TM Connect


Use "My TM" for log in & register.

Taylor Marsh has been writing on line since 1996, with the archives provided here a representation of that work.

Tag Archives | Martha Coakley

TM-DC PODCAST: An Interview with Martha Coakley

By on 11 November 2009

extensive update below

TM-DC podcast

Listen now!

“To pretend that now the House has passed this bill is real progress – it’s at the expense of women’s access to reproductive rights,” Ms. Coakley said in an interview on WTKK-FM, a Boston radio station. She is currently the frontrunner in the race. – Candidates in Mass. Senate Race Spar Over Stupak Measure

The above quote is similar to what Martha Coakley said in the interview we did last night. She made it clear that if she’d been in the House she simply could not have voted for the bill, because of the Stupak amendment. Coakley also said that she wasn’t going to criticize anyone else for their vote, but that’s just how she saw it.

Martha Coakley stands in direct contrast to Nancy Pelosi and many others, who thought forwarding a bad health care bill was better than getting it right in the first place. You simply cannot eviscerate women’s civil rights, hoping you can change it later. You might get the chance, but what if you simply embolden those on the right? As a Democrat, you’ve changed everything and for what?

That evidently doesn’t phase Alan Khazei, the founder of the non-profit City Year, and Steven Pagiluca, Boston Celtics co-owner, Coakley’s challengers, both of whom would have supported the House bill.

Mr. Capuano, her opponent, in the Times article says he thinks that Coakley’s stance on Stupak is “manna from heaven” for his campaign. Capuano thinks that it’s “realism” to cave to the idea of Stupak, which is devastating to women’s health care. But wait! Now that he’s seen the shock waves from Stupak passing as part of the House bill, he’s flip flopped.

This is what I’m talking about when it comes to Martha Coakley. It doesn’t take a finger in the wind for her to decide what is right.

The late Sen. Ted Kennedy would be proud to have Martha Coakley, the current attorney general of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, take up where he left off, especially on health care. Ms. Coakley is sharp, frank and well qualified, reminding me of another female, whom I don’t dare mention for fear of what might ensue. The election is Dec. 8th. So if you know someone in Massachusetts, send out the word.

I wrote about many of the terrific women who have recently stood up against Stupak over at Huffington Post today. …and I’m not talking about Sen. Claire McCaskill, who had to see which way the wind was blowing before she came out strongly against Stupak.

Martha and I had a great conversation. An important one, because it’s clear after what we are experiencing, first with the House, but now the Senate with people like Ben Nelson, we all need to make sure that when strong, pro civil rights women run for office that we’re behind them. That goes for feminist men as well. Ones that also won’t invite the religious hierarchy into the process and let them write, or at the very least, okay legislation, especially when women’s civil rights are at stake.

There was also another conversation going on today on a similar subject. This one over at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., where women’s groups let Administration officials know that they weren’t happy about where things stood after Speaker Pelosi invited the Catholic Bishops in to make sure the Stupak amendment got an up or down vote. Via Jake Tapper:

White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, senior advisor Valerie Jarrett and Domestic Policy Council director Melody Barnes, health care reform czar Nancy-ann DeParle and other White House officials met with a dozen officials from liberal women’s and abortion right’s groups this afternoon where they had a “frank exchange,” in the words of one attendee. …

“Frank exchange.” I bet.

 
Read full story · Comments are closed

Nancy’s Compromise

By on 10 November 2009

updated – bumped from early a.m.

PELOSI_huffingtonpost
photo via Huffington Post

Greg Sargent, who is one of the good guys, loses himself completely today, writing a stunning post in which he posits Speaker Pelosi as the “lioness of the House,” and played a “Kennedyesque role” in getting the House health care bill passed. Smelling salts, please, I think I’m going to faint.

A similar dynamic has been at play with Pelosi. A key reason the health care bill passed was that she was able to persuade liberals in her caucus to swallow compromises that didn’t sit well with them. She was able to do this for the same reason Kennedy was able to do the same in the Senate. … Similarly, they reluctantly backed the bill even though it contains the Stupak anti-abortion amendment, because they believe in their guts that she’ll fight hard to strip it later. For a bunch of reasons, of course, the historical comparison is far from perfect. But the dynamic is worth noting as another sign of how under-estimated Pelosi has been throughout this process.

“Far from perfect” is an understatement.

But underestimated Pelosi? Not around here. I was present inside the Capitol, watching a TV in a room not far from where she took the oath, one of the most jubilant people, man or woman, in the room. I expected great things, with Pelosi charging hard on health care all year, when Pres. Obama went missing and Sarah Palin’s “death panels” squeal took the stage.

However, when all was written and votes cast, after the Catholic Bishops and evangelical Dems had weighed in, what women were left with was Nancy’s Compromise. A House health care bill with a watered down public option, with women now having fewer rights than the law actually allowed and than where we started before the House weighed in. Health care about to become far more difficult for women to navigate, poor women to access, and our health put in jeopardy because of hoops we had to jump through because a white evangelical Democratic male from C Street, backed by his Republican mentors, was given full rein.

“Liberal lioness”? In her dreams.

Meet the real lioness, the only person to stand up so far to say Hyde should be rewritten to reflect current law, who also happens to be the woman vying for Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat.

“The House’s vote is in many ways a significant step toward the goal of health care reform. However, I am deeply disturbed that the House adopted the Stupak/Pitts amendment, which would deny millions of women access to reproductive services. The inclusion of the Stupak/Pitts amendment violates the very intent of health care reform, which is meant to guarantee quality, affordable health care coverage for everyone. I believe that the Senate has a responsibility to fix this by eliminating the provision in whatever reform legislation moves forward.” – Martha Coakley, candidate for U.S. Senate

To add… Sam Stein reports that Sen. Boxer, another candidate for the real “liberal lioness” award, says the votes are there in the Senate to block Stupak: Boxer: Senate Has Votes To Block Stupak Amendment.

Read full story · Comments are closed