A Fighting Chance

Karl Rove was off the airways: Common Cause conducted an in-depth study on the People’s Pledge and concluded: “The People’s Pledge drastically reduced outside spending.” Also, “The People’s Pledge resulted in substantially greater public disclosure of political donors.” Common Cause notes that other similar elections in 2012 had five times more “dark” or completely undisclosed money. “The People’s Pledge increased the influence of small donor donations relative to big dollar donations” and the pledge “resulted in significantly less negative advertising.” Common Cause also notes: “In response to the Pledge, outside groups did not run a single television advertisement for or against either candidate after the Pledge was signed.… In the few cases of print and radio advertisements financed by outside groups, candidates paid the agreed upon fine and the advertisements promptly ceased.” The report concludes that limiting “the impact of outside groups in elections is a fundamental first step to an electoral process that is more transparent, fair, and accountable.” Common Cause calls for future elections to have similar pledges, noting the pledge “should be replicated in elections going forward.” Tyler Creighton, “A Plea for a Pledge,” Massachusetts Common Cause, April 2013. At commoncause.org.

stood tall for all workers: From early in the campaign, Lou Mandarini worked to connect me to union families throughout the state. Lou, a Boston labor lawyer and son of the president of the Greater Boston Labor Council, was Labor Director for the Campaign. He was tireless, making calls, passing along names, offering advice, and showing up at events, always with one goal in mind—get to know everyone in the Commonwealth. Lou is smart as a whip, but his advice was always straight from the heart: “You’re on our side—just make sure we all get a chance to see that.”

As the campaign progressed, so many union members put their shoulders to the wheel, carrying signs, working the phones, opening their union halls and homes to me and to my team, and fighting with heart and soul for the campaign. I was deeply humbled by their outpouring, and I will always be grateful.

One note: Whenever I was hosted by a union family or met at a union hall, I always talked about my belief in the right of workers to organize and to bargain collectively, but the cheers were always just as loud for protecting Social Security, equal pay for equal work, and helping our kids get a college education. In other words, we fought side by side for a future, not just for some of our families, but for all of our families.

In the end, Otis was my best coach: Debate prep was frustrating and Otis was terrific, but my second-best coach was Jon Donenberg, who has since become the legislative director in my Senate office. Jon tutored me on policy issues and taught me an enormous amount about the US Senate. He played a key role, and I’m grateful.

subsidizing Big Oil. In putting a spotlight on Big Oil subsidies, I have been pleased to work alongside the League of Conservation Voters, Sierra Club, and so many other organizations dedicated to protecting our environment for our children and grandchildren. We should be investing in energy technologies of the future, not subsidizing Big Oil.

war whoops and tomahawk chops: The video can be seen at http://bluemassgroup.com/2012/09/scottbrown-staffers-do-indian-war-whoop-tomahawk-chop-youtube. Brown soon issued a statement saying he “regrets” his staff’s “unacceptable behavior.” Katharine Q. Seelye, “Scott Brown says He ‘Regrets’ His Staff’s ‘Unacceptable’ Behavior,” The Caucus (blog), New York Times, September 26, 2012.

and lying about my family: See Sabrina Siddiqui, “Scott Brown Aims at Elizabeth Warren over Native American Claim,” Huffington Post, September 24, 2012.

See also Glen Johnson, “Scott Brown Hits Elizabeth Warren’s Native American Claim in New Ad,” Boston Globe, September 28, 2012.

claimed I’d hurt asbestos victims: For a link to Brown’s ad and my response ads, see http://www.factcheck.org/2012/10/warrens-role-in-asbestos-case/.

payment for their injuries: As more and more people who had worked around asbestos, particularly in shipbuilding and construction, developed a rare form of lung cancer, lawsuits began mounting up. If each victim had sued each company individually, more money would have been spent on lawyers’ fees. More important, the first people to develop cancer would likely receive payment, but at some point the companies would run out of money and the insurance coverage would be exhausted, so that later victims would get nothing. The solution was to create a trust and to fund it with all the money from the businesses and their insurance companies who would be held responsible. This way victims could get compensated while paying smaller legal fees and there would be more money available for all the victims, including those who developed cancer later. The trust system had been effective for many years, but it was challenged in the US Supreme Court. In this case, alongside an insurance company and the trusts representing thousands of victims, I argued that the trusts were the best way to compensate victims, rather than individual lawsuits. We won that case in the Supreme Court. Later, after I left the case, a lower court held that the insurance company didn’t need to pay as much money as it had offered, and the case was again appealed.

For additional information, see Factcheck.org: “Warren’s version of the case has been publicly backed by several attorneys representing the asbestos victims, as well as leaders of an asbestos workers’ union. ‘[Brown is] flat out misrepresenting the facts,’ Francis C. Boudrow, business manager for the International Association of Heat and Frost Insulators and Asbestos Workers Union, Local No. 6 told the Boston Globe. ‘It’s offensive to all these people who’ve lost lives’ to asbestos-related illness, he said.” See “Warren’s Role in Asbestos Case,” Factcheck.org, October 15, 2012, http://www.factcheck.org/2012/10/war rens-role-in-asbestos-case/.