Where does Martha McSally stand on the Financial Choice Act? We don’t know.
Well, we kind of know. The web site “politics that work” tells us that McSally votes for consumer protection 0% of the time, and financial sector regulation 0% of the time. And since the Financial Choice Act is intended to gut the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau and repeal the Dodd Frank reforms of Wall Street, it’s a pretty sure bet she’ll vote for it.
But she hasn’t admitted it publicly. Her official position is that she has no position. Still deciding. No one’s challenging her on that. No one’s forcing her to defend, publicly, her support for a bill that Vox says could “dramatically exacerbate the likelihood of another financial crisis.”
That’s where we come in.
Call or fax McSally and insist that she make a public statement explaining her position on the Financial Choice Act. No more flying under the radar.
The Washington Post reported recently that a division of the Labor Department which protects the rights of women in the workplace is on the chopping block. At the request of the ultra conservative Heritage Foundation, Trump's budget proposes that the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs be merged into the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which is already overextended, with a backlog of 73,500 cases.
The administration claims the 2 agencies are redundant, but in fact
they serve different purposes; the EEOC responds to individual
complaints of discrimination, whereas the OFCCP takes a proactive role,
ensuring that federal contractors provide equal opportunity for women
(along with minorities, the disabled and veterans). Last year, for
example, they found that Gordon Foods had "systematically eliminated
qualified women from the hiring process," and hired men over women at a
ratio of 50 to 1 (!). Gordon Foods agreed to pay $1.85 million to 926
women and change their hiring practices.
Emily Martin of the National Women's Law Center says the proposal to merge the two agencies is "a recipe for reducing civil rights enforcement overall," and that the unique role that the OFCCP plays in proactive enforcement will be lost.
We don't yet know where Martha McSally stands on this issue. On the one hand, she claims to have a "tireless commitment" to empowering women to succeed, inspired by her own experience as the first female fighter pilot to fly in combat. But when the topic turns to federal enforcement, her quotes start filling up with words like "maybe," "if" and "not necessarily." You get the sense she wants businesses to do the right
thing, but on a voluntary basis.
So this week, let's find out whether Rep. McSally is ready to walk her tough talk. Will she fight to save the OFCCP, and support its mission to defend the rights of working women? Or will she back down before the Trump administration and the Republican party yet again? When it comes to the barriers that face working women, she has said herself, "this issue shouldn't be about cultivating partisan talking points." Now let's see how much she meant it.
"Corrupt CBP law enforcement personnel pose a national security threat." That was the blunt assessment of an independent review panel appointed by the secretary of Homeland Security in 2016; they also cited the CBP's "broken disciplinary process."
177 CBP agents were arrested for official misconduct (frequently narcotics and human trafficking) between 2004 and 2015, a much higher rate than other federal police forces. There were 67 fatal shootings by CBP agents between 2010 and 2012, including an unarmed Mexican teenager who was shot in the back.
Former CBP Commissioner Gil Kerlikowske acknowledges that CBP agents can be "vulnerable to bribes and corruption." Former director of CBP Internal Affairs James Tomsheck notes that during his tenure, many who applied for border jobs "were doing so solely for the purpose of criminal opportunities and profit."
Some reforms have been implemented, including a polygraph screening program put in place after a massive hiring spree during the Bush years caused a spike in corruption at the border. Tomsheck says the polygraph screen revealed applicants with serious felony records - and even some who'd been directed by drug cartels to apply to become border agents.
In spite of that history, Martha McSally is sponsoring H.R. 2213, the Anti-Border Corruption Reauthorization Act of 2017, which would waive the polygraph requirement for some applicants (largely former law enforcement and military veterans).
Grateful as we are to our police and veterans, we can't assume they have an inherent immunity to basic human greed. Joel Luna, a border agent now serving 20 years for his participation in a drug trafficking ring (which perpetrated a grisly murder), was an Army veteran.
Please call McSally and ask her to withdraw her support for H.R. 2213; loosening our standards will lead to more corruption at the border, and weaken our national security.
Martha McSally has a sworn duty to defend the Constitution from all enemies, "foreign and domestic."
When Russia, led by a "thug," (her word), interferes in a U.S. election to benefit the candidate they prefer; when the president admits to obstructing the investigation of that interference; when he further admits to revealing highly classified information to the Russians in the Oval Office --
Then Martha McSally has a Constitutional obligation to protect this country. NOT the president, and NOT her party.
Two Republican members of the House have already signed on as cosponsors of H.R. 356, the Protecting Our Democracy Act, which would create a bipartisan commission to investigate Russian interference into the 2016 election.
If Martha McSally's oath of office means anything to her, she will do the same.
"It actually takes little courage to aid those who are already powerful, already comfortable, already influential. But it takes great courage to champion the vulnerable and the sick and the infirm — those who have no access to the corridors of power." -- former President Barack Obama
Rep. Martha McSally made it clear last week just how little courage she has -- first by siding with her big money donors over her own constituents, and now by hiding from us.
Refusing to even engage with her district, much less represent us, is a dereliction of duty, plain and simple. Rep. Ruben Gallego, a former Marine who served in Iraq, understands the obligation that Members of Congress have to serve and to lead. Thankfully, he's willing to step up where McSally continues to fail.
We're actually asking for 2 calls this week. One to Rep. McSally to voice your disapproval of her cowardly behavior, and another to Rep. Gallego to let him know how much we appreciate his willingness to step into the breach, and give us HONEST answers about this disastrous health care bill.
That's the kind of courage, leadership and integrity we have every right to expect from our own representative. At this point, it's not clear she's even capable of it.
Our Intention is to have a CD-2 Representative who will courageously fight for the rights of ALL of the CD2 constituents and to reveal the gap between McSally and the issues important to progressives in her district.
Jack Jary joined1 year ago
T. J. & Sandy Wolner joined1 year ago
kevin henderson joined1 year ago
Sarah Chekfa joined1 year ago