Senator Scott Brown’s largest financial supporters are a who’s who of finance and business, while his political challenger, Elizabeth Warren, has drawn support primarily from universities, law firms, and left-leaning political groups, according to an analysis of federal filings.
The contrast is sharp in the most expensive Senate race in the country, reflecting donors’ view of Brown as an advocate for investment firms, analysts say, and Warren as a former cop on the Wall Street beat.
Comments
Exactly. That's why she'll have my vote.
We don't need any more politicians beholden to Wall Street. I didn't need this article to convince me though. The anti-Warren TV ads placed by the US Chamber of Commerce are enough of a red flag
Scott Brown supporters have all been duped by his phoney bipartisen position. Given the opportunity, he will vote with his Wall St.and corporate benefacors. He will not be advocating for women's rights, consumer advocacy, health care, or any other agenda of support services for the working class of America. Elizabeth Warren has been fearless and effective fighting Scott Brown's biggest donors. She has my vote.
If you are a working person making sure your pension plan is not savaged. If you are a woman and believe you should have the same rights as men in the workplace or in the bedroom. If you are unemployed due to no fault of your own and need some help to relieve economic suffering while you look for a new job. If you think your health should not be a factor of economics but critical to survival. If you think diplomacy and statesmanship should be the strongest bulwark against war and the military should only be used when we or our allies are attacked and always with cooperation of allies in numbers. If you think environmental concerns matter and should take precedence over profit. If you think energy sources should be as renewable and polution free as possible. The opposites of these concerns are backed by Scott Brown's donors. This is not a liberal/conservative debate. It is what makes sense to ensure this country prospers and anyone who is a citizen is able to fairly use whatever talents they possess. There is still no guarantee of success but at least no one should put you out of the game. VOTE FOR ELIZABETH WARREN. There is no doubt she represents all the people's interests including those who don't think so.
Scott Brown does what is in the interest of Scott Brown not the people he represents. Gail Huff can stick up for him being pro-life and pro women but his record speaks for itself.
This comment has been removed.
Ms. Healy writes that some say Senator Brown has tried to weaken Dodd-Franck.
Did you do no research for this story? The Sept 9th, 2012 New York Times reports: "Internal government documents provide a glimpse of one such lobbying effort last year, when an aide to Senator Scott Brown, Republican of Massachusetts, appealed to the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve. " It goes on to quote the letters.
Also, The Boston Globe has covered Brown's activities in this arena: "From mid-June until the Fourth of July, according to a Globe analysis of his campaign finance reports, the Massachusetts senator took in $140,000 from banks and investment firms and their executives, including companies based in the state, such as MassMutual and State Street Corp. That is 400 percent more than the $28,000 received on average by all Republican senators during the same three weeks.
As the money poured in, Brown and his Senate staff were working both publicly and behind the scenes to scuttle $19 billion in fees on the financial industry that would have paid for part of the regulatory overhaul, and to weaken a provision intended to curb certain types of investment activities by banks and insurance companies.
Both efforts were successful and were adopted as part of the final bill, which was signed by President Obama on July 21."
These are facts, not hearsay, and it is the Globe's single highest responsibility to clarify for its readers which is which. To use the phrase some say reduces readers to guessing at which TV commercials are true and which are false. It fails in this story and it fails in that responsibility in presenting the real story of Elizabeth Warren and the asbestos workers.
In that way, The Globe has played a part in this campaign that newspapers never should play. I expect better from Beth Healy.
It's interesting that your rambling screed leaves me wondering which side you think the Globe is supporting more.
I literally cannot tell what your point is.
This article didn't intend to harm Liz Warren but it has!!! 'Elizabeth Warren, has drawn support primarily from universities, law firms, and left-leaning political groups'--------NOTICE, she isn't getting money from people who create jobs, she's only getting money from people who read about other people creating jobs!!!!!! Notice, she isn't getting money from job creators, she is getting money from lawyers and professors; two groups of people that are perhaps the MOST REMOVED FROM NORMAL LIFE!!!!!!!!!!! Have you noticed how many jobs universities, law firms, and left-leaning groups have created the past four years, or forty years? NOT MANY!
Brown was named Wall Street's favorite senator. There is nothing else that needs to be said. By the way, in the last three-month cycle, 56% of donations for Elizabeth Warren were under $25 and 82% were less than $50. That's a lot of people who know better than to buy Brown's bipartisan lie.
Globe says, wihout any proof whatsoever "Warren as a former cop on the Wall Street beat". We are supposed to accept that as fact? Exactly what did she do? What did she accomplish? Also, if she intends to follow Barack Obama's ploicies in every way, then she needs to explain to the public why Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama LIED to the American people and to the U.N. when they blamed the Libyan consolate attacks on a Video. ven though it is now known that there is video of the attack in progress. And the attack was known by the US government within minutes of the start.
This comment has been removed.