A very strange thing is happening in West Michigan: while women across America run away from the Republican Party in droves due to its war on women's health, the local Democratic establishment is backing a candidate who cast a vote to completely defund Planned Parenthood when he was a member of the State House of Representatives in 2001. That person was Steve Pestka, and that vote means Pestka stands for much more than just eradicating abortion -- he in fact voted to deprive about five million women statewide of basic medical screenings if they could not afford to pay for it themselves.
It's hard for me to relay just how detrimental Pestka's positioning is to the wellbeing of women. Not only did he receive a zero rating from Planned Parenthood during his two years serving as a state representative, but he essentially helped popularize the playbook that many of the most radical members of the Republican Party are now using to marginalize women and their health needs.
As President Barack Obama put it in his video address just three weeks ago: "When some professional politicians casually say they'll 'get rid of' Planned Parenthood, don't forget what they're really talking about -- eliminating the funding for preventative care that millions of women rely on and leaving them to fend for themselves."
What's even stranger about this scenario is that the Democratic leaders in Michigan's 3rd Congressional District have a solid alternative, Trevor Thomas, who wholeheartedly supports a woman's right to make her own medical decisions. Thomas is pro-choice and he also comes from a family born of two former GM employees who met at the factory and worked the lines together for 30 years. Trevor Thomas knows what it's like to withstand tough times and he understands that, even after you've logged a lifetime of hard work, financial security is no guarantee. He's the type of candidate who will never forget his humble beginnings in Marne and how fortunate he was to become the first member of his family to attend college.
Regrettably, the women of Michigan know all too well that it only takes one Democrat from our state to limit the rights of women nationwide. I personally have no interest in voting the next Bart Stupak into office while risking the possibility that basic health care access could be stripped from tens of millions of American women across the country.
If you, like me, are concerned about the future of your health care, your mother's health care, or your daughter's health care, you most certainly are not alone. A comprehensive USA Today poll of 12 swing states released earlier this month found that health care was the single most important concern for women in those states. The same poll also found that President Obama was seeing "a huge shift of women to his side." It's no coincidence that women now strongly favor Obama after the likely GOP nominee, Mitt Romney, promised to "get rid of" Planned Parenthood to balance the budget.
Which leads me to a confounding question: Why are a handful of Democratic leaders in West Michigan entirely ignoring the key concerns of some their most loyal voters -- women? Aren't they supposed to find a candidate who will excite us, mobilize us, and, once in office, work tirelessly to protect us and our future?
There's been a lot of talk about West Michigan values lately and who best embodies them. Steve Pestka certainly didn't vote my values in 2001 and 2002. My values don't include depriving women who are struggling financially of access to basic medical services -- services that could, in all actuality, save their lives.
Democratic leaders in West Michigan would surely like us to follow their lead on a decision that they apparently made behind closed doors without regard for a large corps of voters who will populate the polls on primary day. But when I go to the voting booth on August 7, I will be voting for the candidate who believes that I'm fully capable and should be fully empowered to make my own medical decisions, regardless of my means. And until that day, I will be doing everything in my power to make sure Trevor Thomas knows that the women of West Michigan stand with him.
He was never for limiting Women's rights or against abortion until he married his 2nd or 3rd wife who is Catholic and overbearing. Why NOT just elect her?
This is a good time to NOT elect the Democrat.
Politics is more than just holding the "correct" position on the issues. Steve Pestka has deep rooted connections in the community, a record of service, and a wealth of experience.
Mr. Thomas is certainly welcome to run, but if he really wants to serve the 3rd district residents there is a lot of good work that can be done on the smaller scale. Convince the voters that he's in it to serve us, not just to gain the position of Congressman.
A bunch of MEN want to make a supporter of rights for WOMEN get out of the race because they think he can't win? That he can't beat Amash? N'SYNC is more popular than Amash right now!
If I (as a man) EVER attack champions of women's rights, whack me.
we need to converse.
Seriously, look at his latest CFR: 11 donors from the district... 11! The dirty little secret about 'The Campaign for All of My Ego' is that Trevor is being propped up by out of state interests. Trevor has been lying about his district, saying anti-choice men are bullying him and women, he even claims on his facebook and twitter that he is bullied and beaten down for being gay and pro-choice by the local Democratic party... come on Trev, come clean, you're full of it.
Your candidacy is not only ill fated, it is going to cost a money to beat you in August, money which would be much better spent on beating Amash. Why don't you do all of the local West Michigan Dems a favor and call it quits now before you do more damage to the party and our chances in November, you have no shot you're just wasting everyones money for you ego trip.
Thomas has raised more money from more people than you wish to acknowledge. Meanwhile, Steve's donors, well they got deep pockets, don't they? Not surprising, as I said below they're paying him back for what he's given them before! This is the kind of cronyism that Obama and Thomas are fighting against.
Oh well. More hatred of Thomas from the "How Dare He Run" crowd. How would you feel if Thomas and his crew told Pestka to stop running? How? Thankfully, Thomas, a progressive, trusts the democratic process enough to welcome a primary, even though Pestka got in after Thomas did - Feb 13 vs March 5.
And since those who support Pestka are wealthy, they can't understand what Thomas understands: People are hurting. The poor, gays, women, the young - they're all hurting. And Thomas, who knows what it's like to be young, poor and gay, is fighting for them.
Like Dean and Obama before him, Thomas is a courageous champion of progressive values. Those Democrats who beat the party establishment end up beating Republicans too (witness Obama's victory and Kerry's defeat).
Mr. Thomas, if you or your team read this: Keep fighting the
Indeed, ten years ago, Trevor Thomas was a senior at a suburban high school, a good Catholic boy. What did he think then about this supposed piece of anti-woman legislation? And what about his parents, the blue collar, Catholic workers that they were -- where did they stand on this issue?
If Thomas was like so many others at that time in our city, he would have likely called himself "pro-life." Certainly his neighbors and parishioners would have embraced that label.
And these were the same folk whom Pestka also represented, first on the County Commission and then in the State House. They were the people he met on the doorstep and porches, the folks who worked hard and did well enough. Steve's vote was their vote.
To object to Pestka then for this vote is one deep sense to object to the community he represented, and the same community from which Thomas himself came from, whose values he shared.
Of course, the biggest question is not what happened ten years ago, but what should happen now. For women, our schools, our communities.
This resentment of young people that you show here and in your other comment just goes to show how little you establishment types really think of the people who work their butts off for Democratic candidates.
It's interesting that you call George "Union Buster" Heartwell a progressive mayor. Didn't your own county party chair run against him in 2007, pointing out that he's not really a Democrat?
There's no harm to that. We all change. We go to school, we find our voice, we reach deeper into the convictions our parents and teachers taught us and find our own opinion.
On the mayor's race: Heartwell was a the pro-choice candidate in 2003 and he still is a member of that faction. As to the party chair in 2007, that would have been Sue Levy.
And last, folks who work their butts off? You really want to go there, about how Thomas was busting his butt for Dem candidates in Kent County? Thomas did some good work in Lansing, and some very important work in Washington, but working in Kent County? No.
TREVOR THOMAS HAS NEVER VOTED IN A GENERAL ELECTION IN THE 3RD DISTRICT, HE NEVER EVEN LIVED IN THE DISTRICT UNTIL HE DECIDED TO RUN. GRANHOLM IS AS IRRELEVANT NOW as she was in her 2nd term. We all remember her popularity ratings at the lowest in history.
Who exactly are you referring to? I'll speak for myself: I worked on numerous campaigns within the 3rd congressional district and Grand Rapids area in 2010, and even hosted David LaGrand, Phil Skaggs, Fred Johnson, Brandon Dillon, Pat Miles, Pal Mayhue, and others at GVSU while I was President of the GVSU College Democrats. I'll be glad to forward you pictures of me canvassing, in campaign offices, walking in a parade holding a "Kent Dems" sign, and a picture of the "War Room" shirt I got for working the phones at the election headquarters on the East Beltline on election night 2010. And as for Trevor Thomas, he grew up in Grand Rapids, went to GVSU, and worked for Wood TV-8 before moving to Lansing, and returning recently. If you have a problem with Thomas' recent absence from the district, fine, but it's simply untrue to state that he's never lived in the area. We're all entitled to our own opinions, but not to our own facts...
And I will reiterate: I think the topic of discussion here should be the candidates' qualifications and the issues, not the character of the citizens who are doing their civic duty and voicing their opinions about local politics.
When Trevor Thomas addressed the Kent Dems, he made a critical error in his address. Perhaps it was a Freudian slip... Trevor said, "I'm in this race until August". I believe he meant it in a way to address that he was not getting out of the race. But, I took issue with the statement. I want someone who enters the race with their eye on being IN THIS RACE UNTIL NOVEMBER. When Trevor made the Freudian slip... It made me believe that he has no intention of beating Amash. He does not have his eye in the REAL PRIZE. He is wasting his energy by going after Pestka instead of the real opponent - Amash.
What?!?!?! He helped repeal the backwards, 'Don't ask, don't tell' law, He helped our previous governor (the only most progressive since Milliken retired), and he has the support of progressives throughout the area, including people who have been attacked in these comments!).......... yet you want to accuse him of helping Amash????
"Pestka is not saying anything negative about Thomas. To do so would weaken his chances against Amash in the event that Thomas wins the Primary." ... Meanwhile, YOU are attacking Thomas.
It seems, you are admitting that your goal is to kneecap Thomas. Were you behind the question-planting incident at the Kent Democrats meeting? Is that also why you (a paid staffer for the state House Dems) were spending your time today trashing your fellow Democrats? We're dealing with Mike frickin' Callton and his merry band of anti-choice, anti-worker thugs - yet you would rather go after a progressive who you admit shares your views? What about Rick "Out-With-Democracy" Outman up north? Holly Hughes? Mike Shirkey? What about them?
On behalf of working people everywhere. Get to work or get out of your job!
As far as my strong wording goes: it's true, I call a spade a spade, and when Ms. Bennet says, "he in fact voted to deprive about five million women statewide of basic medical screenings if they could not afford to pay for it themselves." That is a false attack. Period. I think you appear to be acknowledging that it was false. Now, she either knows it's false and is lying or she never looked into the information Trevor fed her and she's which is foolish. I call them as I see them.
Finally, the primary doesn't help because Trevor has decided to make false and negative attacks on Pestka and because he is encouraging disunity and strife. I urge you to rethink your support for him.
You're good people with the best intentions, but you're being manipulated into saying things that just aren't true. Please, please, take a look at the bill. If you want to say "Steve Pestka voted to give priority funding for women's health to organizations that didn't fund abortions" OK. That appears to be largely true. But for people to ask you to write "he in fact voted to deprive about five million women statewide of basic medical screenings if they could not afford to pay for it themselves." Or for people to ask you to say that Steve voted to defund Planned Parenthood (when the bill passed and PP isn't defunded). For those people you have to ask yourself, "why are you asking me to publicly write untrue things?" Just take a step back and think if you want to be associated with people who are manipulating you and asking you to say things they know are not true.
Oh, and even if Trevor DID make that promise, why would I trust someone to be a city commissioner who revealed the details of an ostensibly private meeting?
Keep telling the truth, Andy - we have the establishment on the defensive!
I think Steve's hoping to skate through a primary without being open about these views (but will be open about them in the general when he thinks his pro-life positions make him more electable). Trevor's standing up for women, and though he's critical of Steve on policy, his campaign has not brought attacks to a personal level the way you guys have.
Pestka is getting nailed by a fellow Democrat- because he didn't fall for a political trap set by the Michigan RTL. In 2002, Pestka was running for State Senate against Hardiman. Michigan RTL and the Republicans orchestrated HB 4655 to create a scorecard vote for the upcoming election. In an effort to take out the Democrat who never introduced anti-abortion legislation- RTL needed to try to get Pestka to vote against this bill to clear the way to endorse Hardiman. Pestka didn't fall for the trap.
Once Hardiman was elected, he introduced SB 395 http://legislature.mi.gov/documents/2003-2004/billintroduced/Senate/pdf/2003-SIB-0395.pdf to define personhood, he introduced anti-stemcell bills SB-249 http://legislature.mi.gov/documents/2003-2004/billintroduced/Senate/pdf/2003-SIB-0249.pdf and SB-606 http://legislature.mi.gov/documents/2003-2004/billintroduced/Senate/pdf/2003-SIB-0606.pdf
This is the problem with voting with blinders on- you fail to see the bigger picture. As Pro-Life people, who would we have preferred to be in office? Hardiman or Pestka? If you are Trevor Thomas... you'd say Pestka was anti-woman. However, if Pestka had been elected to the Senate... he wouldn't have introduced these bad bills.
Trevor's message should be about beating the incumbent. Isn't this race about beating Amash, the real woman-hater???
NOW is a time for some HONESTY, if he is to be trusted.
ASK him WHY he is for cutting funds for Women's clinics.
Is it a firm, campaign, politically expedient, intentionally obscure, misinterpreted or ? stance?
Watch SockyMonky get a headache...
“Santorum Campaign Manager to Help Romney Reach Pro-Lifers - 4/26/12
http://www.lifenews.com/2012/04/26/santorum-campaign-manager-to-help-romney-reach-pro-lifers/
Interesting and ironic considering...
Mitt then vs. Mitt now on Women's Choice
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qc7-ig8mnF0
1994 - Romney
Believes Abortion should be safe & Legal, he says since 1970! (Long held beliefs of 24 years!?)
Says Rowe V. Wade should be sustained & supported...
States it's the right of a woman to make that choice....
Was asked why should voters believe that you have any empathy with their problems - far removed from everyday people
... ends with "I don't think the voters see a dimes worth of difference between us"...