ready to meet anytime and anywhere to sign the People’s Pledge and stop these third party, out of state groups from pouring their millions into New Hampshire and polluting our airwaves,” said Vlacich.

More than $1.5 million has poured into New Hampshire from the Koch Brothers, Karl Rove and other Republican special interests to attack Jeanne Shaheen.  Brown stopped these third-party out of state groups by proposing and signing the People’s Pledge with his opponent Elizabeth Warren.

As recently as just a few weeks ago, Scott Brown was bragging about how well his People’s Pledge worked, and in 2012 he said Massachusetts voters deserved better than outside third-party attack ads.  The people of New Hampshire deserve better too, so Jeanne Shaheen has asked him to sign the same People’s Pledge for them.  Last week, two bipartisan nonprofit organizations committed to open and accountable government – Common Cause and Public Citizen – also asked both campaigns to sign the People’s Pledge.  They are asking Brown to respond by April 15th.

Shaheen for New Hampshire Releases New Radio Ad: “The People’s Pledge”

money-in-politics

Scott Brown Boasts About the People’s Pledge He Now Refuses to Sign

money-in-politicsConcord, NH — Jeanne Shaheen’s campaign has released a new radio ad highlighting Scott Brown’s hypocrisy and calling on him to sign the People’s Pledge to stop third party advertising in the New Hampshire senate race. The ad uses audio of Brown boasting about the same exact People’s Pledge he created in Massachusetts, but is now refusing to sign in New Hampshire.

The new 60-second radio spot introduces New Hampshire to a Scott Brown 2012 radio ad with Brown boasting about the People’s Pledge he and Elizabeth Warren signed that year.

“Scott Brown said he proposed and signed the People’s Pledge because Massachusetts deserved better.  But apparently, New Hampshire doesn’t deserve better in Brown’s mind because now Scott Brown is refusing to sign the exact same pledge,” said Harrell Kirstein, communications director for the Shaheen campaign.  ”Big Oil and Wall Street special interests want to buy him a senate seat, and he’s eager to get their money.”

“Jeanne Shaheen signed the People’s Pledge and asked Scott Brown to do the same because she believes the people of New Hampshire deserve an election where they can hear the candidates directly and decide who will best represent their interests, not a flood of attack ads from Big Oil and Wall Street,” added Kirstein.

Listen to the new radio ad here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrG898nnw7s&feature=youtu.be

SCRIPT BACKUP
ANNCR: Scott Brown’s changed more than his address. Listen.BROWN: Hello. This is Scott Brown. You’ve probably heard about the SuperPacs that have been created to influence elections, usually with negative ads. So I did something about it in my own race. I proposed and signed a pledge to stop third-party groups from coming into our state…ANNCR: That was Scott Brown running for Senate in Massachusetts. BROWN IN 2012 MASSACHUSETTS CAMPAIGN AD: “This is Scott Brown. You’ve probably heard about the SuperPacs that have been created to influence elections, usually with negative ads. So I did something about it…. I proposed and signed a pledge to stop third party groups from coming into our state.” [YouTube, scottbrownma, 3/9/12]
ANNCR: Just a few weeks ago in New York, he was still boasting about his People’s Pledge.But now Scott Brown’s in New Hampshire and refusing to sign the exact same People’s Pledge. BROWN: “We didn’t need another 30 to 40 million dollars coming in to distort our record and positions on things, so but what we came up with was the people’s pledge. Very unique, way to try to address these things. […] And it worked.” [Scott Brown Appearance, Cornell University, 2/6/14]
ANNCR: Not long ago, Scott Brown said he was “really disgusted” with SuperPac ads. BROWN: “But I and she were really disgusted and deeply concerned about the groups that would come in and distort our records and positions on things. Those third party super PAC’s in particular.  So we came up with a very unique way to handle that.  We signed an agreement.  It’s historic.” [Scott Brown Appearance, Amherst College, 2/18/13]
ANNCR: Now Scott Brown won’t sign his own pledge to stop them. Maybe it’s because Big Oil and Wall Street want to buy him a Senate Seat. Brown Refused To Sign The Same People’s Pledge That He Signed In 2012. “Former Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA) is trying to avoid a repeat of the last time he ran for Senate and lost against now-Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA). This time around, he won’t agree to pledge to reduce spending by outside groups in the Senate race like he and Warren did in 2012.” [TPM, Livewire, 3/17/14]

  • HEADLINE: Scott Brown Won’t Take High Ground This Time, Will Accept Outside Cash [TPM, Livewire, 3/17/14]

 

ANNCR: Jeanne Shaheen signed. Tell Scott Brown to sign.It was the right thing to do in Massachusetts and it’s the right thing to do here. New Hampshire deserves a clean election too.

NEW HAMPSHIRE VOTERS DESERVE THE SAME RESPECT BROWN SHOWED HIS FELLOW BAY STATERS IN 2012

Shaheen Called On Brown To Sign Same People’s Pledge He Sign In MA To Keep Millions In Third-Party TV Ads Off The Airwaves. “Democratic U.S. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen is calling on newly announced Republican challenger Scott Brown to sign the same pact in New Hampshire that helped prevent outside groups from pouring millions of dollars into his last Massachusetts Senate election. In a letter sent Saturday, less than 24 hours after the former U.S. senator from Massachusetts entered the race, Shaheen said she ‘very much admired the People’s Pledge’ that Brown signed with Sen. Elizabeth Warren in 2012. Brown lost his Senate seat to Warren.” [Associated Press, 3/15/14]

Brown Said He Proposed People’s Pledge Because The People Of Massachusetts “Deserve Better” Than Third-Party Groups Getting Involved In Massachusetts’ Election. In a January 2012 appearance on CNN, when asked why Brown proposed the People’s Pledge, Brown said: “Because third parties have a history of coming into states and getting involved in politics and it’s not good for the process, it’s not good for the people of MA, and they deserve better. [CNN, 1/25/12]

Brown Said He Believed Strongly In People’s Pledge And Provided A “Reprieve From Negative Ads That He Didn’t Believe Massachusetts Voters Deserved. “Mr. Brown, who informally met with constituents at the Kenmore Diner before visiting with the editorial board of the Telegram & Gazette, said he strongly believes in the pact, adding that the agreement provides a much-needed ‘reprieve’ from some of the cut-throat political attack advertisements that have cropped up this election year.  He said Massachusetts voters don’t deserve such ads and added that he and Ms. Warren, a Harvard University law professor, are competent candidates capable of articulating their viewpoints and positions without plugs from partisan groups”.  [Worcester Telegram and Gazette, 1/26/12]

 

N.H. Voters Sour On Scott Brown: The More They Learn The Less They Like Him

http://www.dreamstime.com/-image13166580

After 11 Months of Teasing New Hampshire Voters with an Elaborate Ploy for Attention, Scott Brown’s “Prospects for a Political Comeback in New Hampshire Have Taken a Sudden Nosedive”

Concord – The more New Hampshire voters see of Scott Brown the less they like him.  That is the message from the newest public opinion poll conducted by Suffolk University and the Boston Herald.  After flirting for 11 months, Scott Brown’s “prospects for a political comeback in New Hampshire have taken a sudden nosedive” reports the poll.  The former Massachusetts politician trails New Hampshire’s Senator Jeanne Shaheen 39-52, and is seen unfavorably by New Hampshire voters.

“It is clear that Scott Brown’s scam emails, his toxic record of voting for Big Oil’s interests, and his flippant attitude towards the people of New Hampshire are taking its toll,” said New Hampshire Democratic Party Communications Director Harrell Kirstein.  “Granite Staters know how important their vote is and consider candidates seriously; Scott Brown’s circus act is failing the laugh test.”

The Suffolk University/Boston Herald is the third public poll in a row showing New Hampshire’s Senator Shaheen widening her lead.  It comes after the billionaire oil baron Koch Brothers and Scott Brown’s allies have spent nearly $900,000 in negative ads against her – outspending Democratic leaning groups by a more than two-to-one margin.  In January PPP Polls reported Shaheen with a 46-43% lead, then the WMUR/UNH Granite State poll showed the lead widening to 47-37%, and now the Boston Herald/Suffolk University poll shows it expanding further to 52-39%.

“Granite Staters aren’t fooled by desperate attacks. They know Jeanne Shaheen, and they know she always puts New Hampshire first, working for commonsense solutions that make a difference for people here,” continued Kirstein.  “Brown has been involved in a ridiculous almost year-long tease – he’s running for Senate, no for President, he’s in his barn jacket, no he’s shirtless — and it is a stark contrast with Senator Shaheen, who has spent the last year working hard for the people of New Hampshire.”

The full report from the Boston Herald on the Suffolk-Herald poll is below.

N.H. voters sour on Scott Brown, new Suffolk-Herald poll shows

Former U.S. Sen. Scott Brown has slipped in a new Suffolk University-Boston Herald poll when put up against New Hampshire U.S. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen.

Thursday, March 6, 2014

By: Joe Battenfeld

Former U.S. Sen. Scott Brown’s prospects for a political comeback in New Hampshire have taken a sudden nosedive, while U.S. Sen. Rand Paul and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie top the pack of GOP presidential hopefuls in the Granite State, a new Suffolk University/Boston Herald poll shows.

Brown, the ex-Massachusetts lawmaker now considering a run against U.S. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, is trailing the Democratic incumbent by a 52-39 percent margin in a general election matchup, according to the Suffolk/Herald poll of 800 likely New Hampshire voters.

Just one in three Granite State voters have a favorable impression of Brown while 42 percent have a negative opinion of the Republican transplant who shocked the political world in 2010 by winning a U.S. Senate seat in the Bay State, the poll shows.

Brown is easily defeating his GOP foes in a Senate primary matchup, getting just one third of Republican voters, according to the poll.

Brown is not the only pol whose approval ratings are taking a beating in New Hampshire. Half of all Granite State voters now disapprove of President Obama’s job performance, with just 40 percent of voters saying they approve. 

More than half of New Hampshire voters – 52 percent say – Obama’s signature health care law has been bad for New Hampshire, according to the poll.

Just 37 percent of voters say Obamacare has been good for the Granite State, a stunning rejection of the new law that has forced millions of people nationwide off their health care plans.

But Obamacare’s unpopularity has not hurt Shaheen or another Democrat facing re-election, New Hampshire Gov. Maggie Hassan. While Shaheen has opened a comfortable lead against Brown, Hassan is beating her potential GOP opponents by at least 25-point margins, the Suffolk/Herald poll shows. The margin of error for the poll of 800 likely voters is 3.5 percent.

The poll also reveals that the 2016 race for president in the first-in-the-nation primary state is a tossup right now. Paul, the Kentucky senator and tea party favorite, is getting 12 percent of the vote in a crowded field, according to the poll.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who once led the pack in New Hampshire, is also getting just 12 percent of the vote – a sign he’s been hurt by the George Washington bridge scandal and ongoing criminal investigation.

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan, the 2012 vice presidential nominee, follow with nine percent in a matchup of 426 likely GOP primary voters, the poll shows.

Former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman is getting eight percent, while Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker has support from seven percent of New Hampshire voters and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio trails with six percent in a 2016 trial heat.

U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz is also in the middle of the pack with five percent support from New Hampshire Republican primary voters – tied with former Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown.

There are 14 percent of voters who say they are undecided right now.

The Rules change that could end gridlock in the US House

GOP pretzels

Record dysfunction in Congress: it’s NOT just the Senate, and NOT just the filibuster.

Republican extremists in the House have also been using parliamentary tricks to block legislation – including bills that had bipartisan support and would have passed if our elected Representatives were actually allowed to vote.

“The use of ‘closed rules’ has excluded most House members from full participation in the legislative process,” Rep. Louise Slaughter, ranking Democrat on the House Rules Committee, wrote earlier this week.

“Under a closed rule, no amendments are allowed on the House floor. As a result, House Republicans are able to pursue a politically driven agenda without allowing commonsense amendments that could achieve bipartisan compromise.  This approach has also empowered the most extreme members of the House to pursue narrow policy goals at all costs.”

Like, say, the government shutdown.

“On Sept. 30 — the eve of the government shutdown — Republicans on the House Rules Committee changed the rule so only House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) could call up a Senate-passed clean funding bill — a bill that has the votes to pass the House and would end the shutdown, if it were given a vote.”

One man, standing in the way of a vote that impacts millions of Americans.  (Remind you of anything?  Such as: then-Senator Scott Brown single-handedly blocking an extension of unemployment benefits, back in 2010?  The Senate couldn’t vote until they added an extension of Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy.)

This is what’s REALLY wrong with Congress:  our elected Representatives aren’t being allowed to vote on legislation that has bipartisan support.

GOP leadership is using the “closed rule” process to keep the House from passing legislation.  Last year was the most “closed” year in House history.  “In fact, the House GOP passed as many closed rules in a single week in October as during the entire last year of Rep. Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) speakership.”

The Senate is finally reforming the filibuster.

Isn’t it time for the House to reform the “closed rule” process?

Changing the Rules of the Game

Marines_Wrestling


In Congress – as in wrestling – sometimes the rules make the all the difference in who wins or loses.

That’s why the upcoming fight over the Senate filibuster means a lot to working families.

The filibuster is a procedural method that the minority party can use to perpetually delay any legislation it doesn’t like.  If a bill doesn’t get to the Senate floor for a vote, it doesn’t ever get passed – even if a majority of the Senate would vote to approve it.  It’s a back-door way for the minority party to kill legislation, or at least hold the bill up in Committee until it is amended to the satisfaction of the filibustering Senators.

photo by Diane Beckwith-Zink via Flikr

Massachusetts Senator Scott Brown
photo by Diane Beckwith-Zink via Flikr/Creative Commons

Remember two years ago, when Massachusetts Senator Scott Brown “single-handedly” blocked an extension of unemployment benefits?  Senate Republicans used the filibuster to hold up the bill until it was amended to include an extension of Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy.  (The final version cost $900 billion; but only 6% of that cost was for unemployment benefits.)

That’s how the filibuster works – and works against working families.

Using the Senate filibuster to kill legislation is such an “inside game” that – at least as far as we can tell – no one has been tracking filibusters in recent years.  But during the last campaign season, Progress Massachusetts looked closely at Scott Brown’s voting record and came up with 40 bills that would have passed the Senate – if they hadn’t been killed by a Republican filibuster.  The list includes:

  • Restoring American Financial Stability Act of 2010 (the original financial regulatory reform bill);
  • Creating American Jobs and Ending Offshoring Act;
  • Emergency Senior Citizens Relief Act of 2010;
  • American Jobs Act of 2011;
  • Rebuild America Jobs Act;
  • Middle Class Tax Cut Act of 2011; and
  • The Buffett Rule (a 30% effective tax rate on income exceeding $1 million).

All of those bills would have passed the Senate – if they had ever gotten to the floor for a vote.

So, here’s what may be changing:

Yesterday, Majority Leader Harry Reid said that when the Senate is sworn in next January, “he will attempt to diminish the power of Republicans to slow or stop legislation by putting limits on the filibuster. …Mr. Reid would like to limit what procedural motions are subject to filibusters, and to force senators to return to the practice of standing around forever, reading the phone book or what have you, if they choose to filibuster a bill before its final passage.”

Yes, it will be just a procedural change to Senate Rules (if it happens).

But just think where our country might be, now, if the Senate had been able to actually vote on all those bills that Scott Brown helped block.