“Congratulations to Gabriel Gomez for his hard fought victory. The Senate is the nerve center of dysfunctional Washington and we need to get it working again. Gabriel Gomez is just the sort of next generation leader we need to help turn it around.

“Gabriel Gomez lives, breathes, and bleeds Massachusetts, but his story is uniquely American. Throughout his life, Gabriel, a former Navy SEAL commander, has served a cause far greater than himself or any one of us. Gabriel Gomez is the kind of results-oriented leader who will bring a never say die attitude and spirit of service to the Senate on behalf of the Bay State.

“Too often, politicians running for office try to make elections about the past, but candidates like Gabriel Gomez remind us that they are about the future, and providing responsible leadership and a better life for those who elect us.”

###

The post NRSC Chairman Jerry Moran Congratulates Gabriel Gomez on Massachusetts Victory appeared first on NRSC - National Republican Senatorial Committee.

“Gary Peters already lost a statewide campaign and that was before supporting a cap and trade energy tax policy that would effectively put Michigan out of business and ObamaCare which will raise health care costs. It takes a special kind of guy like Peters to ask for a promotion from the very same people that his policies would put out of work.

“If Gary Peters is indeed the Democratic candidate in Michigan, Republicans have a great opportunity to pick up this seat and move closer to the taking majority in 2014.”

###

The post Statement on Gary Peters Entering 2014 Michigan Senate Race appeared first on NRSC - National Republican Senatorial Committee.

“Just days after calling ObamaCare a ‘train wreck,’ its architect Max Baucus waved the white flag rather than face voters. ObamaCare has gone from being an ‘abstract’ discussion to a real life pain for workers and families, which has Democratic candidates like Bruce Braley, Mark Pryor, Mark Begich and Kay Hagan backpedaling. Vulnerable Democrats will face voters just as ObamaCare’s tax hikes, mandates, fees, penalties, and red tape bureaucracy take shape over the next eight months, and Senator Baucus’ retirement reflects that political reality. The 2014 electoral map is in free–fall for Democrats, who were already facing a daunting challenge.”

The post STATEMENT ON RETIREMENT OF SENATOR MAX BAUCUS appeared first on NRSC - National Republican Senatorial Committee.

“South Dakota voters rejected the progressive agenda by nearly 20 points in 2012 and it’s a prime pick up opportunity for Republicans regardless of whose name ends up on the ballot after what’s shaping up to be a contentious Democratic primary.

“South Dakota is a place where people value hard work, personal responsibility, and earning one’s own success. When given the choice between a conservative vision to grow the economy, decrease overbearing regulations, and provide opportunity to young people and the liberal Democratic agenda of higher taxes, more regulations, and fewer jobs, we have no doubt voters in South Dakota  will overwhelmingly choose the former.”

The post Statement by NRSC Chairman Jerry Moran on Retirement of Sen. Tim Johnson appeared first on NRSC - National Republican Senatorial Committee.

- Brad Dayspring, Communications Director

The post Statement by NRSC on the release of the Republican National Committee’s Growth and Opportunity Project report appeared first on NRSC - National Republican Senatorial Committee.

“Over the last few months, the 2014 map has gone from sorta difficult to really tough for Senate Democrats.  Politically, Senator Levin’s decision knocks a Democratic Senate already on defense far back on their heels and offers us a real pick up opportunity.   Republicans can win in Michigan, as the Governor, Lt. Governor, Secretary of State, and Attorney General have proven.  That is why we’ve been speaking to local officials and grassroots organizations in preparation for Senator Levin’s potential retirement, and now that groundwork will start to pay off.”

- Brad Dayspring, Communications Director

The post Statement on Retirement of Senator Carl Levin appeared first on NRSC - National Republican Senatorial Committee.

Kentucky Democrats the Opposite of Excited About Ashley Judd for Senate

‘Most Democratic Kentucky State Senators Lukewarm on Ashley Judd Candidacy’ “…we asked those 14 Democratic state senators whether they thought Judd was a viable  U.S. Senate candidate. Taken as a whole, Democratic state senators were unenthusiastic about the idea of a Judd candidacy.” (“Most Democratic Kentucky State Senators Lukewarm On Ashley Judd Candidacy,” WFPL, 2/27/13) 

“Democrats plugged into the Frankfort, Ky…see her losing the Senate contest — an uphill climb for any Democrat — and potentially poisoning the conservative brand of some state Democrats.” (“Kentucky Democrats Fear Judd May Drag Down Ticket,” Roll Call, 2/13/13)

“Judd’s interest in the race has prompted mixed feelings among Democrats both nationally and in Kentucky. Some worry she wouldn’t be able to overcome her clear vulnerabilities: The actress’s staunchly liberal views…” (“Ashley Judd Meets With DSCC,” Politico, 2/20/13)

Greg Stumbo, KY House Speaker: “‘I don’t think she runs at all and given her position on mining, it would probably be a race that Democrats like myself would have trouble supporting her” (“Who Runs Against McConnell in 2014? Not Judd or Grimes, Stumbo Says,” WFPL, 11/19/12)

State Sen. Johnny Ray Turner, Minority Caucus Chair: “I think that there’s probably better candidates out there to run against Senator McConnell.” (“Most Democratic Kentucky State Senators Lukewarm On Ashley Judd Candidacy,” WFPL, 2/27/13)

State Rep. Rocky Adkins, House Democratic Floor Leader: “…she wouldn’t be the best candidate in my opinion… There’s no question that the issue of coal and her position on mountaintop mining, in my opinion, would be harmful to her in coal regions of the commonwealth of Kentucky.’” (“Ky. House Democratic Leader: Judd “Not The Best Candidate” Unless She Changes On Coal,” Cn|2, 2/15/13)

State Sen. Dennis Parrett: “…I don’t believe she needs to be running for U.S. Senate.” (“Most Democratic Kentucky State Senators Lukewarm On Ashley Judd Candidacy,” WFPL, 2/27/13)

State Sen. Ray Jones: “…she’s taken some stances on a few issues that would be detrimental to her.” (“Most Democratic Kentucky State Senators Lukewarm On Ashley Judd Candidacy,” WFPL, 2/27/13)

State Sen. Walter Blevins: “I mean, she’s got some issues that would hurt her up in Eastern Kentucky.” (“Most Democratic Kentucky State Senators Lukewarm On Ashley Judd Candidacy,” WFPL, 2/27/13)

State Sen. Gerald Neal: “How her issues that she has championed square with the Kentucky voters in various parts of Kentucky, I can’t answer that question.” (“Most Democratic Kentucky State Senators Lukewarm On Ashley Judd Candidacy,” WFPL, 2/27/13)

State Sen. Robin Webb: “…I don’t know that her background would lend itself to running a political campaign and or serving in Washington necessarily… I think that the Kentucky (Democratic) Party has some better candidates with some experience under their belt.” (“Most Democratic Kentucky State Senators Lukewarm On Ashley Judd Candidacy,” WFPL, 2/27/13)

Dan Mongiardo, Former Lt. Gov. of KY: “Kentucky Democrats Not Sold On Possible Ashley Judd Senate Campaign” (“Kentucky Democrats Not Sold On Possible Ashley Judd Senate Campaign,” The Hill, 1/24/13)

Jimmy Cauley, KY Dem Strategist: “‘If she runs, I think that it would be a catastrophe for a lot of downballot races in Kentucky,’ said Jimmy Cauley, a longtime Kentucky Democratic strategist who doesn’t believe Judd can win a general election. Among Democratic state legislators, he said, ‘there is significant worry about Ashley being on the ballot.’” (“Kentucky Democrats Fear Judd May Drag Down Ticket,” Roll Call, 2/13/13)

• Cauley: “If Judd runs, ‘the conversation will be about her being a liberal, Hollywood star. It’s not going to be about (McConnell). And I don’t think that’s the ground we want to be on.’” (“Ashley Judd Meeting With Democratic Donors In Louisville, Sparks More Talk Of 2014,” Cn|2, 2/15/13)

Dale Emmons, KY Dem Strategist: “…we don’t need to waste a lot of time on a fantasy. We need a real candidate.” (“Kentucky Democrats Not Sold On Possible Ashley Judd Senate Campaign,” The Hill, 1/24/13)

• Emmons: “I have yet to talk to an elected official in Kentucky — other than [Rep.] John [Yarmuth] — who thinks Ashley should run or thinks she can prevail in this contest.” (“Kentucky Democrats Fear Judd May Drag Down Ticket,” Roll Call, 2/13/13) 

Bob Gunnell, KY Dem Strategist: “…she’s not necessarily with Kentucky Democrats.” (“Kentucky Atwitter, Judd’s Twitter Reveals Positions,” WHAS11, 2/21/13)

In the press “….Here is a sampling of some of Judd’s most stunning comments:”

• On her decision not to have kids with her husband: “It’s unconscionable to breed, with the number of children who are starving to death in impoverished countries.”
• On fathers giving daughters away at weddings: “To this day, a common vestige of male dominion over a woman’s reproductive status is her father ‘giving’ away her away to her husband at their wedding, and the ongoing practice of women giving up their last names in order to assume the name of their husband’s families, into which they have effectively been traded.”
• On the coal industry, which employees thousands of Kentuckians: “The era of coal plant is over, unacceptable,” she tweeted in October.
• On how Christianity “legitimizes” male power over women: “Patriarchal religions, of which Christianity is one, gives us a God that is like a man, a God presented and discussed exclusively in male imagery, which legitimizes and seals male power. It is the intention to dominate, even if the intention to dominate is nowhere visible.”
• On men: “Throughout history, men have tried to control the means of reproduction, which means trying to control woman. This president is a modern day Attila the Hun.”

The post Eccentric Ashley Judd Worries Democrats appeared first on NRSC - National Republican Senatorial Committee.

WASHINGTON, D.C – For months, Republicans in the House and Senate have been urging their Democratic counterparts to replace President Obama’s sequester with smarter, safer and more sensible spending cuts to lower the deficit.  Instead, less than 24 hours before the President’s sequester hits, Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA) voted against both Republican and Democratic alternatives to replace the sequester.

You read that correctly: Senator Landrieu’s solution to a sequester that she voted for and later claimed would have a “devastating impact” on border security and our military is to stand by and let it hit Louisiana.

NRSC Communications Director Brad Dayspring issued the following statement:

“Mary Landrieu was right to recognize that President Obama’s sequester, which she voted for, could have ‘devastating’ consequences on border security and defense, but dead wrong to do nothing about it to protect her home state. Louisiana families deserve better than Senator Landrieu, who for the past year seemed far more interested in reelecting Barack Obama than finding a smarter, safer and more sensible solution than the sequester she supported.” 

 

BACKGROUND: 

Landrieu Discussed “The Devastating Impact That The Sequester Would Have On Our Border Security.”  “U.S. Senator Mary L. Landrieu, D-La., chair of the Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee, today discussed the disproportionate share of our nation’s debt and deficit reduction that has come from spending cuts as opposed to revenues, as well as the devastating impact that the sequester would have on our border security.” (Senator Mary Landrieu, “Landrieu Cautions Against Effects Of Sequester On Border Security,” Press Release, 2/14/13)

Landrieu Said Sequester’s Spending Cuts Would “Drastically Affect Our Military And Defense Programs.” “Sen. Mary Landrieu, a Democrat, said Congress must take action to avoid the sequestration spending cuts. ‘While I support smart spending cuts together with increased revenues as part of a balanced approach to debt and deficit reduction, these potential budget cuts would drastically affect our military and defense programs,’ said Landrieu. ‘Louisiana has a strong tradition of military service and knows the meaning of sacrificing to protect our nation. It is our duty to support these brave men and women.’” (Deborah Barfield Berry, “Civilians At La. Military Bases Face Temporary Pay Cuts,” News Star, 2/24/13)

Mary Landrieu Voted For The Bill That Created The Sequester

Senator Mary Landrieu Voted For The Budget Control Act, Which Included The Sequester. (S. 365, CQ Vote #123: Motion agreed to, thus clearing the bill for the president 74-26: R 28-19; D 45-6; I 1-1, 8/2/11, Landrieu Voted Yea)

·      Landrieu Said The Budget Control Act Took “Several Positive Steps Forward” And Ensured “That We Will Not Have To Relive This Hostage Situation In Six Months Or A Year.” LANDRIEU: “Even though the bill has some flaws, we have taken several positive steps forward.  Most importantly, this compromise ensures that we will not have to relive this hostage situation in six months or a year, which will give our financial markets some much-needed certainty.  It also sets us on a path toward reducing our national debt by more than $2 trillion over the next 10 years.  And it accomplishes this without cutting benefits to Social Security and Medicare and without tying the hands of thefederal government when a terrible disaster strikes.” (Sen. Mary Landrieu, “Landrieu Votes In Favor Of Bipartisan Debt Ceiling Compromise,” Press Release, 8/2/11)

According To White House Analysis, The Sequester Would Be Damaging To Louisiana

Sequestration Will Cause Louisiana To Lose Approximately $15.8 Million In Funding For Primary And Secondary Education, Putting Around 220 Teacher And Aide Jobs At Risk. “Teachers and Schools: Louisiana will lose approximately $15.8 in funding for primary and secondary education, putting around 220 teacher and aide jobs at risk. In addition about 26,000 fewer students would be served and approximately 50 fewer schools would receive funding.” (“Impact Of March 1^st Cuts On Middle Class Families, Jobs, And Economic Security: Louisiana,” The White House, Accessed 2/25/13)

In Louisiana, Around 7,000 Civilian Department Of Defense Employees Would Be Furloughed, Reducing Gross Pay By About $35.9 Million. “Military Readiness: In Louisiana, approximately 7,000 civilian Department of Defense employees would be furloughed, reducing gross pay by around $35.9 million in total.” (“Impact Of March 1^st Cuts On Middle Class Families, Jobs, And Economic Security: Louisiana,” The White House, Accessed 2/25/13)

Louisiana Would Lose $58 Million In Army Base Operation Funding And Air Force Operations Would Be Cut By About $8 Million. “Army: Base operation funding would be cut by about $58 million in Louisiana. Air Force: Funding for Air Force operations in Louisiana would be cut by about $8 million. Navy: A planned demolition project at Naval Air Station Joint Reserve Base New Orleans and a scheduled Blue Angels show at Barksdale Air Force Base could be canceled.” (“Impact Of March 1^st Cuts On Middle Class Families, Jobs, And Economic Security: Louisiana,” The White House, Accessed 2/25/13)

Louisiana Would Lose $264,000 In Grants That Support, Among Other Things, Law Enforcement, Prosecution And Courts, And Crime Prevention And Education. “Law Enforcement and Public Safety Funds for Crime Prevention and Prosecution: Louisiana will lose about $264,000 in Justice Assistance Grants that support law enforcement, prosecution and courts, crime prevention and education, corrections and community corrections, drug treatment and enforcement, and crime victim and witness initiatives.” (“Impact Of March 1^st Cuts On Middle Class Families, Jobs, And Economic Security: Louisiana,” The White House, Accessed 2/25/13)

If Sequestration Takes Effect, Louisiana Would Lose Job Search Assistance Funding, Which Would Result In “Around 17,150 Fewer People” Receiving “The Help And Skills They Need To Find Employment.” “Job Search Assistance to Help those in Louisiana find Employment and Training: Louisiana will lose about $509,000 in funding for job search assistance, referral, and placement, meaning around 17,150 fewer people will get the help and skills they need to find employment.” (“Impact Of March 1^st Cuts On Middle Class Families, Jobs, And Economic Security: Louisiana,” The White House, Accessed 2/25/13)

The post Landrieu Allows “Devastating” Sequester To Hit Louisiana appeared first on NRSC - National Republican Senatorial Committee.

WASHINGTON, D.C – For months, Republicans in the House and Senate have been urging their Democratic counterparts to replace President Obama’s sequester with smarter, safer and more sensible spending cuts to lower the deficit.  Instead, less than 24 hours before the President’s Sequester hits, Senator Mark Pryor (D-AR) chose to do nothing by voting against both the Republican and Democratic alternatives to replace the sequester.

You read that correctly: Senator Pryor voted against BOTH measures that would have averted the sequester HE said would cause thousands of Arkansans to lose their jobs.

All thanks to Mark Pryor.

NRSC Communications Director Brad Dayspring issued the following statement:

“Mark Pryor’s do nothing mentality hurts Arkansas. The Obama sequester, which Mark Pryor voted for, will be devastating to many in Arkansas. Families deserve better than Senator Pryor, who for the past year seemed more interested in reelecting Barack Obama than finding a smarter, safer and more sensible solution than the sequester to deal with our deficit.”  

BACKGROUND: 

Mark Pryor Voted For The Bill That Created The Sequester

Senator Mark Pryor Voted For The Budget Control Act, Which Included The Sequester. (S. 365, CQ Vote #123: Motion agreed to, thus clearing the bill for the president 74-26: R 28-19; D 45-6; I 1-1, 8/2/11, Pryor Voted Yea)

• Pryor Called The Budget Control Act “A Step In The Right Direction.” PRYOR: “The debate over raising the debt ceiling has been difficult but essential to reduce the deficit, avoid default, and provide more certainty in our economy. We started with harmful, partisan plans and advanced to an agreement on a bipartisan, practical solution. While not perfect, I plan to vote for this bill. It makes a nearly $1 trillion in spending cuts and sets the stage for long-term savings. It does so without dismantling safety net programs such as Social Security and Medicare, which would have been unacceptable to hundreds of thousands of Arkansans. Though it is a step in the right direction, we must continue making tough decisions to reduce our debt.” (Sen. Mark Pryor, “Statement By Senator Mark Pryor In Support Of The Bipartisan Solution To Raise The Debt Ceiling,” Press Release, 8/1/11)

According To White House Analysis, The Sequester Cuts Would Be Damaging To Arkansas

In Arkansas, Approximately 4,000 Civilian Department Of Defense Employees Would Be Furloughed, Reducing Gross Pay Around $19.2 Million In Total. “In Arkansas, approximately 4,000 civilian Department of Defense employees would be furloughed, reducing gross pay by about $19.2 million in total.”(“Impact Of March 1^st Cuts On Middle Class Families, Jobs, And Economic Security: Arkansas,”The White House, Accessed 2/25/13)

·      Base Operation Funding For Arkansas Would Be Cut For The Army By $1.6 Million, And For The Air Force By $2 Million. Army: Base operation funding would be cut by almost $1.6 million in Arkansas. Air Force: Funding for Air Forceoperations in Arkansas would be cut by about $2 million.”  (“Impact Of March 1^st Cuts On Middle Class Families, Jobs, And Economic Security: Arkansas,” The White House, Accessed 2/25/13)

Arkansas Would Lose Over $5.9 Million In Funding For Primary And Secondary Education,  Putting 80 Teacher And Aide Jobs At Risk. “Arkansas will lose approximately $5.9 million in funding for primary and secondary education, putting around 80 teacher and aide jobs at risk. In addition about 10,000 fewer students would be served and approximately 30 fewer schools would receive funding.”(“Impact Of March 1^st Cuts On Middle Class Families, Jobs, And Economic Security: Arkansas,” The White House, Accessed 2/25/13)

Arkansas Would Lose Over $5.6 Million In Funds For 70 Teachers, Aides And Staff Who Help Children With Disabilities. “In addition, Arkansas will lose approximately $5.6 million in funds for about 70 teachers, aides, and staff who help children with disabilities.”(“Impact Of March 1^st Cuts On Middle Class Families, Jobs, And Economic Security: Arkansas,” The White House, Accessed 2/25/13)

Head Start Services Would Be Eliminated For Approximately 600 Children In Arkansas.“Head Start and Early Head Start services would be eliminate for approximately 600 children in Arkansas, reducing access to critical early education.” (“Impact Of March 1^st Cuts On Middle Class Families, Jobs, And Economic Security: Arkansas,” The White House, Accessed 2/25/13)

Up To 200 Disadvantaged Arkansas Children Could Lose Access To Child Care. “Up to 200 disadvantaged and vulnerable children could lose access to child care, which is also essential for working parents to hold down a job.”(“Impact Of March 1^st Cuts On Middle Class Families, Jobs, And Economic Security: Arkansas,” The White House, Accessed 2/25/13)

Approximately 1,140 Fewer Arkansas Children Will Receive Vaccines For Diseases Such As Mumps, Measles And Rubella. “In Arkansas around 1,140 fewer children will receive vaccines for diseases such as measles, mumps, rubella, tetanus, whooping cough, influenza, and Hepatitis B due to reduced funding for vaccinations of about $78,000.” (“Impact Of March 1^st Cuts On Middle Class Families, Jobs, And Economic Security: Arkansas,” The White House, Accessed 2/25/13)

The post Pryor Allows Sequester To Hit Despite Saying It’s “Bad For Arkansas” appeared first on NRSC - National Republican Senatorial Committee.

WASHINGTON, D.C – For months, Republicans in the House and Senate have been urging their Democratic counterparts to replace President Obama’s sequester with smarter, safer and more sensible spending cuts to lower the deficit.  Instead, less than 24 hours before the President’s Sequester proposal hits, Senator Mark Begich (D-AK) voted to instead replace the sequester with a bill that raises taxes and actually INCREASES the deficit.

You read that correctly: Senator Begich’s solution to America’s deficit is to add more to it by taking more from hard working Alaskan families and throwing good money after bad.

NRSC Communications Director Brad Dayspring issued the following statement:

“Leave it to Mark Begich to try to solve the deficit crisis by adding more to it. Senator Begich voted today to take more money from Alaska families and give it to the powerful Democrats controlling Washington to spend, adding billions more to the deficit. Workers and families in Alaska understand that there’s a simple and smart way for Washington to do a little more with a little less, unfortunately Mark Begich would rather do a little less with a lot more.  Senator Begich left Alaska families with the sequester repercussions and refused to support a sensible alternative.”

BACKGROUND: 

The Congressional Budget Office Estimated That The Plan Would Increase The Deficit By $7.2 Billion. “S. 388 would eliminate the automatic spending reductions scheduled to occur under current law for 2013 and would partially eliminate the reductions scheduled for 2014. The bill also would eliminate direct payments to certain agricultural producers, provide funding for agricultural disaster assistance, and exempt from sequestration all mandatory funding provided for the Department of Agriculture. In addition, S. 388 would ensure that taxpayers with annual income above $5 million face an average tax rate of at least 30 percent on their income, and it would extend an existing per-barrel tax on oil production to oil produced from tar sands. CBO and the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) estimate that enacting the bill would increase budget deficits from changes in direct spending and revenues by $7.2 billion over the 2013-2023 period.” (“S. 388: American Family Economic Protection Act Of 2013,” Congressional Budget Office, 2/27/13)

President Obama Supported The Begich Senate Bill, Despite The Fact That It Would Increase Deficits. “White House-backed legislation in the Senate to replace $85 billion in across-the-board spending cuts would raise the deficit through the end of the budget year by tens of billions of dollars, officials said late Wednesday as the two parties maneuvered for public support on economic issues.” (David Espo, “Senate Dems’ Bill Light On Deficit Cuts In 2013,” The Associated Press 

The post Begich’s Deficit Solution: Add More To It appeared first on NRSC - National Republican Senatorial Committee.