“It is uncharacteristic for Bonnie to launch desperate attacks. It’s the unfortunate result of a campaign with no message or money. Nathan was rated as 100% pro-choice by Planned Parenthood. Past procedural votes have been misconstrued by some, but Nathan’s position is clear. He is pro-choice.”
-Amy Thoma
“I’ve known Nathan for years. He has always been pro-choice and has always been willing to listen and learn about issues on women’s health.”
-Karen Brailean, Democrat
I knew Nathan before he ever ran for office and hosted his first fundraiser for the Assembly. One of my criteria for supporting Nathan, as someone long involved in women’s issues, was that he was pro-choice. Nathan was pro-choice then and has remained so, and women everywhere respect his commitment to their right to choose.
-Julie Meier Wright, Republican
We have enjoyed a constructive dialogue with you during your service in the state legislature and appreciate the candor you have always brought to these discussions. We are especially appreciative of your personal commitment to women’s reproductive rights and healthcare services.
-Vince Hall, Vice President, Planned Parenthood of the Pacific Southwest
Nathan was rated 100% by Planned Parenthood. (Planned Parenthood, Press Release, May 1, 2012)
Comments 20
So he’s always been pro-choice but was too scared to say it till just now? Ok, got it.
Why list Brailean and Wright’s political party affiliations? I thought Nathan was moving passed that.
2009 Planned Parenthood Scorecard : Nathan Fletcher “Anti-Choice”
http://www.ppactionca.org/voter-resources/scorecards/2009-ppac-scorecard.pdf
Terrible that campaigns are touting who’s more in to aborting babies than the other.
The guy has a 0% “anti choice” record and now all the sudden he’s pro choice to hit in better with his “socially progressive” “Independent” mantra, really?
This is isn’t even about being pro-life or pro-choice, its about how Nathan’s hypocrisy is finally being brought to light.
Just curious: Since when does the Mayor of San Diego get a say in whether someone has an abortion or not?
I guess Nathan was Pro-Life before he was Pro-Choice or was he
“for it before he was against it”
http://www.ppactionca.org/voter-resources/scorecards/2009-ppac-scorecard.pdf
Someone at Rostra needs to create a list or website dedicated to keeping track of all of this flip-flops just like this CBS reporter did for John Kerry’s Flip-Flops. I have a feeling Fletcher’s list is flip-flop is going to grow and this is going to be a full-time job.
Kerry’s Top Ten Flip-Flops
http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-250_162-646435.html
Kirk Effinger:
From the VOSD Archives: A Pro-Choice Mayor For San Diego
http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/opinion/article_0ff02ce6-c77f-11e0-b3c0-001cc4c002e0.html
NARAL Pro-Choice California Scorecard: Nathan Fletcher: 0%, Choice-Status: Anti
http://www.prochoicecalifornia.org/in-our-state/your-legislators.shtml
I stand by my earlier post: Since when does the Mayor of San Diego have a say in whether someone has an abortion or not? The job of the mayor of any city is to uphold the laws and protections of the Constitution of the State of California and the Constitution of the United States of America. He or she has no choice in the matter. The question of your pro- or anti-choice stance is plain political fodder used to stir up “the base” of the very people Flrtcher is running against. The VOSD link proves nothing.
Some votes on issues that would be considered women’s issues by Fletcher as reported by capitolvotes.org :
1. Opposed -Regular Session Assembly Bill 98 – Mandates Health Insurance To Provide Maternity Coverage
This bill will force all health insurance carriers to provide maternity coverage.
2. Opposed- Regular Session Assembly Bill 685 – School facilities: compliance with Title IX
This bill would increase government bureaucracy by requiring state review of new school construction plans completed by school districts to ensure compliance with federal anti-discrimination laws amended on April 22, 2009 to make technical changes
3. Opposed- Regular Session Assembly Bill 56 – Require Coverage of Mammograms
This bill would require insurance companies to notify female policyholders in writing of eligibility for screening tests and diagnosis of breast cancer, and require all individual or self-insured plans issued or renewed after July 1, 2010 to provide coverage for mammograms.
4. Opposed- Regular Session Assembly Bill 294 – Expand Scope of Practice for Nurses
This bill will authorize standardized procedures that would expand the scope of duties for nurse practitioners .
5. Opposed- Regular Session Assembly Bill 549 – Authorize Out-of-state Cosmetology Licenses
This bill will authorize the board of barbering and cosmetology to grant licenses to an applicants licensed in another state.
6. Opposed- Regular Session Assembly Bill 1003 – Domestic violence grants
to expand funding for prevention of domestic violence in the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community
7. Missed- Regular Session Assembly Bill 1230 – Intent to Pass Human Trafficking Amendments
This bill states the Legislature’s intent to pass amendments to combat and prevent human trafficking in California
The issue is not pro-choice or pro-life. The issue is HONESTY.
As demonstrated above, Fletcher is not. And that DOES matter.
Frankly I don’t give a damn what a mayor thinks about the abortion issue. But we don’t need a someone wearing “flip-flops” as the head of our city government.
Kirk – Flip Flop Fletcher has brought up several non-city related issues up in this campaign to attack opponents. His hypocrisy knows no bounds.
Kirk-
I’m here to provide facts not rhetoric. Nowhere in my comment did I suggest that the mayor should play a a role in abortion. You asked a question and I provided you with the opinion of one San Diegan who thinks that voters should take a candidate’s pro-life/pro-choice stance into consideration. That San Diegan also happens to sit on the board of Planned Parenthood of the Pacific Southwest, which is the same organization that Mr. Fletcher quoted in his post and who’s questionnaire he’s touting. So if you’re upset that Mr. Fletcher’s unprincipled stance on abortion has become an issue then I suggest that you take it up with him.
California Abortion and Reproductive Rights League: Nathan Fletcher (Independent): 0%
http://votesmart.org/interest-group/331/rating/5613
Obviously I’m a Carl DeMaio fan, but if Carl wasn’t in the race, today I’d be supporting Bonnie Dumanis.
However, if you’d asked my preference between (only) Fletcher and Dumanis at the first of the year, I would have mildly preferred Fletcher. But unlike Dumanis, the more I’ve learned about Fletcher since then, the more disappointed I am in him.
At 3:30 of this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCDoBvG1HoI
Q: Is that a yes or a no?
A: (shrugs) It’s a possible maybe
Richard, I know you believe that abortion isn’t the issue here and I tend to agree with you on this.
That said, my comment still stands. Does anyone else find it abhorrent that both candidates are fighting over who’s more in to aborting babies?
I’m no hard right anti-abortion person, but it’s still awful. Add that to the organization receiving federal subsidies for the act its self.
Fletcher’s campaign obviously is still confused about what “moving to the middle means.” What they should have said is that Nathan is 50% pro-choice.
Bastinda and twm – it’s like what has been said before – you can’t be half pregnant, so Fletcher is 100% Planned Parenthood. Very, very not conservative. hmmmm.