| When you think of a Republican "moderate," what positions or what politicians come to mind? I for one think of the stellar former Rhode Island Senator Lincoln Chaffee, who is against the death penalty and courageously voted against the Iraq War. Almost invariably, though, the New Jersey media states that GOP State Senator and NJ-07 Congressional Candidate Leonard Lance is a "moderate," yet the facts on the ground and his record indicate otherwise. Part of the reason for this, of course, is that the candidates who Lance faced in the Republican primary were somewhere to the right of Bush on several issues, and Lance is, by comparison, indeed a moderate compared to those right wing extremists. |
| But on social issues, the record needs to be corrected, particularly when it comes to Lance's supposed support of a woman's right to choose, gay and lesbian rights, and embryonic stem cell research.
Lance's record on abortion rights is spotty at best. In his his own words, Lance says "I have voted for parental notification for abortion, although I am pro-choice.'' This is hardly a pro-choice position, as parental notification threatens the rights of young girls, particularly those who have been sexually-assaulted by family members. Further, according to Lance's personal survey response on Project Vote Smart, he writes that he is against all abortions except in the case of rape, incest, or when the woman's life is in danger. Then there's womens rights group Emily's List, which didn't hesitate to criticize Lance's record on womens' issues: "Lance has repeatedly voted to limit access to abortion and family planning services for women -- he even opposed legislation to require pharmacists to fill prescriptions for contraceptives." I see nothing in Lance's record to indicate that he is pro-choice, as only permitting abortion rights in the most extreme circumstances doesn't constitute a pro-choice position. Further, if a Republican president were to push an anti-choice Supreme Court justice replacement, Lance, even though he would only be a congressman, would almost certainly support him/her, thus putting Roe v. Wade perilously close to being overturned.
Then there's Lance's slippery slope on stem cell research. As senate minority leader for three years and as a powerful Republican assemblyman, Lance has had numerous opportunities to further life-saving stem cell research initiatives, but he's failed to act in favor of this research time and time again. Recently, Lance voted against a stem cell funding bill, S 1471: Cigarette Tax Securitization Proceeds Fund; Stem Cell and Biomedical Research Facilities Source, that would have provided a definite money source for developing this research. Stem cell research facilities in Newark, New Brunswick and Camden would have been left out of vital funding sources if Lance's position would have been in the majority. In 2005, Lance refused to vote for another stem cell funding initiative, as he abstained from voting on a Dick Codey-sponsored bill. Depending on what media article you're reading on Lance, you may hear that he supports stem cell research, but his record suggests otherwise.
Finally, on the topic of civil rights for gays and lesbians, Lance has a simply godawful record and draconian philosophy. According to his Project Vote Smart survey response, Lance himself is "undecided" on whether there should be a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage -- he's even undecided on whether N.J.'s civil unions should continue in law. We shouldn't be surprised about his intolerance towards gays and lesbians, though, since he already voted against New Jersey's Civil Unions bill.
I know where Linda Stender stands on each of these issues, and her stand doesn't shift according to the audience: She's pro-choice, pro gay rights and pro stem cell research. Leonard Lance is no moderate on social issues, and his record in the N.J. state legislature needs to be more conspicuous, since he has voted the wrong away almost every time a gut-check social issue vote has come up. |
