|
|
"A comprehensive, collaborative elections resource."
|
Disparagement of Obama votes doesn't hold up
|
|---|
| Parent(s) |
Candidate
|
| Contributor | ArmyDem |
| Last Edited | ArmyDem Dec 22, 2007 02:42pm |
| Logged |
0
|
| Category | Blog Entry |
| News Date | Tuesday, December 4, 2007 08:00:00 PM UTC0:0 |
| Description | Originally posted: December 4, 2007
Obama, however, was in a safe district and never faced a serious challenge for his legislative seat. He had no need to shy from hard-line stands on gun control and abortion rights. He actually took such stands frequently and is now highly praised by advocates for both causes.
Why would he then vote "present" instead of a resounding "no" on certain bills advanced by lawmakers opposed to abortion rights?
"To provide cover for other Democrats who were shaky on the issue in an effort to convince them not to vote `yes,'" Sutherland said. "The idea is to recruit a group to vote `present' that includes legislators who are clearly right with the issue."
Sutherland said this tactic makes the "present" vote look less like a hedge or a cop-out and more like a constitutional concern or other high-minded qualm.
She pointed to the Parental Notice of Abortion Act of 2001, a bill requiring that an adult family member be notified 48 hours in advance when a minor seeks an abortion.
Obama's "present" vote on that bill is one Hull is attacking him for in a flier decorated with rubber duckies.
Sutherland just laughs. "We also had [Democratic Senate leader] Emil Jones, [current Atty. Gen.] Lisa Madigan, Miguel del Valle, Rickey Hendon and other very strong pro-choice legislators voting `present' on that one," she said. "It was all done to pull `present' votes off the fence."
Obama confirmed Sutherland's account of the legislative strategy and said, "No one was more active to beat back those bills than I was." |
| Share |
|
|
2¢
|
|
| Article | Read Full Article |
|
| Date |
Category |
Headline |
Article |
Contributor |
|
|
