According to Democrat congressional hopeful Peter Welch, the race for Vermont's lone seat in the House is not about who is best to serve Vermont, but about which party you belong to.
"This race is not about Martha Rainville," [Carolyn] Dwyer [campaign manager for Democratic House candidate Peter Welch] said. "It's about whether or not it's a good idea to send one more Republican to Washington for President George W. Bush."
This is in response to new Ads Republican candidate Martha Rainville is running touting her service as Vermont National Guard Adjutant General specifically highlighting her service to Vermont's service members
The ad shows images of Rainville in uniform while an announcer relates how, in June of 2003, she learned that Vermont guardsmen were about to go to Afghanistan without the best available body armor. About 45 Vermont guardsmen were being deployed at the time.
"Speaking up for her troops and other generals, she demanded the Pentagon provide for her soldiers," the announcer says. "And she won. If Martha Rainville stood up to the Pentagon, she won't be bought or bullied in Washington. By anyone. In either party."...[Director of the Army National Guard in 2003 Lt. Col. (Ret.) Roger] Schultz, in a telephone interview later Monday, said it was true Rainville pushed for better body armor. "She got after it big time," he said, noting that not all adjutant generals around the country were as aggressive as she was on the issue.
It seems to me, being an independent sort, that who is running is much more important than which party a person is affiliated. It is certainly at least as important as the platform upon which the candidate runs. I would be more likely to vote for someone who I felt was a reasonable person, even if I didn't agree with all their positions rather than voting for someone I felt was untrustworthy but agree with on issues.
So I don't know what Mr. Welch is talking about. In fact, Party is the most trivial reason I can think of for voting for someone; or against someone for that matter.
But perhaps Mr Welch is afraid that people would rather vote for a strong female who has been a member of the military, which is the most trusted institution in American, than a political wannabe who is an ambulance chaser a personal injury lawyer, perhaps one of the least respected professions in America.
Even lower than member of congress.
And how does his career as a personal injury lawyer square with his position on health care?
In addition to health care reform, Peter helped pass tough legislation requiring transparency and full disclosure of pricing by pharmaceutical companies, regulating pharmacy benefit managers, and establishing a prescription drug reimportation program for Vermonters to buy safe, cheaper drugs from Canada.
Peter will support other cost savings measures, such as information technology and chronic illness initiatives – measures that will also improve the delivery of quality comprehensive care.
Notice Tort Reform is not one of the measures Mr. Welch proposes. So I guess his career and his proposals square quite well.
But is that what we want? A legislator that does not support tort reform as a mechanism for reducing healthcare costs because that's how he made his bones: Suing doctors and healthcare providers?
It's not what I want.
