Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

wyldwolf

(43,869 posts)
Sun Feb 15, 2015, 10:01 AM Feb 2015

Warren pushing the interests of major defense contractors

Elizabeth Warren’s standing as a liberal warrior immune to the influence of Big Business hasn’t stopped her from pushing the interests of major defense contractors back home.

Warren has fought to stop the Army from shifting funds away from a Massachusetts-built communications network to pay for unanticipated costs associated with the war in Afghanistan. She’s lobbied for problem-plagued General Dynamics-made tactical radios. And she’s pledged to protect Westover Air Reserve Base from the budget ax — all while saying she supports “targeted” cuts elsewhere.

Warren didn’t respond to questions as she walked to a vote in the Capitol, and an aide referred POLITICO to the senator’s spokeswoman, Lacey Rose, who also didn’t respond to repeated requests for comment. But the half-dozen industry insiders who were interviewed painted a picture of a senator who’s willing to advocate for local defense firms but has no relationship with the industry on a national level.

“I have seen the senator and her team take a very active role in defense matters in Massachusetts,” said Joseph Donovan, a Boston-based defense lobbyist with Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough and a former aide to then-Gov. Mitt Romney. “I’ve been in roundtables that her office has organized with major defense contractors and small businesses.”
One local defense executive noted it’s no secret the industry in 2012 backed Warren’s Republican opponent, Army National Guard veteran Scott Brown, explaining that Brown’s seat on the Senate Armed Services Committee gave him a big platform to advocate for home-state contractors
.
But the executive said Warren’s made an effort to reach out to defense companies, including visits to Raytheon and General Dynamics facilities in her state, and that “there’s certainly not an impression that she’s adversarial” to big-name contracting firms.


Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/elizabeth-warren-defense-massachusetts-115157.html#ixzz3Rp2NnGhu

9 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

Autumn

(45,120 posts)
1. Good for her. You should see what our Democrats do for Fort Carson and the air force bases.
Sun Feb 15, 2015, 10:08 AM
Feb 2015

Defense industries do provide jobs and a nation should have a strong defense, Just not endless wars of choice.

 

djean111

(14,255 posts)
2. Oh, she is looking out for the interests of companies in her state. Gotcha!
Sun Feb 15, 2015, 10:13 AM
Feb 2015

As long as Congress and the President are determined to spend all the money, and increase the amount, why wouldn't Warren try and get some of that money for her constituents? When Hillary does this, it is called "what you have to do to get campaign donations".

Here's the thing - Warren could barbecue puppies on the floor of Congress, and that would not make Hillary any more palatable than she is now, to those who do not want her as the presidential candidate.
I think "Anyone but Hillary" would be a clue.
But it is nice that you expend an effort digging around, finding things liberals would not like about Warren.

Personally, I have taken some advice I have been repeatedly given, to heart - I do not let the perfect be the enemy of the good. In my case, Warren (or another liberal candidate) is still good, Hillary - not good. Nothing Warren does can make me accept the TPP and fracking.

DemocratSinceBirth

(99,711 posts)
3. I support Hillary ... I respect you wyldwolf...
Sun Feb 15, 2015, 10:15 AM
Feb 2015

And while I believe it's important to explore the issues including this one, if we all do is attack Elizabeth Warren , we become no better than the Hillary Haters on this board whose raison d'etre is to constantly attack her.

Any way, the notion that any Democratic candidate that is elected president would govern fundamentally differently than this or that Democratic candidate strikes me as hopelessly naive and politically childish.

wyldwolf

(43,869 posts)
4. I have made it clear a number of times my respect for Warren. This isn't an attack on her.
Sun Feb 15, 2015, 10:19 AM
Feb 2015

It's a commentary on how the anti-Clinton brigade here seize on every little tidit about Clinton while virtually ignoring any news that would cast ___________(fill in name of latest progressive savior) in a negative light.

If I were Warren, I'd be doing exactly what she's doing. If Clinton were still Senator of NY and doing this, she'd be viciously attacked for it.

Gman

(24,780 posts)
7. In that respect
Sun Feb 15, 2015, 11:38 AM
Feb 2015

The HRC haters act no differently than teabaggers. And that seems to really be a characteristic of fanatics in general.

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
8. Good, hope all the righties that call her anti-business will shut up now.
Sun Feb 15, 2015, 11:43 AM
Feb 2015

She's pro-business & pro-people. It is possible to balance both & that's who we need to lead. And Raytheon didn't even need to give her gobs of money for her not to be "adversarial"...

I love her, I hope she changes her mind about 2016.

Thanks for posting WW!!

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Warren pushing the intere...