First of all, I hope the best that can be hoped for the people of Haiti or anyone else that is in the country for work, leisure, or humanitarian reasons. Human tragedy on this scale tends to put a lot of other things in perspective. Martha Coakley and Scott Brown also took a minute away from the campaigns to express their condolences.
Coakley said, "I join with all Americans and people across the world in offering my thoughts and prayers to the people of Haiti. I am profoundly concerned about the impact of yesterday’s earthquake on millions of people in that country. As Americans, we are best when we pull together to help those in need when there is a crisis. And this is a crisis. We must all commit ourselves to working with the people of Haiti to help in their relief and rebuilding efforts for their country." Brown tweeted his prayers, and offered this link for anyone that wants to help.
Now back to the campaign...
--The "Coakley staffer 'attacked' the Weekly Standard reporter" story took on a life of its own today. It has been reported all over the place so I won't say much about it (except that McCormack comes off like a whiny brat/the Don King character in Rocky V: "touch me and I'll sue!"), but here is the link to his original post, Coakley's response that she is being "stalked" by Scott Brown staffers, and Michael Meehan's apology.
One final (and obvious) thought on this: this is the last thing Coakley needed right now.
--Coakley has posted a letter from Vicki Kennedy on her website in which the widow of the late Senator Ted Kennedy says, "Throughout my husband Ted’s life, you were always there for him, for me and for the entire Kennedy family. We are tremendously grateful for your friendship and support in the past, and we ask you to stand with us now to support Martha Coakley in the crucial race to fill Ted’s remaining term. This Tuesday, January 19 everything is on the line."
The direct ask from Vicki on behalf of the entire Kennedy clan may provide an interesting test to measure the remaining political pull of the famous Massachusetts family.
--I can't link to State House News (subscription only), but Senate President Therese Murray told reporters she was push-polled by the Brown campaign. SHN also reports that Governor Deval Patrick and Boston Mayor Tom Menino are optimistic that Coakley will prevail on Tuesday.
--The Fix's Chris Cillizza is all over the race today. This morning he noted that more than $6 million will be spent on TV ads in the race (that cheering you hear is from local TV execs). Then he wrote that Republicans already view the race as win-win. Finally, he opined that this race is going to provide a blueprint for Republican candidates next November (even suggesting they will copy Brown's truck ad).
--Over at Politico, Glen Thrush says Martha Coakley is no longer shy about playing the "Kennedy card." White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs says "there's a lot at stake" in Massachusetts.
--The Phoenix's Adam Reilly wonders why Ayla Brown's defense of her father is front-page news.
--Martha Coakley scored three newspaper endorsements today (on top of the Globe), picking up the nods of the Boston Phoenix, Providence Journal, and Newton Tab. The Phoenix called Brown "a know-nothing reactionary," while the Providence Journal said, "our state is so boring we pay more attention to races in Massachusetts."
--Finally, Friday is the deadline to request an absentee ballot. If you can't vote on Tuesday, go visit your town hall tomorrow.
Boston Globe endorses Martha Coakley for Senate.
This afternoon the Boston Globe endorsed Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley for U.S. Senate.
The Globe writes that Scott Brown, "wins points for being different" (i.e. Republican), but that a vote for Brown is "a vote for gridlock, in the form of endless Republican filibusters, and for the status quo in health care, climate change, and financial regulation."
As for Coakley, the paper notes that she, "is by far the more qualified candidate, in experience and judgment," even if she, "wasn't the most forceful or visionary candidate in the Democratic field."
This has to be one of the strangest endorsements I have read, which I guess befits a strange few weeks, during which Globe columnists routinely blasted Coakley's campaign. Ironically, given the Globe's pasting of her strategy, this much-needed endorsement resembles Coakley's campaign...it leaves a lot to be desired.
While technically the it's an endorsement of Coakley, it reads more like anti-endorsement of Brown. In fact, Coakley's name is only mentioned 7 times in the entire editorial, compared to 14 mentions of the Republican. As far as I can tell, the only reason the Globe gives for supporting Coakley is that she will "carry the message to Washington" that Massachusetts voters are, "fed up with Senate wrangling and wants clear answers on health care, climate change, and loose regulation of financial institutions." Can't the rest of the delegation do that?
Most of the piece goes into great detail to call Brown an obstructionist, and while the endorsement is important for Coakley, I'm not sure it does anything to fire up the Democratic base if they weren't already planning to vote on Tuesday.
The Globe writes that Scott Brown, "wins points for being different" (i.e. Republican), but that a vote for Brown is "a vote for gridlock, in the form of endless Republican filibusters, and for the status quo in health care, climate change, and financial regulation."
As for Coakley, the paper notes that she, "is by far the more qualified candidate, in experience and judgment," even if she, "wasn't the most forceful or visionary candidate in the Democratic field."
This has to be one of the strangest endorsements I have read, which I guess befits a strange few weeks, during which Globe columnists routinely blasted Coakley's campaign. Ironically, given the Globe's pasting of her strategy, this much-needed endorsement resembles Coakley's campaign...it leaves a lot to be desired.
While technically the it's an endorsement of Coakley, it reads more like anti-endorsement of Brown. In fact, Coakley's name is only mentioned 7 times in the entire editorial, compared to 14 mentions of the Republican. As far as I can tell, the only reason the Globe gives for supporting Coakley is that she will "carry the message to Washington" that Massachusetts voters are, "fed up with Senate wrangling and wants clear answers on health care, climate change, and loose regulation of financial institutions." Can't the rest of the delegation do that?
Most of the piece goes into great detail to call Brown an obstructionist, and while the endorsement is important for Coakley, I'm not sure it does anything to fire up the Democratic base if they weren't already planning to vote on Tuesday.
Martha Coakley visits seniors, says she will protect Social Security and Medicare.
Visiting seniors at the Kit Clark Senior Service Center in Boston today, Martha Coakley outlined her commitment to protect Social Security and Medicare, according to a campaign press release. Coakley also highlighted the differences between "her commitment to Massachusetts seniors and Republican Scott Brown’s adherence to Bush-Cheney policies that would cost seniors money and undermine Medicare and Social Security."
“I will make an iron-clad commitment to protecting Social Security and Medicare, and I’ll fight to lower the cost of health care and prescription drugs," Coakley said. "My opponent won’t even tell you where he stands. So I will. In the Massachusetts Senate, Scott Brown filed a bill that could allow insurance companies to deny coverage for hospice care. Scott Brown is against the health care bill which would extend prescription drug coverage to seniors. He would also consider cuts to Social Security. I won’t let that happen. I’ll always stand up for you.”
The press release states that, in the Senate, Martha Coakley will fight for seniors. She will protect Social Security and support seniors’ long term care. And she will work to reduce prescription drug costs by closing the so-called Medicare Part D “doughnut hole,” which forces seniors, many on fixed incomes, who are on Medicare to pay the full cost of their prescription drugs once those costs exceed $2,700 per year.
The Coakley campaign also claims that Scott Brown voted against funding for MassHealth Senior Care in 2003, and would consider cuts to Social Security.
Update:
The Brown campaign responded to Coakley's claims in a statement. “It’s disappointing that Martha Coakley is attempting to deceive voters with her demonstrably false statements on my health care record. We have sharply different views on the health care bill in Washington,” Brown said. “Time and again, Martha has said she would be the 60th vote for a health care bill that will slash Medicare by a half-trillion dollars, raise taxes and increase spending. As the 41st Republican Senator, I would insist we start over on health care and craft a bipartisan bill that will lead to meaningful reform.”
“I will make an iron-clad commitment to protecting Social Security and Medicare, and I’ll fight to lower the cost of health care and prescription drugs," Coakley said. "My opponent won’t even tell you where he stands. So I will. In the Massachusetts Senate, Scott Brown filed a bill that could allow insurance companies to deny coverage for hospice care. Scott Brown is against the health care bill which would extend prescription drug coverage to seniors. He would also consider cuts to Social Security. I won’t let that happen. I’ll always stand up for you.”
The press release states that, in the Senate, Martha Coakley will fight for seniors. She will protect Social Security and support seniors’ long term care. And she will work to reduce prescription drug costs by closing the so-called Medicare Part D “doughnut hole,” which forces seniors, many on fixed incomes, who are on Medicare to pay the full cost of their prescription drugs once those costs exceed $2,700 per year.
The Coakley campaign also claims that Scott Brown voted against funding for MassHealth Senior Care in 2003, and would consider cuts to Social Security.
Update:
The Brown campaign responded to Coakley's claims in a statement. “It’s disappointing that Martha Coakley is attempting to deceive voters with her demonstrably false statements on my health care record. We have sharply different views on the health care bill in Washington,” Brown said. “Time and again, Martha has said she would be the 60th vote for a health care bill that will slash Medicare by a half-trillion dollars, raise taxes and increase spending. As the 41st Republican Senator, I would insist we start over on health care and craft a bipartisan bill that will lead to meaningful reform.”
Scott Brown visits medical company to highlight negative impact of health care bill.
With the fate of national health care reform hanging on the outcome of Tuesday's election, Republican Senate candidate Scott Brown (a vehement opponent of the bill) visited ZOLL Medical Corporation to highlight the "impact that higher taxes in the health care bill will have on Massachusetts." ZOLL, located in Chelmsford, makes medical devices that help clinicians, EMS professionals, and lay rescuers treat victims needing resuscitation and critical care.
According to a campaign press release, Brown visited ZOLL to call attention to elements within the national health care bills that would force the company and others like it in the medical device sector to pay dramatically higher taxes. Both the House and the Senate health bills propose $20 billion in new taxes on medical device manufacturers over the coming decade. Brown called the proposals “unacceptable” and said Massachusetts’ 225 medical device companies, which account for 22,000 jobs in the state, should not be made to pay these new costs.
“ZOLL Medical has a strong business and provides excellent benefits to its employees, but national proposals to change our health care system will alter the landscape for this company and many others like it,” said Brown. “Companies like this are critical to the Massachusetts economy and provide good jobs and excellent benefits. It is wrong to force them to shoulder a new tax burden that will destroy their ability to compete and maintain jobs.”
Depending on the final language of a health care reform bill, ZOLL’s share of the proposed new tax on medical devices could be in the $5 million to $10 million range, according to the Brown campaign. An additional tax in this amount would equal nearly 100 percent of the company’s entire net income and would seriously threaten ZOLL’s ability to ability grow and compete.
“We’re big supporters of health care reform but the current proposals would mean a reduction in our Massachusetts-based manufacturing and engineering workforce, along with much greater healthcare cost sharing by all our employees,” said Richard Packer, ZOLL Medical chief executive officer. “The $20 billion in extra taxes on device manufacturers like us would have a devastating effect on our business.”
According to a campaign press release, Brown visited ZOLL to call attention to elements within the national health care bills that would force the company and others like it in the medical device sector to pay dramatically higher taxes. Both the House and the Senate health bills propose $20 billion in new taxes on medical device manufacturers over the coming decade. Brown called the proposals “unacceptable” and said Massachusetts’ 225 medical device companies, which account for 22,000 jobs in the state, should not be made to pay these new costs.
“ZOLL Medical has a strong business and provides excellent benefits to its employees, but national proposals to change our health care system will alter the landscape for this company and many others like it,” said Brown. “Companies like this are critical to the Massachusetts economy and provide good jobs and excellent benefits. It is wrong to force them to shoulder a new tax burden that will destroy their ability to compete and maintain jobs.”
Depending on the final language of a health care reform bill, ZOLL’s share of the proposed new tax on medical devices could be in the $5 million to $10 million range, according to the Brown campaign. An additional tax in this amount would equal nearly 100 percent of the company’s entire net income and would seriously threaten ZOLL’s ability to ability grow and compete.
“We’re big supporters of health care reform but the current proposals would mean a reduction in our Massachusetts-based manufacturing and engineering workforce, along with much greater healthcare cost sharing by all our employees,” said Richard Packer, ZOLL Medical chief executive officer. “The $20 billion in extra taxes on device manufacturers like us would have a devastating effect on our business.”
Scott Brown releases new radio ad featuring daughters.
Earlier today, Republican Senate candidate Scott Brown began airing a new radio ad that features his daughters Ayla and Arianna criticizing Martha Coakley for negative TV spots.
The script for the ad reads:
AYLA BROWN: My Name is Ayla Brown
ARIANNA BROWN: And I’m Arianna Brown.
AYLA BROWN: Our dad is Scott Brown. When he made his decision to run for the United States Senate we knew it would be a learning experience for our family. We were excited about the campaign and what our dad could accomplish for this state. But what we’ve witnessed and learned from Martha Coakley and her political machine goes against everything we were taught growing up. Martha Coakley and her supporters are saying hurtful and dishonest things about our dad. Their attacks are out of line.
ARIANNA BROWN: And they’re just plain wrong. Instead of discussing important issues like health care and jobs, Martha Coakley decided the best way to stop our dad is to tear him down. On Tuesday please consider voting for our dad Scott Brown. He will fight to lower taxes, cut spending and get our economy moving again. We know our dad will bring the change needed to get our country back on the right track again. Let’s send a message to Martha Coakley that the old way of doing things just doesn’t work.
SCOTT BROWN: Thanks girls. My name is Scott Brown, I’m their dad and I approved this message.
ANNOUNCER: Paid for by Scott Brown for U.S. Senate.
The script for the ad reads:
AYLA BROWN: My Name is Ayla Brown
ARIANNA BROWN: And I’m Arianna Brown.
AYLA BROWN: Our dad is Scott Brown. When he made his decision to run for the United States Senate we knew it would be a learning experience for our family. We were excited about the campaign and what our dad could accomplish for this state. But what we’ve witnessed and learned from Martha Coakley and her political machine goes against everything we were taught growing up. Martha Coakley and her supporters are saying hurtful and dishonest things about our dad. Their attacks are out of line.
ARIANNA BROWN: And they’re just plain wrong. Instead of discussing important issues like health care and jobs, Martha Coakley decided the best way to stop our dad is to tear him down. On Tuesday please consider voting for our dad Scott Brown. He will fight to lower taxes, cut spending and get our economy moving again. We know our dad will bring the change needed to get our country back on the right track again. Let’s send a message to Martha Coakley that the old way of doing things just doesn’t work.
SCOTT BROWN: Thanks girls. My name is Scott Brown, I’m their dad and I approved this message.
ANNOUNCER: Paid for by Scott Brown for U.S. Senate.
DSCC and SEIU air attack ads.
No time to comment on these at the moment, but wanted to post them for readers to take a look.
From the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee:
and from SEIU:
From the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee:
and from SEIU:
The ice-cold morning roundup.
As I wait for my fingers to thaw out from a cold, glove-less walk across Fort Point Channel, I want to take a moment to give credit to some volunteers. Driving my kid-sister to Logan this morning, we passed a number of highway bridges packed with Coakley and Brown supporters holding signs. My car told me it was 15 degrees outside, and I'm guessing that on a highway bridge the wind chill drops the temp down close to zero. Kudos to these committed souls who are braving frostbite for their candidates.
On to the morning roundup:
--The Washington Post's Dan Eggen has more on last night's Coakley fundraiser, which was hosted by a number of prominent health care industry lobbysists.
In a statement released last night, Scott Brown said, "While the Beltway special interests groups may be lining up behind Martha, I am proud to rely upon small campaign contributions from everyday people who are concerned about the direction of our country. It's ironic that she would claim she'll be accountable to the people and then jet off to Washington to wine and dine with lobbyists."
--Added to that bit of spin, David Filipov reports from the Coakley campaign trail in today's Boston Globe, noting that she has not done much (if any) retail politicking during this campaign. Filipov writes that:
-- Over at CW Unbound, Bruce Mohl reports on Coakley's duel AG roles of consumer advocate and state defender.
--The Herald's Jessica Van Sack reports that Rush Limbaugh joined the Senate fray yesterday (no surprise given the Coakley ad's Hitler-esque Limbaugh photo), calling the Democratic candidate a "sock puppet."
--Dan Balz and Chris Cillizza report on the race in today's Washington Post. Remember how I wrote Monday that national Dems would start looking to blame Coakley, and not the national political environment, for this mess so they don't hurt their recruitment for November? That spin has already begun. Balz and Cillizza write:
--In an Ideas piece on Politico, Radley Balko details Coakley's career as a prosecutor and writes, "Coakley may share Kennedy’s opposition to the death penalty, but her record as a prosecutor leaves plenty of doubt about her commitment to justice."
--Scott Lehigh writes today that he is not impressed with Brown, but is also very disappointed in Coakley for her "chameleon" approach to the death penalty.
Finally, Scott Brown picked up the endorsement of another Boston sports hero today: former Natick Redmen, Boston College Eagle, and New England Patriot Doug Flutie:
On to the morning roundup:
--The Washington Post's Dan Eggen has more on last night's Coakley fundraiser, which was hosted by a number of prominent health care industry lobbysists.
In a statement released last night, Scott Brown said, "While the Beltway special interests groups may be lining up behind Martha, I am proud to rely upon small campaign contributions from everyday people who are concerned about the direction of our country. It's ironic that she would claim she'll be accountable to the people and then jet off to Washington to wine and dine with lobbyists."
--Added to that bit of spin, David Filipov reports from the Coakley campaign trail in today's Boston Globe, noting that she has not done much (if any) retail politicking during this campaign. Filipov writes that:
"Coakley bristles at the suggestion that, with so little time left, in an election with such high stakes, she is being too passive. ‘As opposed to standing outside Fenway Park? In the cold? Shaking hands?’ she fires back, in an apparent reference to a Brown online video of him doing just that."Note to future candidates for office: When campaign momentum appears to be 100% on the side of your opponent, national attention is being drawn to the race, and your campaign is being criticized left and right, here are a couple of things to avoid:
- Don't leave the state one week before the election to attend a Washington, DC fundraiser with Congressmen and highly connected lobbyists.
- Don't dismiss retail politics and shaking hands with the people, especially when you say it in reference to your opponent's efforts to...shake hands with the people.
--I started writing a post on the dueling press conferences on women's rights yesterday but got sidetracked, so I will leave it to the Globe's Matt Viser, WBUR's Fred Thys and the Herald's Hillary Chabot to fill you in. In short, the Coakley campaign rallied pro-choice groups against Brown, and he responded with a press conference of his own starring his daughters. Brown focused on Coakley's attack ad, which his daughter Ayla said, "represents everything that discourages young women from getting involved in politics."
--The Herald's Peter Gelzinis penned a column on Scott Brown that I can't really describe, while Rachelle Cohen notes the arrival of Democratic spokesman Hari Sevugan.
--Speaking of "Hari the Hatchet," David Bernstein of the Boston Phoenix has an interesting piece over at Talking Politics on the proxy-war being waged now between Sevugan and Brown adviser Eric Fehrnstrom. Fehrnstrom of course is a long-time Mitt Romney aide, and he and Hari figure to spend much of their time sparring between now and 2012.
-- Over at CW Unbound, Bruce Mohl reports on Coakley's duel AG roles of consumer advocate and state defender.
--The Herald's Jessica Van Sack reports that Rush Limbaugh joined the Senate fray yesterday (no surprise given the Coakley ad's Hitler-esque Limbaugh photo), calling the Democratic candidate a "sock puppet."
--Dan Balz and Chris Cillizza report on the race in today's Washington Post. Remember how I wrote Monday that national Dems would start looking to blame Coakley, and not the national political environment, for this mess so they don't hurt their recruitment for November? That spin has already begun. Balz and Cillizza write:
"Democratic strategists in Massachusetts and Washington said they remain confident that Coakley will prevail, given the huge Democratic registration advantage in the state and the attorney general's appeal to female voters. But they blamed Coakley and her campaign for letting up over the holidays and allowing Brown to change the dynamic of the race."--Politico's Dan Frates writes that Brown's campaign is showing national Republicans that they "can run against reform," a development that could influence the mid-term campaigns.
--In an Ideas piece on Politico, Radley Balko details Coakley's career as a prosecutor and writes, "Coakley may share Kennedy’s opposition to the death penalty, but her record as a prosecutor leaves plenty of doubt about her commitment to justice."
--Scott Lehigh writes today that he is not impressed with Brown, but is also very disappointed in Coakley for her "chameleon" approach to the death penalty.
Finally, Scott Brown picked up the endorsement of another Boston sports hero today: former Natick Redmen, Boston College Eagle, and New England Patriot Doug Flutie:
