The Democrat contender for New York’s 23rd district, Martha Robertson, spoke briefly about her election campaign against incumbent Republican Tom Reed at a Cornell Democrats event Wednesday evening.
Speaking for 30 minutes to a crowd of about 40 students, Robertson, Cornell Class of 1975, mainly stuck to autobiography and her major talking points.
In particular, the former kindergarten teacher, small business owner, and 12-year member of the Tompkins County Legislature noted that “jobs and economic development, Medicare and Social Security, and taxes” are her three primary concerns.
Robertson specifically cited Reed’s 2011 votes for free trade deals with South Korea, Colombia, and Panama as detrimental to the U.S. economy, claiming they send jobs overseas. She also claimed Reed’s support for the Ryan Budget would have translated into tax hikes of $2000 for middle class families.
Robertson’s campaign website includes nearly identical language on these topics. Concerning the latter claim, there is a link to an article in the New York Times article that makes the claim about tax hikes; however, neither article nor Robertson offers a concrete explanation of how exactly the Ryan Budget would cause tax increases.
Most likely, they are referring to speculation that in order for the Ryan Budget to remain “revenue neutral” it would require increasing tax revenue due to the large tax cuts it calls for. The explicit assumption is the desirability of “revenue neutrality” which means that the net effect on government spending and taxation would be zero.
Robertson also spoke about Burger King’s merger deal with Tim Horton’s, calling it “unpatriotic.” However, Robertson did not mention that she and her husband own 800,000 shares of Burger King in a mutual fund. The Reed campaign has called on Robertson to divest her holdings, but according to the article linked above this has not happened yet.
During the Q&A session, Robertson, no longer relying on rehearsed material, let her rhetoric wander outside of talking point-confinements.
In response to one question about Senate Republicans voting down this week the Paycheck Fairness Act (often referred to as “Equal Pay for Equal Work”), Robertson said, “‘Let’s vote for discrimination!’ That’s what they [Senate Republicans] have done… It’s un-American… That’s what Tom Reed has done.”
Robertson went on to reference how both Seneca Falls, the site of the first women’s rights convention, and Corning, the hometown of Margaret Sanger, the controversial founder of Planned Parenthood, are both located in NY23.
“It’s about time [we were] represented by a woman,” Robertson said.
No video or audio recording was permitted during the event, and members of the Cornell Democrats kept close watch of the crowd. Windows were even covered to prevent people outside the lecture hall from filming.
For more coverage of the NY23 race, readers should check out Legal Insurrection’s coverage. Legal Insurrection is run by Cornell law professor William Jacobson, who offers analysis and breaking news for this highly contested race. Most recently, Legal Insurrection has covered the Robertson campaigns alleged “fat-shaming” of Tom Reed.
So disappointed in the Cornell Review.
Martha Robertson is a Democrat-ic candidate. You tipped your hand in the first sentence.
As Rep.Tom Reed denigrates the entire county of Tompkins for it’s “Extreme liberal Agenda”, it appears the writers of this blog, feel the need to help him.
The Review blog states “…..neither article nor Robertson offers a concrete explanation of how exactly the Ryan Budget would cause tax increases.” Are there really intelligent persons out there, who are not aware of the Ryan Budget’s direct causation of taxation increase on the middle and working poor? Does Rep. Reed explain the Ryan Plan’s prevention of growth for all but the corporate welfare takers he supports?
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3114
Directing readers to follow Legal Insurrection’s blatant Reed “win at all costs” war cries are further proof that the writer(s) of this blog have zero interest in fair, truthful reporting.