While Detroit is battling under the weight of recent news of their state of bankruptcy, which Democrat Gary Peters failed to offer any solutions to prevent,  Peters is ducking out of Michigan and heading west to join his liberal leader Nancy Pelosi and their trial lawyer friends in the Golden State. The San Francisco Chronicle reports that Peters and some of his Democratic allies have hit the California fundraising scene and are “working it”, hobnobbing with trial lawyers and liberal Washington bigwigs at the “big national trial lawyers convention in SF…a political bonanza.”

Peters, the infamous “wolf in sheep’s clothing“, is seeking to collect some major campaign cash after protecting their pockets ahead of Michiganders’ and voting against commonsense measures like medical malpractice.

The San Francisco Chronicle describes the “bonanza”:

“The American Association for Justice Convention at the Hilton in San Francisco this week has brought hoards to town — hoards of politicians. And we’re betting they’re not so much interested in AAJC’s panel discussions…than they are in being here in the Mother Lode of political fundraising….’Half of the Democratic caucus is hanging out at the Hilton,’ quips one Dem insider on scene.”

Despite the massive economic benefits of tort reform, which the Congressional Budget Office projected would mean $54 billion in ObamaCare savings alone, Peters opposed and voted against a measure to pursue cost-saving medical malpractice reform during the 2009 health-care debate.

Why? The trial lawyers have lent a helping hand to fill Gary Peters’ campaign coffers and this week, Peters is collecting.

“The city and the people of Detroit are fighting tooth and nail for their very survival and Gary Peters is off hobnobbing in San Francisco with the trail lawyers that fund his campaign,” said NRSC Press Secretary Brook Hougesen. “Not only has Peters failed to offer any real solutions to help Detroit, Peters abandoned the city because of the deep pockets of his trial lawyer friends, leaving Michiganders wondering about the priorities of their absent Congressman. Michiganders expect dedicated leaders who are willing to roll up their sleeves and solve problems and are tired of typical Washington politicians like Gary Peters.”

Background:

• Peters Was “Oblivious To The Consequences Of Allowing The City To Hurtle Off The Cliff.”  “Other voices that puff themselves up to extol the sanctity of local control are equally bereft of ideas. We had Rep. Gary Peters, the Oakland County Democrat trying to reinvent himself as a Detroit liberal, in our offices a few weeks ago denouncing state meddling. When asked what he’d do instead, he answered, ‘Detroit needs more jobs.’ … Peters’ response was typical of those who rail against a state ‘takeover,’ but are oblivious to the consequences of allowing the city to hurtle off the cliff.” (Nolan Finley, “Easter Bunny Won’t Hop In To Save Detroit,” The Detroit News, 3/15/12)
• Peters “Nitpick[ed] The Rescue Process, Ignore[ed] The Proximate Causes Of Collapse And Offer[ed] Nothing Approaching Solutions Beyond Vague Calls For ‘Jobs” “This is what passes for leadership: As Michigan’s largest city slides inexorably to insolvency, three members of Congress nitpick the rescue process, ignore the proximate causes of collapse and offer nothing approaching solutions beyond vague calls for ‘jobs’ (Peters) and ‘bailouts’ (Clarke).” (Daniel Howes, Op-Ed, “U.S. Reps’ Nitpicking No Help To Failing City,” The Detroit News, 3/23/12)
• In November 2009, Peters Voted Against A Motion To Add Medical Malpractice Reform To The Health Care Bill. “Cantor, R-Va., motion to recommit the bill to the House Energy and Commerce Committee with instructions that it be immediately reported back with an amendment that would create a fund that aims to preserve access to the Medicare Advantage program and establish new regulations for medical malpractice lawsuits. It would prohibit the filing of malpractice suits more that three years after an incident, limit attorney fees to a certain percentage of a claimant’s reward, and allow the awarding of punitive damages only if malicious intent is established.” (H.R. 3962, CQ Vote #886: Motion rejected 187-247: R 174-3; D 13-244, 11/7/09, Peters Voted Nay)