Ad

Facts

ANNCR: In Sharron Angle’s Nevada,

On Screen: In Sharron Angle’s Nevada…

ANNCR: There are no background checks to catch sex offenders working with kids

On Screen: No background checks . -AB 239, 4/15/99

FACT: ANGLE VOTED AGAINST SETTING UP A SPECIAL FUND TO HELP NON-PROFITS PERFORM BACKGROUND CHECKS TO MAKE SURE VOLUNTEERS WORKING WITH KIDS AREN’T SEX OFFENDERS

Angle Voted Against Special Fund To Help Non-Profits Conduct Criminal Background Checks On Volunteers Working With Kids. In 1999, Angle was one of only two votes in the Assembly opposing AB 239, which gave nonprofit agencies access to a special fund that helped underwrite the costs of background checks on volunteers to determine whether they had committed sexual offenses. AB 239 passed the Assembly on a 40-2 vote. [AB 239, 4/15/99; Assembly Judiciary Committee minutes, 3/1/99]

Girl Scouts And Boy Scouts Of America Supported The Bill. According to Assembly Judiciary Committee minutes, both the Boy Scouts of America and the Girl Scouts were in favor of AB 239. Vicki N. Wright, Executive Director for the Sierra Nevada Girl Scout Council,testified that “the cost of conducting background checks on their current 4,000 volunteers was financially prohibitive. She opined A.B. 239 would address that concern, would add an extra level of scrutiny to their screening process, and would make children safer.” [Assembly Judiciary Committee minutes, 3/1/99]

During A Hearing On The Bill, Angle “Expressed Concern With The Possible Invasion Of Privacy And Liability Issues Included In The Bill.” During a March discussion of AB 239 in the Assembly Judiciary Committee, Angle “expressed concern with the possible invasion of privacy and liability issues included in the bill. She stated voluntary programs always stepped up to become mandatory and she did not want to see the state get involved with things of a first amendment nature.” [AB 239, 4/15/99; Assembly Judiciary Committee minutes, 3/1/99]

ASKED ABOUT THE BILL IN 2010, ANGLE’S RIDICULOUS DEFENSE WAS THAT SHE “RAISED QUESTIONS … REGARDING THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES IN REGARDS TO PERSONAL PRIVACY AND COSTS.” In August the Review-Journal reported that Nevada law enforcement officials had endorsed Reid and attacked Angle’s extreme and dangerous record. According to the report, “What about Angle’s votes in the Assembly that Reid said demonstrated she doesn’t support law enforcement? ‘Sharron agrees with the spirit of those bills and the need for law enforcement to have the proper tools,’ Agen said. ‘However she had concerns with the execution. At the time, Sharron raised questions in committee regarding the unintended consequences in regards to personal privacy and costs.’” [Review-Journal, Political Eye Blog, 8/30/10]

NEVADA LAW ENFORCEMENT PROFESSIONAL DENOUNCED ANGLE’S EXTREME AND DANGEROUS VOTE

Axel James (Police Officers Research Association of Nevada): “One thing is for sure, Sharron Angle’s record on the issues important to law enforcement are just too extreme and dangerous. For example, she was one of only two votes against a special fund to help non-profits conduct criminal background checks on volunteers that are working with kids. Are you kidding me? I am a parent of five year-old triplets. Why in the world would anyone vote against a bill that ensures sex offenders are not working with our children? This bill was supported by the Girl Scouts and the Boy Scouts of America, but not with Sharron Angle. It’s clear Sharron Angle’s vision of Nevada and in Nevada is too extreme and too dangerous. And, when you compare that record to Senator Harry Reid, the choice couldn’t be clearer. And that’s why PORAN is supporting and endorsing Harry Reid this election.” [Reid Campaign Event,8/30/10]

ASKED ABOUT THE BILL IN OCTOBER 2010, ANGLE OFFERED AN EVEN MOREOUTRAGEOUS DEFENSE: THE BILL WAS “OVERREACHING” BY THE GOVERNMENT. In an October 2010 interview with Lars Larson, Angle defended her vote against the background checks bill, saying, “This vote had to do more with our rights under the First Amendment, once more. They were trying to place more government control within, uh, places like churches and private businesses. We already have a law in place in Nevada where you do have to report if you are a sex offender, and also there are laws that have…that have you do, uh, finger, uh, fingerprinting if you’re working with kids. So, we just didn’t want that overreaching government to go in there and begin to attack groups like the Boy Scouts and churches.” [Angle Interview with Lars Larson, 10/11/10 emphasis added)]

FLASHBACK: THE BOY SCOUTS SUPPORTED THE BILL. According to Assembly Judiciary Committee minutes, both the Boy Scouts of America and the Girl Scouts were in favor of AB 239. Vicki N. Wright, Executive Director for the Sierra Nevada Girl Scout Council, testified that “the cost of conducting background checks on their current 4,000 volunteers was financially prohibitive. She opined A.B. 239 would address that concern, would add an extra level of scrutiny to their screening process, and would make children safer.” [Assembly Judiciary Committee minutes, 3/1/99]

ANNCR: There’s no Social Security for seniors

On Screen: No Social Security/ -KSNV/KRNV, 5/19/10

FACT: ANGLE WANTS TO ELIMINATE SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE, BELIEVES ENTITLEMENT PROGRAMS VIOLATE THE FIRST COMMANDMENT

Angle: “We Need To Phase Medicare And Social Security Out.” During a May 2010 debate on Face to Face, Sharron Angle said, “We need to phase Medicare and Social Security out in favor of something privatized.” She later added, “Going forward we need to phase it out, give people an opportunity to either opt into the old system or go for a new system where they have their own healthcare savings account or they have their own retirement savings account which is portable and goes with them from job to job and for those who are entering the workforce right now they come on to the new system so it’s a phased-in system so it’s something [inaudible] privatize.” [Face to Face Debate, 5/19/10]

Angle Said Social Security Is “Difficult To Justify” And Likened It To Welfare. In a May interview with KNPR, Angle said, “Well, it’s very difficult, Lynn, to justify Social Security. As you know F.D.R. put it in as an insurance policy for those who were needy. My grandfather would not even take his Social Security check because he said he was not up for welfare, he had planned for his retirement, and he wouldn’t take it. But, since then we have gotten into this whole mindset that it’s an entitlement.” [KNPR, State of Nevada, 5/19/10 (emphasis added)]

Angle Believes “Entitlement Programs … Make Government Our God” And That “We Have Become A Country Entrenched In Idolatry.” During an April 2010 interview with TruNews radio, Angle said, “And these programs that you mentioned -- that Obama has going with Reid and Pelosi pushing them forward -- are all entitlement programs built to make government our God. And that’s really what’s happening in this country is a violation of the First Commandment. We have become a country entrenched in idolatry, and that idolatry is the dependency upon our government. We’re supposed to depend upon God for our protection and our provision and for our daily bread, not for our government.” [TruNews, 4/21/10]

Even Sherm Frederick Knew Angle Was Saying Social Security Violates The First Commandment, And Even He Disagreed. In an August 2010 blog post, Review-Journal Publisher Sherm Frederick wrote, “U.S. Senate candidate Sharron Angle does it again. She grants an interview to a Christian radio station and spouts some religious stuff that not only makes her look politically bad, it gives people of faith -- like, say, our Founding Fathers -- a black eye … I'm not saying that she doesn't have a point about things being out of whack when it comes to the balance between personal responsibility and the role of government. And, yes, humans can put anything before God, thus ignoring the First Commandment. But our government was created by men who believed in God. And they crafted the government to provide a common protection. That wasn't idolatry. Expansion of that common protection to include things like Social Security, or even national health care (though I think it is a bad idea) is not necessarily idolatry.” [Review-Journal, Sherm Frederick Blog, 8/5/10]

Angle Called Social Security “A Broken System Without Much To Recommend It.” In August 2010 the Associated Press reported Angle, “previously said she didn't trust big government to manage what she called ‘a broken system without much to recommend it,’ and she repeatedly has said she supports phasing out Social Security over time.” [Associated Press,8/14/10]

Angle In 1993: “STOP FUNDING THE WASTEFUL SOCIAL AND ENTITLEMENT PROGRAMS.” In a 1993 letter to Senator Reid, Angle wrote, “The answer to this mess is clear. STOP FUNDING THE WASTEFUL SOCIAL AND ENTITLEMENT PROGRAMS. MAKE THE DIFFICULT CHOICES THAT WILL KEEP OUR COUNTRY STRONG. THAT'S WHAT YOU WERE ELECTED TO DO!” [Review-Journal, John L. Smith Column,8/18/10 (emphasis in original)]

Review-Journal’s John L. Smith On Angle’s Letter: “That's The Angle I Know. Her Recent Soft-Lens Campaign Style Notwithstanding, I Suspect Sharron Angle Is The Same As She Ever Was.” In an August 2010 column, John L. Smith wrote, “Angle let Reid have it with both barrels. She also bluntly revealed her belief that the only way to save America was to end ‘social and entitlement programs.’ As a Senate candidate this year, Angle and her campaign mechanics have worked hard to soften her rhetoric about ‘eliminating’ Social Security in favor of ‘privatizing’ and ‘personalizing’ individual accounts. She's also suffered self-inflicted wounds on federal unemployment insurance extensions and other ‘entitlement’ programs … Ending Social Security and other entitlement programs? … That's the Angle I know. Her recent soft-lens campaign style notwithstanding, I suspect Sharron Angle is the same as she ever was.” [Review-Journal, John L. Smith Column, 8/18/10 (emphasis added)]

Angle: “The Idea Of Privatizing And Getting Out Of Medicare And Social Security Is Not Up For Grabs.” In June 2010, Talking Points Memo reported, “In an interview from three weeks before the Nevada Republican primary, Sharron Angle made it clear that getting rid of Medicare and Social Security is a non-negotiable issue for her … Going on in the interview, Angle talks about how as a Senator she would work with other legislators to formulate a proper solution for her idea, haggling over the details and implementation of privatization without giving up on the main idea itself: ‘The idea of privatizing and getting out of Medicare and Social Security is not up for grabs.’” [Talking Points Memo, 6/14/10]

Angle: “I’m Not Sure Just Where In The Constitution The Federal Government Is Even Supposed To Be Involved In Our Medicare.” During a September 2009 campaign event, Sharron Angle said, “We need to send people back there who are willing to look at what’s wrong because we know that Medicare Part D might have been a good idea when it started out, but once it goes through the legislative process it becomes compromised and pretty soon it doesn’t work. And I’m not sure just where in the Constitution the federal government is even supposed to be involved in our Medicare. You know, these are things that could be done on the state level much better.” [Angle Campaign Event, 9/1/09 (emphasis added)]

Angle On Medicare: “We Need To Phase It Out.” In October 2009, the Review-Journal reported, “As for Medicare, she (Angle) said the entitlement program popular with seniors will eventually grow too costly to maintain… ‘We need to phase it out,’ she said.” [Las Vegas Review-Journal, 10/21/09]

ANNCR: Insurance companies don't cover cancer tests

On Screen: No cancer tests / - SB 183, 5/16/03

FACT: ANGLE WAS ONE OF JUST TWO VOTES IN THE ASSEMBLY TO VOTE AGAINST REQUIRING INSURANCE COMPANIES TO COVER COLON CANCER SCREENINGS

Angle Voted Against Requiring Coverage Of Colorectal Cancer Screenings. Angle in 2003 was one of only two votes in the Assembly against SB 183, which required health insurance companies to cover screenings for colorectal cancer, if they provide treatment for colorectal cancer. [SB 183, 5/16/03]

Even The American Cancer Society’s Lobbyist Testified Her Insurance Did Not Cover Colonoscopies. While urging members of the Assembly Commerce and Labor Committee to pass SB 183, American Cancer Society Lobbyist Buffy Gail Martin disclosed, “Just as a side note, I am an employee of the American Cancer Society.  However, my medical insurance company operating in the state of Nevada does not cover colonoscopies.” [Assembly Commerce and Labor Committee Minutes, 4/25/03 (emphasis added)]

FACT: ANGLE BRAGS ABOUT INTRODUCING LEGISLATION TO REPEAL ALL STATE COVERAGE MANDATES

Angle Touted Bill To Remove Coverage Mandates. During an April 2010 debate, Angle said, “If you go to my website you will see my record. As your state legislator I introduced three bills. One would have taken off all of the mandates on insurance, and that’s one of the solutions that we have to have a Senator that will go and introduce something like that that says we don’t have mandated coverages on insurance.” [Anger is Brewing Senate Debate, 4/23/10]

Angle Touted Legislation That Would Have “Created A Basic Health Insurance Policy” Without Coverage Mandates On Her Primary Campaign Website. According to Angle’s pre-primary website, “Assemblywoman, Sharron Angle introduced affordable insurance legislation that removed costly mandates and created a basic health insurance policy, with the ability to add those benefits that were specific to each person.” [Angle Campaign Website, 6/8/10, via TheRealSharrnAngle.com]

FACT: ANGLE EXPLICITLY ADDRESSED THE CHARGE THAT SHE OPPOSES INSURANCE COVERAGE MANDATES FOR MAMMOGRAMS AND COLON CANCER SCREENINGS BY BRAGGING ABOUT HER BILL TO REPEAL COVERAGE MANDATES

Asked About Attacks On Her Record And Rhetoric Regarding Health Care Coverage Mandates Angle Bragged About Trying To Repeal Coverage Mandates And Attacked Reid For Supporting Coverage Mandates.” During a July 2010 interview with the Review-Journal, Angle addressed attacks on her record and rhetoric on the campaign trail:

BOARD MEMBER: Let’s ask you some questions then. The latest mailer that Harry Reid has sent out is one that says you voted against requiring insurance companies to pay for mammograms and colonoscopies. So tell us your rationale for that.

ANGLE: Remember one of the things that we said would always be a good health care cost reform is to eliminate mandated coverages and allow people to participate in a just a basic plan and add the coverages they needed and take on those costs so that they knew what they were actually taking on. Those things that Harry Reid is complaining about are mandated coverages. And we have so many now in this state of Nevada that many insurers won’t even come in this state because they can’t.

BOARD MEMBER: How many are there?

ANGLE: How many insurers are there?

BOARD MEMBER: Mandates.

ANGLE: Mandates, I’m not even sure. When I left there were 21. And I don’t know how much beyond that. I’ve heard bigger numbers, but that was one of the things that I even had a bill to remove those mandates here in the state because every time they put a mandate on, somebody can’t afford it, somebody drops off those affordable insurance rolls and now they are uninsured. So if Harry Reid is really genuine and wants people to be insured, he needs to give them the opportunity to afford insurance and one of those things is to take off those mandated coverages, not put on more.  [Angle Interview with the Review-Journal Editorial Board, 7/25/10 (emphasis added)]

FACT: ANGLE WANTS TO REMOVE ALL COVERAGE MANDATES – BOTH IN NEVADA AND ACROSS THE COUNTRY

Jon Ralston: “Angle: Insurance Mandates Are Product Of Government Bowing To ‘Politically Correct Special Interest.’” In September 2010, Jon Ralston reported, “Such as Big Autism or Big Colonoscopies or Big Pregnant Women, perhaps? That last one may be politically incorrect, but it is political correctness Angle cited last month in a speech to the Association of Health Underwriters on August 10 in explaining her opposition to mandates on insurance companies … Here's a transcription of what Angle said … ‘We know that if we could have that affordability across state lines, you’re not, you’re not afraid of competition I know you’re not, you would in fact invite it. I have friends in other states that say you know I’d like to come to Nevada, but you have problems there in Nevada. And one of the problems is unfunded, well they are unfunded, but these mandates on insurance companies to provide coverage for things that people don’t even really need! And what we need to do is get rid of those mandates, let you provide a comprehensive coverage that takes care of what people need and allows them to buy them the things that they have to have, not things that are mandated by the government. A similar policy, as the things that people write for car insurance, and life insurance, you know you write something that fits the need of a person rather than fitting what the government has done for some politically correct special interest and that’s how we got those mandates.’” [Ralston’s Flash, 9/27/10 (audio at link)]

Angle: The Answer To Health Care “Is Take Off The Mandates For Coverage In The State Of Nevada And All Over The United States.” During an August 2009 campaign appearance, Angle discussed her ideas on health care. She said, “The first one is let us go outside state lines and get a competitive insurance company. The second one is take off the mandates for coverage in the state of Nevada and all over the United States. But here you know what I’m talking about. You’re paying for things that you don’t even need. They just passed the latest one, is everything they want to throw at us now is covered under ‘autism.’ So that’s a mandate that you have to pay for. How about maternity leave? I’m not going to have any more babies, but I sure get to pay for it on my insurance. Those are the kinds of things we want to get rid of.” [Angle Campaign Event, 8/29/09]

Angle: “If You Don’t Have 23 Mandates That Are In The State Of Nevada That Say You Have To Have This And This Coverage, You Can Then Cut Your Costs On The Coverage.” During a September 2009 appearance on Face to Face, Angle explained her answer on health care:

RALSTON: What’s the answer then; tell me what the answer is?

ANGLE: I’m saying that our free market system is the answer. We have a lot of things that we can do. One of them is just letting people go across state lines to make choices on their interests—

RALSTON: Insurances across state lines…

ANGLE: yeah, that’s right…Another one is to cut down on all of the government mandates that are on healthcare. If you don’t have 23 mandates that are in the state of Nevada that say you have to have this and this coverage, you can then cut your costs on the coverage.

RALSTON: Well let’s jus take that just for instance, because that’s a Conservative principle that I’ve heard you and other Conservatives say, let’s not have so many mandates. But some of those things people would argue the counter. If we don’t force insurance companies to cover certain things whether it’s treatments for cervical cancer or something like that, then you’re hurting healthcare by not doing that on the other end. Don’t just think that it’s government’s responsibility to make sure that insurance companies cover certain things.

ANGLE: No, I don’t think so. I think that supply and demand…the whole point of our country and the freedom of that system. If we want those coverages, we’ll go out and buy those coverages and they then will supply those coverages. Those kinds of things, you know we are going to shop around for the insurance company that is going to supply the thing that we need. Those are the kind of coverages that I want. You know, it works the same way for car insurance, when we go out we get a basic policy, and then if we want collision or if we want comprehensive then we go out and we buy that too, and we find the lowest price car insurance to provide the kind of things that we need. And that’s what will happen on the free market scale. [Face to Face, 9/23/09]

Angle Doubled Down On Her Opposition To Requiring Insurance Companies To Cover Anything They Don’t Want To Cover. During the October 14 Senate debate, Angle was asked about her stance on requiring insurance companies to cover “anything at all”:

FOX: Okay.  Uh, we'll go to the next question.  It's still on healthcare reform and actually Senator Reid kind of paraphrased my question, but I'll rephrase it.  Uh, you've said, on various occasions, and in fact voted in the state assembly, to do away with mandated coverage of mammograms. You've come out in favor of eliminating coverage for autism and maternity leave. Is there anything that you think the insurance companies should be forced to cover?

ANGLE: America is a country of choices. Not forcing people to buy things they don't need. What we want is a basic policy where we can add the coverages that we need. I taught autistic children. I know that this is a real biomedical disorder. And it needs to have its own insurance code so that families can get the right treatment and also be covered. But the insurance mandate that we passed in this state only cares for 25% of the one out of every 110 children that have autism. We need to stop making Band-Aid uh applications and look at real solutions when we talk about healthcare, and really, forcing someone to buy something that they don't need is not the way to solve a problem.

FOX: Okay, let me rephrase that question again. Is there anything at all that you think the insurance companies should be mandated to cover? Anything?

ANGLE: Anything at all?

FOX: Yes.

ANGLE: I, I think that what we, what we have here is a choice between the free market and Americanism. America is about choices, and we need to allow people to have those choices. The free market will weed out those companies that uh don't offer as many choices, and don't have a cost effective system. Let the people decide where they want to buy their insurance. You don't have to force them to buy anything, and you don't have to force anyone to offer a product that no one wants.

FOX: Okay, so no insurance mandates? [Nevada Senate Debate, 10/14/10]

ANNCR: Prisoners get massages in a radical Scientology program

On Screen: Prisoner massages / - FactCheck.org, 6/2/10]

IT’S TRUE. SHARRON ANGLE PROPOSED LEGISLATION THAT WOULD PROVIDE MASSAGE AND SAUNA TREATMENTS TO NEVADA PRISONERS AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE.

Angle Promoted Scientology-Based Massage and Sauna Therapy To Nevada Prisons, Funded By Tax Dollars. According to National Review, Sharron Angle wanted to bring a Scientology-based drug treatment program to Nevada that “was described in media accounts as ‘sauna and massage’ treatments…It was developed in part based on concepts from Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard and was estimated to cost roughly $15,000 per inmate. Angle tried to organize a trip to Ensenada prison in Mexico to see the program in action; the cost of the trip was to have been covered by a Scientologist. The trip was ultimately canceled.” [National Review,5/26/2010]

FactCheck.org: “It’s True: Massages, Saunas For Inmates.” In June 2010, the nonpartisan PactCheck.org wrote, “With the June 8 Nevada primary nearing, there was one TV ad in the Republican Senate race that caught our attention. It’s so outlandish that we thought it couldn’t possibly be true. Did former Nevada Assemblywoman Sharron Angle – a Republican backed by the Tea Party Express and the fiscally conservative Club for Growth — sponsor legislation to create a drug rehab program for state prisoners that included saunas and massage therapy? And was that program developed by the Church of Scientology? That’s what Republican Sue Lowden claims in her ad, “Prison Spa,” that first aired May 29. We were skeptical, but found it to be largely true.” [FactCheck.org, 6/2/2010]

Angle Wanted Federal Funding For Her Scientology-Based Inmate Rehabilitation Program. According to a 2003 article in the Las Vegas Review-Journal, “Angle said her bill, which she hopes to introduce in the Assembly later this week, authorizes a demonstration project in Nevada. She said federal funding would be needed, and she’s looking for grants from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, as well as from President Bush’s faith and community-based programs initiative.” [Las Vegas Review-Journal, 2/11/03]

EVEN ANGLE’S EXPLANATIONS FAIL THE LAUGH TEST AND THE TRUTH TEST

Angle’s Wacky Defense Of Giving Massages To Prisoners: “It Was Really More Of A Karate Chop.” In a May candidate debate on Face to Face with Jon Ralston, Angle defended her Scientology-based inmate rehabilitation program, saying, “Well it wasn’t actually…massages… it was really more of a karate chop and the sauna I would say was a sweat box, in there with 30 sweaty guys is not exactly a sauna.” [Face to Face with Jon Ralston, 5/18/10]

Angle Claim: Scientology Program Was “Being Used Successfully” In New Mexico.Sharron Angle told political pundit Jon Ralston, “in New Mexico they are now using that program and it’s being used successfully. We had an opportunity to use it here in Nevada and it would have saved us money in prison fees for incarceration.” [Face to Face with Jon Ralston, 5/18/10]

Fact: Second Chance Program In Albuquerque Shuttered For Housing Violent Criminals. According to a 2008 report by KRQE in Albuquerque, “A controversial drug-rehab center organized on elements of Scientology is being evicted for housing inmates convicted of violent crimes, Albuquerque’s mayor said Friday. The eviction notice gives Second Chance until the end of the next month to wind down the operation housed in a former city jail on Albuquerque’s northwest mesa. So far there has been no response from Second Chance.” [KRQE, 12/26/08]

Fact: New Mexico Lawmakers Had “Reservations,” Judges Were “Skeptical About Second Chance’s Methods.” According to a 2009 article in the Albuquerque Journal, “Lawmakers from around the city and state have had reservations about the connection between Second Chances and Scientology, which they expressed with a lack of funding. And judges, particularly in Bernalillo County, have been skeptical about Second Chance’s methods and where the center has gotten its funding.” [Albuquerque Journal, 1/25/09]

ANNCR: For Sharron Angle, It's not her job to fight for jobs

On Screen: Not her job / Angle Campaign Event, 5/14/10

FACT: ANGLE DOESN’T THINK IT’S THE JOB OF A UNITED STATES SENATOR TO CREATE JOBS

Angle On Jobs: “Ok, As Your U.S. Senator I Am Not In The Business Of Creating Jobs.”[Elko County Forum, 05/11/10]

Angle On Creating Jobs: It’s Someone Else’s Job. During a May 2010 campaign event, Angle said, “People ask me, what are you going to do to develop jobs in your state? Well that’s not my job as a US Senator, to bring industry to the state. That’s the Lieutenant Governor’s job. That’s your State Senator’s and Assemblyman’s job. That’s your Secretary of State’s job, to make a climate here in this state, ya’ll come.” [Angle Campaign Event, 5/14/10]

During The Debate Angle Doubled Down On Jobs Again! During the October 2010 debate between Reid and Angle, Moderator Mitch Fox asked Angle and Reid about the role of a Senator in creating jobs.

FOX: Ok let me ask a follow up, do you believe that getting jobs for Nevadans is not your job?

ANGLE: I believe that my job is to create the policies that will en encourage the private sector to do what they do best and that is to create jobs.

FOX: That would be a no. Ok.  Senator Reid your response.

REID: Mitch, yesterday, day before we had a company from China come here to create a thousand jobs. They've already leased the warehouse they're going to make LED lighting, they're gonna build windmills. That's a result of tax policy that I put in a bill. We have now almost 2 billion dollars worth of work going on in Nevada with renewable energy jobs. That’s a result of tax policy incentives to have them do that. McCarran airport as a re result of tax policy we have a three billion dollar project going on there today.  Harrah’s as a result of language in a bill there. They have, we saved 31,000 jobs at Harrah's alone. All these things I've talked about today. My opponent is against those. She wouldn't do that. My job is to create jobs. What she's talking about is extreme. We have to do this. We've been doing it since Boulder Dam was created 81 years ago, we started the construction.

FOX: Okay, and your response?

ANGLE: Once again, Harry Reid, it's not your job to create jobs. [Reid/Angle Debate, 10/14/10]

Angle: “When I Said That As A United States Senator That Was Not My Job To Create Jobs, It’s True.” During a June 2010 interview on Chalice Jackson’s internet radio show, Angle said, “But really we know that the government doesn’t create jobs and Harry Reid has been saying that he’s creating jobs, but really what has happened is that the unemployment rate in Nevada has gone from four percent to fourteen percent. And so he has not created jobs, in fact he has created more problems with unemployment than he has created any kind of jobs. We know from President Reagan that the government is not the solution. It is the problem. And so when I said that as a United States Senator that was not my job to create jobs, it’s true.”[Chalice Jackson Show, 6/23/10]

ANNCR: There would be no CityCenter

On Screen: No CityCenter /- KXNT, 7/7/10

OUT-OF-TOUCH: ANGLE WOULDN’T HAVE LIFTED A FINGER TO SAVE 22,000 JOBS AT CITYCENTER

Las Vegas Sun: “Reiterating her position that government should stay out of the way of business, even when it asks for help, Angle said this week that she would not have intervened to help rescue CityCenter when the project was on the brink of losing its financing.” [Las Vegas Sun, 7/9/10]

Angle Would Not Have Acted To Save CityCenter, Called It “Shuffling … Deck Chairs On The Titanic.” During a July 2010 interview with Alan Stock, Angle was asked if she, like Reid, would have acted to save CityCenter. Angle said, “No, I would not. You know the reason is because he may have saved jobs in CityCenter, but he actually cost jobs in other parts of the city. And you know that as well as I do. The issue here becomes bailouts, right? And stimulus. We want something that is not going to bail out and stimulate, what we want is deregulate, lower taxes, give businesses some breathing room to do what they do best which is create jobs. And just shuffling these, if you will, the deck chairs on the Titanic is not going to solve the problem.  And so shifting employment from one arena to the next is not going to solve the problem. What we really need is real jobs, permanent, full-time jobs with a future. And that can only be provided by the private sector, government does not provide jobs.” [KXNT, Alan Stock in the Afternoon, 7/7/10]

Immediately After The Interview, Angle Doubled Down. During a July 2010 episode of Face to Face, Jon Ralston reported that, after her interview with Alan Stock, Angle reiterated her opposition to helping save CityCenter. Angle said, “Well, I said that it wouldn’t be something I would have done because it’s not, it’s kind of like shifting the chairs on the deck of the Titanic. If you only shift jobs from one place to another when we know that when they put those jobs at CityCenter it was jobs that were taken away, or business that was taken away, from other areas. And so really it actually injured the economy of other businesses, and that’s not what government should be doing. Government should stand out of the way, through de-regulation and lower taxes that are able to create a climate where business has some confidence, and when they have confidence they do what they do best, which is create jobs. And that’s really what we want here in Nevada is full-time, permanent employment, with a future.” [Face to Face with Jon Ralston, 7/7/10]

Ralston: “This is a dicey position for Angle to take. On the one hand, I and others have raised questions about the propriety of a United States Senator pressing a banker to give a loan to a major corporate interest, and his largest campaign donor. But on the other hand,the same Senate candidate who says it’s not her job to create jobs now says she wouldn’t have tried to save thousands of jobs? That’s tough.” [Face to Face with Jon Ralston, 7/7/10 (emphasis added)]

MGM: “Ms. Angle’s Statement Is Ridiculous On Its Face.” In response to Angle’s comments on CityCenter, MGM Resorts issued the following statement: “Ms. Angle’s statement is ridiculous on its face. Senator Reid’s support of our significant private investment in Las Vegas came during our company’s darkest hour. He saved, not only 10,000 construction jobs and 12,000 permanent private sector jobs at CityCenter, but the jobs of 50,000 employees at our other resorts that would have been jeopardized had our company followed CityCenter into bankruptcy.” [MGM Resorts International, 7/7/10]

Angle Doubled Down Again, Said, "I Would Not Have Voted For The Stimulus For CityCenter." In July 2010, KVVU reported that Angle, when asked about her CityCenter comments during the state Republican convention, said, "What I said on the radio is that I would not have voted for the stimulus for the CityCenter. And the reason is because what happened there was Harry Reid rewarded some friends at the expense of other businesses in town. Stimulus does not work and we've seen that with the unemployment rate going up. We didn't see employment rates going down we saw them going up." [KVVU, 7/9/10]

The Only Problem, There Was No Vote, And CityCenter Received No Stimulus Funding. KVVU anchor John Huck reacted to Angle’s comment on CityCenter, saying, “But I listen to that interview and the caller asked Sharron Angle, would you have called the banks as Harry Reid did to get them to open up some lines of credit to CityCenter so they could continue the construction after their partners pulled out. That's what she was asked and she said no I would not. And tonight she told you, no that is not what I had said I would not vote for the stimulus, but the stimulus had nothing to do with the construction of CityCenter … Well sometimes following this candidate it's like being Alice in Wonderland. Up is down and black is white. So maybe the next time we can try to get some clarification.” [KVVU, 7/9/10]

Days Later, Angle Reiterated Her Opposition To Saving CityCenter, Called It A “Bailout,” Even Though No Federal Funds Were Used For The Project. During a July 2010 interview with Neil Cavuto, Angle was asked about her comments about CityCenter:

Cavuto: Then why at the time, Ms. Angle, were you against what Harry Reid was trying to do to keep, the MGM Mirage operating as it expanded facilities and prevented it from going into bankruptcy? At the time you had said the company should not get any stimulus dollars. Were you not aware the company did not receive any stimulus money but that Harry Reid was phoning lenders on behalf of a big employer in your state?

Angle: Well, truly he was exercising his influence to do a bailout, if you will, of MGM. At the expense of others.

Cavuto: You wouldn't have done that?

Angle: No bailouts don't stimulate the economy. Bailouts, as we’ve seen, don’t do anything for our businessmen.

Cavuto: I understand ma’am, but this wasn't a bailout, right? This was simply just having a loan extended. No federal money was involved.

Angle: Well in a sense it was. No, but it was a bank bailout. He was saying you should lend to this one but it was at the expense of others. And truly we saw what the 14% unemployment that it didn't influence anything as far as the job market. What it did do was the same thing as shifting the chairs on the deck of a Titanic. What you need is an outside force that will actually give confidence in a market to businessmen who have really been holding back. We know they have $2 trillion that they would be willing to invest if they had more confidence.

Cavuto: So I understand that, but then part of it, the job of a senator the way it’s deemed, and we could argue this point, is to protect big employers in your state. Now obviously MGM Mirage is a very big employer, if not the biggest in your fine state. So U.S. Senator, if you were duly elected, you wouldn't do that? You wouldn't be doing everything possible to keep that big employer employing people?

Angle: Well, certainly the job of government is to create a climate where every employer can create jobs. And there were no jobs created really. It was just a shifting of jobs from one business to another. So at the expense of some big business he was willing to play favorites with another big business and that's not really what we're supposed to be about. We’re supposed to be about giving that climate for businesses to provide full time permanent employment.

Cavuto: So you draw the line as to how much you would go to bat for a big employer regardless of how big they are in your state, right?

Angle: Truly there's no such thing in America as too big to fail. Harry Reid thinks he's too big to fail but I think he's failed already in his policies. And this is just one of them, stimulus, bailout, Obamacare, all of those have been failures and we can see that in what we’re now standing on the precipice of what may become double dip recession. [Fox News, Your World with Neil Cavuto, 7/12/10]

Las Vegas Sun: “Angle’s Stunning Statement Shows How Far Out Of Touch She Is With Reality.” In a July 2010 editorial, the Las Vegas Sun wrote, “Angle’s stunning statement shows how far out of touch she is with reality. MGM Resorts issued a statement calling Angle’s comments ‘ridiculous,’ adding that Reid ‘saved not only 10,000 construction jobs and 12,000 permanent private-sector jobs at CityCenter but the jobs of 50,000 employees at our other resorts that would have been jeopardized had our company followed CityCenter into bankruptcy.’ But Angle’s comments are more than ridiculous, they are factually wrong. There was no stimulus or bailout. There were no jobs lost in other parts of the city because of Reid’s action. Government didn’t create any jobs, MGM Resorts — the state’s largest private employer — did, and the jobs are ‘real.’” [Las Vegas Sun, Editorial, 7/9/10]

Sun: “Had She Been In The Senate Instead Of Reid, Tens Of Thousands Of Jobs Would Have Been Lost.” According to the Las Vegas Sun, “But Angle says a senator’s role isn’t to create jobs and apparently doesn’t think a senator should help workers or businesses. Had she been in the Senate instead of Reid, tens of thousands of jobs would have been lost.” [Las Vegas Sun, Editorial, 7/9/10]

Sun: “Angle Just Doesn’t Get It.” According to the Las Vegas Sun, “Angle just doesn’t get it. What Reid did was exactly what anyone should want a senator to do. He went to bat for a local business and for Nevada’s workers. Angle has shown a cold heart toward workers and their families, preferring instead to stick to her narrow anti-government ideology.” [Las Vegas Sun, Editorial, 7/9/10]

ANNCR: Our jobs outsourced to China

On Screen:Outsourcing jobs to China / - Fox Business News, 8/9/10

ANNCR: Sharron Angle's Nevada?

On Screen: No.

REID: I’m Harry Reid, and I approve this message.

On Screen:APPROVED BY HARRY REID. PAID FOR BY FRIENDS FOR HARRY REID.

FACT: ANGLE WOULD HAVE VOTED AGAINST CLOSING TAX LOOPHOLES FOR COMPANIES THAT SHIP JOBS OVERSEAS

Angle Opposed Legislation That Funded 1,400 Nevada Education Jobs

Reid Passed Legislation Providing $83 Million In Funding For 1,400 Education Jobs In Nevada. In August 2010, the Review-Journal reported, “Senate Democrats on Wednesday defeated a Republican filibuster and cleared a path for a $26 billion bill to rescue cash-starved states contemplating layoffs to teachers and other public employees. For Nevada, the legislation promises $83 million to bolster school budgets and $79 million to cushion a shortfall in state spending on health care for the poor.” According to the Department of Education, the bill would fund approximately 1,400 Nevada education jobs. [Review-Journal, 8/4/10; Department of Education, 8/6/10]

Angle On Saving 1,400 Education Jobs: “The Emergency Is Only In Harry Reid’s Mind.” During an August 2010 interview with Andrew Napolitano and Michelle Bachmann on Fox Business News, Angle agreed with Rep. Bachmann when she said funding to save education jobs was “money laundering,” saying, “Well I think the emergency is only in Harry Reid’s mind as Michele put so succinctly. This is an emergency for the Democrats, it is a way to solidify their base if you will with our taxpayer dollars. I say no, Nevada voters are much wiser than that, they know that this emergency is only in Harry Reid’s mind.” [Fox Business News, 8/9/10]

Angle Called Saving Education Jobs A Giveaway To “Special Interests.” During an August 2010 interview with Roger Hedgecock, Angle said, “He has promoted the stimulus plans, and now he’s wanting to promote another one as an emergency act. All it is, is really promoting money to his special interest groups – those unions – and what is going to do to Nevada is this stimulus new bill is going to take money out of Medicaid and food stamps instead of hiring… he wants to hire teachers and our population has gone down so much that we don’t have those jobs for teachers anymore because of what Harry Reid has been doing. I mean we could just go on and on with the poor public policy that he has been promoting. And it’s all for Harry Reid; it has nothing to do with Nevada.” [The Roger Hedgecock Show, 8/9/10]

Education Jobs Bill Was Paid For In Part By Closing Tax Loopholes For Companies That Ship Jobs Overseas

Los Angeles Times: “In a sign of how heavily deficit concerns have come to weigh on this Congress, the bill is fully paid for mainly by ending some tax breaks for companies operatingoverseas, as well as by imposing an earlier end to a food stamp program.” [Los Angeles Times, 8/11/10]

Washington Post: “And it would end tax breaks for some multinational corporations that are based in the United States but have operations and pay taxes abroad. Closing those ‘loopholes,’ as Democrats call them, is the centerpiece of a House Democratic campaign to promote domestic manufacturing and discourage companies from shipping jobs overseas.” [Washington Post, 8/5/10]

Washington Independent: “It raises one tax — closing a loophole that encouraged big companies to hire overseas workers — and otherwise rescinds funds from federal programs, including the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or food stamps … The tax increase is minor, and stops encouraging big companies to ship jobs overseas.” [The Washington Independent, 8/11/10]

JON RALSTON ON REID CAMPAIGN CLAIMS THAT ANGLE SUPPORTED PROTECTING TAX BREAKS FOR COMPANIES THAT SHIP JOBS OVERSEAS: “THAT’S TRUE.” During a September 2010 “Reality Check” Jon Ralston examined a Reid ad that claimed in part, “Sharron Angle’s the one who opposed Wall Street Reform, wants to protect tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas.” Ralston said, “As for Angle opposing Wall Street reform and removing tax breaks, that's true.” [Face to Face, 9/9/10]

Ad

Facts

ANNCR: In Sharron Angle’s Nevada,

On Screen: In Sharron Angle’s Nevada…

ANNCR: There are no background checks to catch sex offenders working with kids

On Screen: No background checks . -AB 239, 4/15/99

FACT: ANGLE VOTED AGAINST SETTING UP A SPECIAL FUND TO HELP NON-PROFITS PERFORM BACKGROUND CHECKS TO MAKE SURE VOLUNTEERS WORKING WITH KIDS AREN’T SEX OFFENDERS

Angle Voted Against Special Fund To Help Non-Profits Conduct Criminal Background Checks On Volunteers Working With Kids. In 1999, Angle was one of only two votes in the Assembly opposing AB 239, which gave nonprofit agencies access to a special fund that helped underwrite the costs of background checks on volunteers to determine whether they had committed sexual offenses. AB 239 passed the Assembly on a 40-2 vote. [AB 239, 4/15/99; Assembly Judiciary Committee minutes, 3/1/99]

Girl Scouts And Boy Scouts Of America Supported The Bill. According to Assembly Judiciary Committee minutes, both the Boy Scouts of America and the Girl Scouts were in favor of AB 239. Vicki N. Wright, Executive Director for the Sierra Nevada Girl Scout Council,testified that “the cost of conducting background checks on their current 4,000 volunteers was financially prohibitive. She opined A.B. 239 would address that concern, would add an extra level of scrutiny to their screening process, and would make children safer.” [Assembly Judiciary Committee minutes, 3/1/99]

During A Hearing On The Bill, Angle “Expressed Concern With The Possible Invasion Of Privacy And Liability Issues Included In The Bill.” During a March discussion of AB 239 in the Assembly Judiciary Committee, Angle “expressed concern with the possible invasion of privacy and liability issues included in the bill. She stated voluntary programs always stepped up to become mandatory and she did not want to see the state get involved with things of a first amendment nature.” [AB 239, 4/15/99; Assembly Judiciary Committee minutes, 3/1/99]

ASKED ABOUT THE BILL IN 2010, ANGLE’S RIDICULOUS DEFENSE WAS THAT SHE “RAISED QUESTIONS … REGARDING THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES IN REGARDS TO PERSONAL PRIVACY AND COSTS.” In August the Review-Journal reported that Nevada law enforcement officials had endorsed Reid and attacked Angle’s extreme and dangerous record. According to the report, “What about Angle’s votes in the Assembly that Reid said demonstrated she doesn’t support law enforcement? ‘Sharron agrees with the spirit of those bills and the need for law enforcement to have the proper tools,’ Agen said. ‘However she had concerns with the execution. At the time, Sharron raised questions in committee regarding the unintended consequences in regards to personal privacy and costs.’” [Review-Journal, Political Eye Blog, 8/30/10]

NEVADA LAW ENFORCEMENT PROFESSIONAL DENOUNCED ANGLE’S EXTREME AND DANGEROUS VOTE

Axel James (Police Officers Research Association of Nevada): “One thing is for sure, Sharron Angle’s record on the issues important to law enforcement are just too extreme and dangerous. For example, she was one of only two votes against a special fund to help non-profits conduct criminal background checks on volunteers that are working with kids. Are you kidding me? I am a parent of five year-old triplets. Why in the world would anyone vote against a bill that ensures sex offenders are not working with our children? This bill was supported by the Girl Scouts and the Boy Scouts of America, but not with Sharron Angle. It’s clear Sharron Angle’s vision of Nevada and in Nevada is too extreme and too dangerous. And, when you compare that record to Senator Harry Reid, the choice couldn’t be clearer. And that’s why PORAN is supporting and endorsing Harry Reid this election.” [Reid Campaign Event,8/30/10]

ASKED ABOUT THE BILL IN OCTOBER 2010, ANGLE OFFERED AN EVEN MOREOUTRAGEOUS DEFENSE: THE BILL WAS “OVERREACHING” BY THE GOVERNMENT. In an October 2010 interview with Lars Larson, Angle defended her vote against the background checks bill, saying, “This vote had to do more with our rights under the First Amendment, once more. They were trying to place more government control within, uh, places like churches and private businesses. We already have a law in place in Nevada where you do have to report if you are a sex offender, and also there are laws that have…that have you do, uh, finger, uh, fingerprinting if you’re working with kids. So, we just didn’t want that overreaching government to go in there and begin to attack groups like the Boy Scouts and churches.” [Angle Interview with Lars Larson, 10/11/10 emphasis added)]

FLASHBACK: THE BOY SCOUTS SUPPORTED THE BILL. According to Assembly Judiciary Committee minutes, both the Boy Scouts of America and the Girl Scouts were in favor of AB 239. Vicki N. Wright, Executive Director for the Sierra Nevada Girl Scout Council, testified that “the cost of conducting background checks on their current 4,000 volunteers was financially prohibitive. She opined A.B. 239 would address that concern, would add an extra level of scrutiny to their screening process, and would make children safer.” [Assembly Judiciary Committee minutes, 3/1/99]

ANNCR: There’s no Social Security for seniors

On Screen: No Social Security/ -KSNV/KRNV, 5/19/10

FACT: ANGLE WANTS TO ELIMINATE SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE, BELIEVES ENTITLEMENT PROGRAMS VIOLATE THE FIRST COMMANDMENT

Angle: “We Need To Phase Medicare And Social Security Out.” During a May 2010 debate on Face to Face, Sharron Angle said, “We need to phase Medicare and Social Security out in favor of something privatized.” She later added, “Going forward we need to phase it out, give people an opportunity to either opt into the old system or go for a new system where they have their own healthcare savings account or they have their own retirement savings account which is portable and goes with them from job to job and for those who are entering the workforce right now they come on to the new system so it’s a phased-in system so it’s something [inaudible] privatize.” [Face to Face Debate, 5/19/10]

Angle Said Social Security Is “Difficult To Justify” And Likened It To Welfare. In a May interview with KNPR, Angle said, “Well, it’s very difficult, Lynn, to justify Social Security. As you know F.D.R. put it in as an insurance policy for those who were needy. My grandfather would not even take his Social Security check because he said he was not up for welfare, he had planned for his retirement, and he wouldn’t take it. But, since then we have gotten into this whole mindset that it’s an entitlement.” [KNPR, State of Nevada, 5/19/10 (emphasis added)]

Angle Believes “Entitlement Programs … Make Government Our God” And That “We Have Become A Country Entrenched In Idolatry.” During an April 2010 interview with TruNews radio, Angle said, “And these programs that you mentioned -- that Obama has going with Reid and Pelosi pushing them forward -- are all entitlement programs built to make government our God. And that’s really what’s happening in this country is a violation of the First Commandment. We have become a country entrenched in idolatry, and that idolatry is the dependency upon our government. We’re supposed to depend upon God for our protection and our provision and for our daily bread, not for our government.” [TruNews, 4/21/10]

Even Sherm Frederick Knew Angle Was Saying Social Security Violates The First Commandment, And Even He Disagreed. In an August 2010 blog post, Review-Journal Publisher Sherm Frederick wrote, “U.S. Senate candidate Sharron Angle does it again. She grants an interview to a Christian radio station and spouts some religious stuff that not only makes her look politically bad, it gives people of faith -- like, say, our Founding Fathers -- a black eye … I'm not saying that she doesn't have a point about things being out of whack when it comes to the balance between personal responsibility and the role of government. And, yes, humans can put anything before God, thus ignoring the First Commandment. But our government was created by men who believed in God. And they crafted the government to provide a common protection. That wasn't idolatry. Expansion of that common protection to include things like Social Security, or even national health care (though I think it is a bad idea) is not necessarily idolatry.” [Review-Journal, Sherm Frederick Blog, 8/5/10]

Angle Called Social Security “A Broken System Without Much To Recommend It.” In August 2010 the Associated Press reported Angle, “previously said she didn't trust big government to manage what she called ‘a broken system without much to recommend it,’ and she repeatedly has said she supports phasing out Social Security over time.” [Associated Press,8/14/10]

Angle In 1993: “STOP FUNDING THE WASTEFUL SOCIAL AND ENTITLEMENT PROGRAMS.” In a 1993 letter to Senator Reid, Angle wrote, “The answer to this mess is clear. STOP FUNDING THE WASTEFUL SOCIAL AND ENTITLEMENT PROGRAMS. MAKE THE DIFFICULT CHOICES THAT WILL KEEP OUR COUNTRY STRONG. THAT'S WHAT YOU WERE ELECTED TO DO!” [Review-Journal, John L. Smith Column,8/18/10 (emphasis in original)]

Review-Journal’s John L. Smith On Angle’s Letter: “That's The Angle I Know. Her Recent Soft-Lens Campaign Style Notwithstanding, I Suspect Sharron Angle Is The Same As She Ever Was.” In an August 2010 column, John L. Smith wrote, “Angle let Reid have it with both barrels. She also bluntly revealed her belief that the only way to save America was to end ‘social and entitlement programs.’ As a Senate candidate this year, Angle and her campaign mechanics have worked hard to soften her rhetoric about ‘eliminating’ Social Security in favor of ‘privatizing’ and ‘personalizing’ individual accounts. She's also suffered self-inflicted wounds on federal unemployment insurance extensions and other ‘entitlement’ programs … Ending Social Security and other entitlement programs? … That's the Angle I know. Her recent soft-lens campaign style notwithstanding, I suspect Sharron Angle is the same as she ever was.” [Review-Journal, John L. Smith Column, 8/18/10 (emphasis added)]

Angle: “The Idea Of Privatizing And Getting Out Of Medicare And Social Security Is Not Up For Grabs.” In June 2010, Talking Points Memo reported, “In an interview from three weeks before the Nevada Republican primary, Sharron Angle made it clear that getting rid of Medicare and Social Security is a non-negotiable issue for her … Going on in the interview, Angle talks about how as a Senator she would work with other legislators to formulate a proper solution for her idea, haggling over the details and implementation of privatization without giving up on the main idea itself: ‘The idea of privatizing and getting out of Medicare and Social Security is not up for grabs.’” [Talking Points Memo, 6/14/10]

Angle: “I’m Not Sure Just Where In The Constitution The Federal Government Is Even Supposed To Be Involved In Our Medicare.” During a September 2009 campaign event, Sharron Angle said, “We need to send people back there who are willing to look at what’s wrong because we know that Medicare Part D might have been a good idea when it started out, but once it goes through the legislative process it becomes compromised and pretty soon it doesn’t work. And I’m not sure just where in the Constitution the federal government is even supposed to be involved in our Medicare. You know, these are things that could be done on the state level much better.” [Angle Campaign Event, 9/1/09 (emphasis added)]

Angle On Medicare: “We Need To Phase It Out.” In October 2009, the Review-Journal reported, “As for Medicare, she (Angle) said the entitlement program popular with seniors will eventually grow too costly to maintain… ‘We need to phase it out,’ she said.” [Las Vegas Review-Journal, 10/21/09]

ANNCR: Insurance companies don't cover cancer tests

On Screen: No cancer tests / - SB 183, 5/16/03

FACT: ANGLE WAS ONE OF JUST TWO VOTES IN THE ASSEMBLY TO VOTE AGAINST REQUIRING INSURANCE COMPANIES TO COVER COLON CANCER SCREENINGS

Angle Voted Against Requiring Coverage Of Colorectal Cancer Screenings. Angle in 2003 was one of only two votes in the Assembly against SB 183, which required health insurance companies to cover screenings for colorectal cancer, if they provide treatment for colorectal cancer. [SB 183, 5/16/03]

Even The American Cancer Society’s Lobbyist Testified Her Insurance Did Not Cover Colonoscopies. While urging members of the Assembly Commerce and Labor Committee to pass SB 183, American Cancer Society Lobbyist Buffy Gail Martin disclosed, “Just as a side note, I am an employee of the American Cancer Society.  However, my medical insurance company operating in the state of Nevada does not cover colonoscopies.” [Assembly Commerce and Labor Committee Minutes, 4/25/03 (emphasis added)]

FACT: ANGLE BRAGS ABOUT INTRODUCING LEGISLATION TO REPEAL ALL STATE COVERAGE MANDATES

Angle Touted Bill To Remove Coverage Mandates. During an April 2010 debate, Angle said, “If you go to my website you will see my record. As your state legislator I introduced three bills. One would have taken off all of the mandates on insurance, and that’s one of the solutions that we have to have a Senator that will go and introduce something like that that says we don’t have mandated coverages on insurance.” [Anger is Brewing Senate Debate, 4/23/10]

Angle Touted Legislation That Would Have “Created A Basic Health Insurance Policy” Without Coverage Mandates On Her Primary Campaign Website. According to Angle’s pre-primary website, “Assemblywoman, Sharron Angle introduced affordable insurance legislation that removed costly mandates and created a basic health insurance policy, with the ability to add those benefits that were specific to each person.” [Angle Campaign Website, 6/8/10, via TheRealSharrnAngle.com]

FACT: ANGLE EXPLICITLY ADDRESSED THE CHARGE THAT SHE OPPOSES INSURANCE COVERAGE MANDATES FOR MAMMOGRAMS AND COLON CANCER SCREENINGS BY BRAGGING ABOUT HER BILL TO REPEAL COVERAGE MANDATES

Asked About Attacks On Her Record And Rhetoric Regarding Health Care Coverage Mandates Angle Bragged About Trying To Repeal Coverage Mandates And Attacked Reid For Supporting Coverage Mandates.” During a July 2010 interview with the Review-Journal, Angle addressed attacks on her record and rhetoric on the campaign trail:

BOARD MEMBER: Let’s ask you some questions then. The latest mailer that Harry Reid has sent out is one that says you voted against requiring insurance companies to pay for mammograms and colonoscopies. So tell us your rationale for that.

ANGLE: Remember one of the things that we said would always be a good health care cost reform is to eliminate mandated coverages and allow people to participate in a just a basic plan and add the coverages they needed and take on those costs so that they knew what they were actually taking on. Those things that Harry Reid is complaining about are mandated coverages. And we have so many now in this state of Nevada that many insurers won’t even come in this state because they can’t.

BOARD MEMBER: How many are there?

ANGLE: How many insurers are there?

BOARD MEMBER: Mandates.

ANGLE: Mandates, I’m not even sure. When I left there were 21. And I don’t know how much beyond that. I’ve heard bigger numbers, but that was one of the things that I even had a bill to remove those mandates here in the state because every time they put a mandate on, somebody can’t afford it, somebody drops off those affordable insurance rolls and now they are uninsured. So if Harry Reid is really genuine and wants people to be insured, he needs to give them the opportunity to afford insurance and one of those things is to take off those mandated coverages, not put on more.  [Angle Interview with the Review-Journal Editorial Board, 7/25/10 (emphasis added)]

FACT: ANGLE WANTS TO REMOVE ALL COVERAGE MANDATES – BOTH IN NEVADA AND ACROSS THE COUNTRY

Jon Ralston: “Angle: Insurance Mandates Are Product Of Government Bowing To ‘Politically Correct Special Interest.’” In September 2010, Jon Ralston reported, “Such as Big Autism or Big Colonoscopies or Big Pregnant Women, perhaps? That last one may be politically incorrect, but it is political correctness Angle cited last month in a speech to the Association of Health Underwriters on August 10 in explaining her opposition to mandates on insurance companies … Here's a transcription of what Angle said … ‘We know that if we could have that affordability across state lines, you’re not, you’re not afraid of competition I know you’re not, you would in fact invite it. I have friends in other states that say you know I’d like to come to Nevada, but you have problems there in Nevada. And one of the problems is unfunded, well they are unfunded, but these mandates on insurance companies to provide coverage for things that people don’t even really need! And what we need to do is get rid of those mandates, let you provide a comprehensive coverage that takes care of what people need and allows them to buy them the things that they have to have, not things that are mandated by the government. A similar policy, as the things that people write for car insurance, and life insurance, you know you write something that fits the need of a person rather than fitting what the government has done for some politically correct special interest and that’s how we got those mandates.’” [Ralston’s Flash, 9/27/10 (audio at link)]

Angle: The Answer To Health Care “Is Take Off The Mandates For Coverage In The State Of Nevada And All Over The United States.” During an August 2009 campaign appearance, Angle discussed her ideas on health care. She said, “The first one is let us go outside state lines and get a competitive insurance company. The second one is take off the mandates for coverage in the state of Nevada and all over the United States. But here you know what I’m talking about. You’re paying for things that you don’t even need. They just passed the latest one, is everything they want to throw at us now is covered under ‘autism.’ So that’s a mandate that you have to pay for. How about maternity leave? I’m not going to have any more babies, but I sure get to pay for it on my insurance. Those are the kinds of things we want to get rid of.” [Angle Campaign Event, 8/29/09]

Angle: “If You Don’t Have 23 Mandates That Are In The State Of Nevada That Say You Have To Have This And This Coverage, You Can Then Cut Your Costs On The Coverage.” During a September 2009 appearance on Face to Face, Angle explained her answer on health care:

RALSTON: What’s the answer then; tell me what the answer is?

ANGLE: I’m saying that our free market system is the answer. We have a lot of things that we can do. One of them is just letting people go across state lines to make choices on their interests—

RALSTON: Insurances across state lines…

ANGLE: yeah, that’s right…Another one is to cut down on all of the government mandates that are on healthcare. If you don’t have 23 mandates that are in the state of Nevada that say you have to have this and this coverage, you can then cut your costs on the coverage.

RALSTON: Well let’s jus take that just for instance, because that’s a Conservative principle that I’ve heard you and other Conservatives say, let’s not have so many mandates. But some of those things people would argue the counter. If we don’t force insurance companies to cover certain things whether it’s treatments for cervical cancer or something like that, then you’re hurting healthcare by not doing that on the other end. Don’t just think that it’s government’s responsibility to make sure that insurance companies cover certain things.

ANGLE: No, I don’t think so. I think that supply and demand…the whole point of our country and the freedom of that system. If we want those coverages, we’ll go out and buy those coverages and they then will supply those coverages. Those kinds of things, you know we are going to shop around for the insurance company that is going to supply the thing that we need. Those are the kind of coverages that I want. You know, it works the same way for car insurance, when we go out we get a basic policy, and then if we want collision or if we want comprehensive then we go out and we buy that too, and we find the lowest price car insurance to provide the kind of things that we need. And that’s what will happen on the free market scale. [Face to Face, 9/23/09]

Angle Doubled Down On Her Opposition To Requiring Insurance Companies To Cover Anything They Don’t Want To Cover. During the October 14 Senate debate, Angle was asked about her stance on requiring insurance companies to cover “anything at all”:

FOX: Okay.  Uh, we'll go to the next question.  It's still on healthcare reform and actually Senator Reid kind of paraphrased my question, but I'll rephrase it.  Uh, you've said, on various occasions, and in fact voted in the state assembly, to do away with mandated coverage of mammograms. You've come out in favor of eliminating coverage for autism and maternity leave. Is there anything that you think the insurance companies should be forced to cover?

ANGLE: America is a country of choices. Not forcing people to buy things they don't need. What we want is a basic policy where we can add the coverages that we need. I taught autistic children. I know that this is a real biomedical disorder. And it needs to have its own insurance code so that families can get the right treatment and also be covered. But the insurance mandate that we passed in this state only cares for 25% of the one out of every 110 children that have autism. We need to stop making Band-Aid uh applications and look at real solutions when we talk about healthcare, and really, forcing someone to buy something that they don't need is not the way to solve a problem.

FOX: Okay, let me rephrase that question again. Is there anything at all that you think the insurance companies should be mandated to cover? Anything?

ANGLE: Anything at all?

FOX: Yes.

ANGLE: I, I think that what we, what we have here is a choice between the free market and Americanism. America is about choices, and we need to allow people to have those choices. The free market will weed out those companies that uh don't offer as many choices, and don't have a cost effective system. Let the people decide where they want to buy their insurance. You don't have to force them to buy anything, and you don't have to force anyone to offer a product that no one wants.

FOX: Okay, so no insurance mandates? [Nevada Senate Debate, 10/14/10]

ANNCR: Prisoners get massages in a radical Scientology program

On Screen: Prisoner massages / - FactCheck.org, 6/2/10]

IT’S TRUE. SHARRON ANGLE PROPOSED LEGISLATION THAT WOULD PROVIDE MASSAGE AND SAUNA TREATMENTS TO NEVADA PRISONERS AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE.

Angle Promoted Scientology-Based Massage and Sauna Therapy To Nevada Prisons, Funded By Tax Dollars. According to National Review, Sharron Angle wanted to bring a Scientology-based drug treatment program to Nevada that “was described in media accounts as ‘sauna and massage’ treatments…It was developed in part based on concepts from Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard and was estimated to cost roughly $15,000 per inmate. Angle tried to organize a trip to Ensenada prison in Mexico to see the program in action; the cost of the trip was to have been covered by a Scientologist. The trip was ultimately canceled.” [National Review,5/26/2010]

FactCheck.org: “It’s True: Massages, Saunas For Inmates.” In June 2010, the nonpartisan PactCheck.org wrote, “With the June 8 Nevada primary nearing, there was one TV ad in the Republican Senate race that caught our attention. It’s so outlandish that we thought it couldn’t possibly be true. Did former Nevada Assemblywoman Sharron Angle – a Republican backed by the Tea Party Express and the fiscally conservative Club for Growth — sponsor legislation to create a drug rehab program for state prisoners that included saunas and massage therapy? And was that program developed by the Church of Scientology? That’s what Republican Sue Lowden claims in her ad, “Prison Spa,” that first aired May 29. We were skeptical, but found it to be largely true.” [FactCheck.org, 6/2/2010]

Angle Wanted Federal Funding For Her Scientology-Based Inmate Rehabilitation Program. According to a 2003 article in the Las Vegas Review-Journal, “Angle said her bill, which she hopes to introduce in the Assembly later this week, authorizes a demonstration project in Nevada. She said federal funding would be needed, and she’s looking for grants from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, as well as from President Bush’s faith and community-based programs initiative.” [Las Vegas Review-Journal, 2/11/03]

EVEN ANGLE’S EXPLANATIONS FAIL THE LAUGH TEST AND THE TRUTH TEST

Angle’s Wacky Defense Of Giving Massages To Prisoners: “It Was Really More Of A Karate Chop.” In a May candidate debate on Face to Face with Jon Ralston, Angle defended her Scientology-based inmate rehabilitation program, saying, “Well it wasn’t actually…massages… it was really more of a karate chop and the sauna I would say was a sweat box, in there with 30 sweaty guys is not exactly a sauna.” [Face to Face with Jon Ralston, 5/18/10]

Angle Claim: Scientology Program Was “Being Used Successfully” In New Mexico.Sharron Angle told political pundit Jon Ralston, “in New Mexico they are now using that program and it’s being used successfully. We had an opportunity to use it here in Nevada and it would have saved us money in prison fees for incarceration.” [Face to Face with Jon Ralston, 5/18/10]

Fact: Second Chance Program In Albuquerque Shuttered For Housing Violent Criminals. According to a 2008 report by KRQE in Albuquerque, “A controversial drug-rehab center organized on elements of Scientology is being evicted for housing inmates convicted of violent crimes, Albuquerque’s mayor said Friday. The eviction notice gives Second Chance until the end of the next month to wind down the operation housed in a former city jail on Albuquerque’s northwest mesa. So far there has been no response from Second Chance.” [KRQE, 12/26/08]

Fact: New Mexico Lawmakers Had “Reservations,” Judges Were “Skeptical About Second Chance’s Methods.” According to a 2009 article in the Albuquerque Journal, “Lawmakers from around the city and state have had reservations about the connection between Second Chances and Scientology, which they expressed with a lack of funding. And judges, particularly in Bernalillo County, have been skeptical about Second Chance’s methods and where the center has gotten its funding.” [Albuquerque Journal, 1/25/09]

ANNCR: For Sharron Angle, It's not her job to fight for jobs

On Screen: Not her job / Angle Campaign Event, 5/14/10

FACT: ANGLE DOESN’T THINK IT’S THE JOB OF A UNITED STATES SENATOR TO CREATE JOBS

Angle On Jobs: “Ok, As Your U.S. Senator I Am Not In The Business Of Creating Jobs.”[Elko County Forum, 05/11/10]

Angle On Creating Jobs: It’s Someone Else’s Job. During a May 2010 campaign event, Angle said, “People ask me, what are you going to do to develop jobs in your state? Well that’s not my job as a US Senator, to bring industry to the state. That’s the Lieutenant Governor’s job. That’s your State Senator’s and Assemblyman’s job. That’s your Secretary of State’s job, to make a climate here in this state, ya’ll come.” [Angle Campaign Event, 5/14/10]

During The Debate Angle Doubled Down On Jobs Again! During the October 2010 debate between Reid and Angle, Moderator Mitch Fox asked Angle and Reid about the role of a Senator in creating jobs.

FOX: Ok let me ask a follow up, do you believe that getting jobs for Nevadans is not your job?

ANGLE: I believe that my job is to create the policies that will en encourage the private sector to do what they do best and that is to create jobs.

FOX: That would be a no. Ok.  Senator Reid your response.

REID: Mitch, yesterday, day before we had a company from China come here to create a thousand jobs. They've already leased the warehouse they're going to make LED lighting, they're gonna build windmills. That's a result of tax policy that I put in a bill. We have now almost 2 billion dollars worth of work going on in Nevada with renewable energy jobs. That’s a result of tax policy incentives to have them do that. McCarran airport as a re result of tax policy we have a three billion dollar project going on there today.  Harrah’s as a result of language in a bill there. They have, we saved 31,000 jobs at Harrah's alone. All these things I've talked about today. My opponent is against those. She wouldn't do that. My job is to create jobs. What she's talking about is extreme. We have to do this. We've been doing it since Boulder Dam was created 81 years ago, we started the construction.

FOX: Okay, and your response?

ANGLE: Once again, Harry Reid, it's not your job to create jobs. [Reid/Angle Debate, 10/14/10]

Angle: “When I Said That As A United States Senator That Was Not My Job To Create Jobs, It’s True.” During a June 2010 interview on Chalice Jackson’s internet radio show, Angle said, “But really we know that the government doesn’t create jobs and Harry Reid has been saying that he’s creating jobs, but really what has happened is that the unemployment rate in Nevada has gone from four percent to fourteen percent. And so he has not created jobs, in fact he has created more problems with unemployment than he has created any kind of jobs. We know from President Reagan that the government is not the solution. It is the problem. And so when I said that as a United States Senator that was not my job to create jobs, it’s true.”[Chalice Jackson Show, 6/23/10]

ANNCR: There would be no CityCenter

On Screen: No CityCenter /- KXNT, 7/7/10

OUT-OF-TOUCH: ANGLE WOULDN’T HAVE LIFTED A FINGER TO SAVE 22,000 JOBS AT CITYCENTER

Las Vegas Sun: “Reiterating her position that government should stay out of the way of business, even when it asks for help, Angle said this week that she would not have intervened to help rescue CityCenter when the project was on the brink of losing its financing.” [Las Vegas Sun, 7/9/10]

Angle Would Not Have Acted To Save CityCenter, Called It “Shuffling … Deck Chairs On The Titanic.” During a July 2010 interview with Alan Stock, Angle was asked if she, like Reid, would have acted to save CityCenter. Angle said, “No, I would not. You know the reason is because he may have saved jobs in CityCenter, but he actually cost jobs in other parts of the city. And you know that as well as I do. The issue here becomes bailouts, right? And stimulus. We want something that is not going to bail out and stimulate, what we want is deregulate, lower taxes, give businesses some breathing room to do what they do best which is create jobs. And just shuffling these, if you will, the deck chairs on the Titanic is not going to solve the problem.  And so shifting employment from one arena to the next is not going to solve the problem. What we really need is real jobs, permanent, full-time jobs with a future. And that can only be provided by the private sector, government does not provide jobs.” [KXNT, Alan Stock in the Afternoon, 7/7/10]

Immediately After The Interview, Angle Doubled Down. During a July 2010 episode of Face to Face, Jon Ralston reported that, after her interview with Alan Stock, Angle reiterated her opposition to helping save CityCenter. Angle said, “Well, I said that it wouldn’t be something I would have done because it’s not, it’s kind of like shifting the chairs on the deck of the Titanic. If you only shift jobs from one place to another when we know that when they put those jobs at CityCenter it was jobs that were taken away, or business that was taken away, from other areas. And so really it actually injured the economy of other businesses, and that’s not what government should be doing. Government should stand out of the way, through de-regulation and lower taxes that are able to create a climate where business has some confidence, and when they have confidence they do what they do best, which is create jobs. And that’s really what we want here in Nevada is full-time, permanent employment, with a future.” [Face to Face with Jon Ralston, 7/7/10]

Ralston: “This is a dicey position for Angle to take. On the one hand, I and others have raised questions about the propriety of a United States Senator pressing a banker to give a loan to a major corporate interest, and his largest campaign donor. But on the other hand,the same Senate candidate who says it’s not her job to create jobs now says she wouldn’t have tried to save thousands of jobs? That’s tough.” [Face to Face with Jon Ralston, 7/7/10 (emphasis added)]

MGM: “Ms. Angle’s Statement Is Ridiculous On Its Face.” In response to Angle’s comments on CityCenter, MGM Resorts issued the following statement: “Ms. Angle’s statement is ridiculous on its face. Senator Reid’s support of our significant private investment in Las Vegas came during our company’s darkest hour. He saved, not only 10,000 construction jobs and 12,000 permanent private sector jobs at CityCenter, but the jobs of 50,000 employees at our other resorts that would have been jeopardized had our company followed CityCenter into bankruptcy.” [MGM Resorts International, 7/7/10]

Angle Doubled Down Again, Said, "I Would Not Have Voted For The Stimulus For CityCenter." In July 2010, KVVU reported that Angle, when asked about her CityCenter comments during the state Republican convention, said, "What I said on the radio is that I would not have voted for the stimulus for the CityCenter. And the reason is because what happened there was Harry Reid rewarded some friends at the expense of other businesses in town. Stimulus does not work and we've seen that with the unemployment rate going up. We didn't see employment rates going down we saw them going up." [KVVU, 7/9/10]

The Only Problem, There Was No Vote, And CityCenter Received No Stimulus Funding. KVVU anchor John Huck reacted to Angle’s comment on CityCenter, saying, “But I listen to that interview and the caller asked Sharron Angle, would you have called the banks as Harry Reid did to get them to open up some lines of credit to CityCenter so they could continue the construction after their partners pulled out. That's what she was asked and she said no I would not. And tonight she told you, no that is not what I had said I would not vote for the stimulus, but the stimulus had nothing to do with the construction of CityCenter … Well sometimes following this candidate it's like being Alice in Wonderland. Up is down and black is white. So maybe the next time we can try to get some clarification.” [KVVU, 7/9/10]

Days Later, Angle Reiterated Her Opposition To Saving CityCenter, Called It A “Bailout,” Even Though No Federal Funds Were Used For The Project. During a July 2010 interview with Neil Cavuto, Angle was asked about her comments about CityCenter:

Cavuto: Then why at the time, Ms. Angle, were you against what Harry Reid was trying to do to keep, the MGM Mirage operating as it expanded facilities and prevented it from going into bankruptcy? At the time you had said the company should not get any stimulus dollars. Were you not aware the company did not receive any stimulus money but that Harry Reid was phoning lenders on behalf of a big employer in your state?

Angle: Well, truly he was exercising his influence to do a bailout, if you will, of MGM. At the expense of others.

Cavuto: You wouldn't have done that?

Angle: No bailouts don't stimulate the economy. Bailouts, as we’ve seen, don’t do anything for our businessmen.

Cavuto: I understand ma’am, but this wasn't a bailout, right? This was simply just having a loan extended. No federal money was involved.

Angle: Well in a sense it was. No, but it was a bank bailout. He was saying you should lend to this one but it was at the expense of others. And truly we saw what the 14% unemployment that it didn't influence anything as far as the job market. What it did do was the same thing as shifting the chairs on the deck of a Titanic. What you need is an outside force that will actually give confidence in a market to businessmen who have really been holding back. We know they have $2 trillion that they would be willing to invest if they had more confidence.

Cavuto: So I understand that, but then part of it, the job of a senator the way it’s deemed, and we could argue this point, is to protect big employers in your state. Now obviously MGM Mirage is a very big employer, if not the biggest in your fine state. So U.S. Senator, if you were duly elected, you wouldn't do that? You wouldn't be doing everything possible to keep that big employer employing people?

Angle: Well, certainly the job of government is to create a climate where every employer can create jobs. And there were no jobs created really. It was just a shifting of jobs from one business to another. So at the expense of some big business he was willing to play favorites with another big business and that's not really what we're supposed to be about. We’re supposed to be about giving that climate for businesses to provide full time permanent employment.

Cavuto: So you draw the line as to how much you would go to bat for a big employer regardless of how big they are in your state, right?

Angle: Truly there's no such thing in America as too big to fail. Harry Reid thinks he's too big to fail but I think he's failed already in his policies. And this is just one of them, stimulus, bailout, Obamacare, all of those have been failures and we can see that in what we’re now standing on the precipice of what may become double dip recession. [Fox News, Your World with Neil Cavuto, 7/12/10]

Las Vegas Sun: “Angle’s Stunning Statement Shows How Far Out Of Touch She Is With Reality.” In a July 2010 editorial, the Las Vegas Sun wrote, “Angle’s stunning statement shows how far out of touch she is with reality. MGM Resorts issued a statement calling Angle’s comments ‘ridiculous,’ adding that Reid ‘saved not only 10,000 construction jobs and 12,000 permanent private-sector jobs at CityCenter but the jobs of 50,000 employees at our other resorts that would have been jeopardized had our company followed CityCenter into bankruptcy.’ But Angle’s comments are more than ridiculous, they are factually wrong. There was no stimulus or bailout. There were no jobs lost in other parts of the city because of Reid’s action. Government didn’t create any jobs, MGM Resorts — the state’s largest private employer — did, and the jobs are ‘real.’” [Las Vegas Sun, Editorial, 7/9/10]

Sun: “Had She Been In The Senate Instead Of Reid, Tens Of Thousands Of Jobs Would Have Been Lost.” According to the Las Vegas Sun, “But Angle says a senator’s role isn’t to create jobs and apparently doesn’t think a senator should help workers or businesses. Had she been in the Senate instead of Reid, tens of thousands of jobs would have been lost.” [Las Vegas Sun, Editorial, 7/9/10]

Sun: “Angle Just Doesn’t Get It.” According to the Las Vegas Sun, “Angle just doesn’t get it. What Reid did was exactly what anyone should want a senator to do. He went to bat for a local business and for Nevada’s workers. Angle has shown a cold heart toward workers and their families, preferring instead to stick to her narrow anti-government ideology.” [Las Vegas Sun, Editorial, 7/9/10]

ANNCR: Our jobs outsourced to China

On Screen:Outsourcing jobs to China / - Fox Business News, 8/9/10

ANNCR: Sharron Angle's Nevada?

On Screen: No.

REID: I’m Harry Reid, and I approve this message.

On Screen:APPROVED BY HARRY REID. PAID FOR BY FRIENDS FOR HARRY REID.

FACT: ANGLE WOULD HAVE VOTED AGAINST CLOSING TAX LOOPHOLES FOR COMPANIES THAT SHIP JOBS OVERSEAS

Angle Opposed Legislation That Funded 1,400 Nevada Education Jobs

Reid Passed Legislation Providing $83 Million In Funding For 1,400 Education Jobs In Nevada. In August 2010, the Review-Journal reported, “Senate Democrats on Wednesday defeated a Republican filibuster and cleared a path for a $26 billion bill to rescue cash-starved states contemplating layoffs to teachers and other public employees. For Nevada, the legislation promises $83 million to bolster school budgets and $79 million to cushion a shortfall in state spending on health care for the poor.” According to the Department of Education, the bill would fund approximately 1,400 Nevada education jobs. [Review-Journal, 8/4/10; Department of Education, 8/6/10]

Angle On Saving 1,400 Education Jobs: “The Emergency Is Only In Harry Reid’s Mind.” During an August 2010 interview with Andrew Napolitano and Michelle Bachmann on Fox Business News, Angle agreed with Rep. Bachmann when she said funding to save education jobs was “money laundering,” saying, “Well I think the emergency is only in Harry Reid’s mind as Michele put so succinctly. This is an emergency for the Democrats, it is a way to solidify their base if you will with our taxpayer dollars. I say no, Nevada voters are much wiser than that, they know that this emergency is only in Harry Reid’s mind.” [Fox Business News, 8/9/10]

Angle Called Saving Education Jobs A Giveaway To “Special Interests.” During an August 2010 interview with Roger Hedgecock, Angle said, “He has promoted the stimulus plans, and now he’s wanting to promote another one as an emergency act. All it is, is really promoting money to his special interest groups – those unions – and what is going to do to Nevada is this stimulus new bill is going to take money out of Medicaid and food stamps instead of hiring… he wants to hire teachers and our population has gone down so much that we don’t have those jobs for teachers anymore because of what Harry Reid has been doing. I mean we could just go on and on with the poor public policy that he has been promoting. And it’s all for Harry Reid; it has nothing to do with Nevada.” [The Roger Hedgecock Show, 8/9/10]

Education Jobs Bill Was Paid For In Part By Closing Tax Loopholes For Companies That Ship Jobs Overseas

Los Angeles Times: “In a sign of how heavily deficit concerns have come to weigh on this Congress, the bill is fully paid for mainly by ending some tax breaks for companies operatingoverseas, as well as by imposing an earlier end to a food stamp program.” [Los Angeles Times, 8/11/10]

Washington Post: “And it would end tax breaks for some multinational corporations that are based in the United States but have operations and pay taxes abroad. Closing those ‘loopholes,’ as Democrats call them, is the centerpiece of a House Democratic campaign to promote domestic manufacturing and discourage companies from shipping jobs overseas.” [Washington Post, 8/5/10]

Washington Independent: “It raises one tax — closing a loophole that encouraged big companies to hire overseas workers — and otherwise rescinds funds from federal programs, including the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or food stamps … The tax increase is minor, and stops encouraging big companies to ship jobs overseas.” [The Washington Independent, 8/11/10]

JON RALSTON ON REID CAMPAIGN CLAIMS THAT ANGLE SUPPORTED PROTECTING TAX BREAKS FOR COMPANIES THAT SHIP JOBS OVERSEAS: “THAT’S TRUE.” During a September 2010 “Reality Check” Jon Ralston examined a Reid ad that claimed in part, “Sharron Angle’s the one who opposed Wall Street Reform, wants to protect tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas.” Ralston said, “As for Angle opposing Wall Street reform and removing tax breaks, that's true.” [Face to Face, 9/9/10]