Tomasek for State Senator

Discussions of general legislativetopics

Re: Tomasek for State Senator

Postby tomasek1000 on Tue Aug 17, 2010 10:19 pm

I am not shy about the social issues. They are however not top priority on most candidates lists.

When you run for office politicos tell you to steer clear of them (at least in MA), but they are of interest to many people. Perhaps they believe these positions say something about the person. The perilous road for the candidate is that a stand sometimes can gain you nothing and in fact lose you votes, so the tendency is to waffle. I hate waffling, so here goes.

I am pro-choice, but (like Scott Brown) I have a number of caveats. No partial term. No minors without parental permission. No public funding. Make adoption information available. If any candidate has NARAL support (one of the Dems in my race has it now) that means they answered "Yes" to all of the above.

That stand may not be enough for some people, but it's what I truly believe.

Any other social issues you want me to weigh in on? Oh, I almost forgot. Put the issue of gay marriage on the ballot. That's what the voters wanted, and the legislature was wrong to block that.
Formerly Tomasek for Senator, now just Jamison Tomasek
tomasek2010@gmail.com
tomasek1000
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2009 4:57 pm

Re: Tomasek for State Senator

Postby atlantis on Wed Aug 18, 2010 8:36 am

Thank you for responding.
atlantis
 
Posts: 327
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 1:01 am

Re: Tomasek for State Senator

Postby cjsmom on Wed Aug 18, 2010 9:08 am

Yes, thanks. I disagree with you on the last point, I don't believe that the majority gets to decide which civil rights they want to grant minorities. But I appreciate your response.
cjsmom
 
Posts: 807
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Tewksbury

Re: Tomasek for State Senator

Postby reginas on Wed Aug 18, 2010 9:53 am

I'm trying to understand how it is a civil rights issue.

Is it just the word "marriage" now that is the issue?

If all rights are equal under a civil union - is it still a civil rights issue?
reginas
 
Posts: 615
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 2:01 am
Location: Regina S.

Re: Tomasek for State Senator

Postby splice on Wed Aug 18, 2010 10:10 am

I'd like to see this thread stay on topic and not go off track and become a "same sex marriage" discussion. Mr. Tomasek has spoken and agree or not, you have to agree that at least he is brave enough to answer a dangerous subject that really is a no win topic for him.

Thanks for staying on topic.
splice
 
Posts: 344
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 2:01 am

Re: Tomasek for State Senator

Postby Josh Lyman on Wed Aug 18, 2010 10:44 am

I am happy to see that cj is not as loonie left as I originally thought.
Josh Lyman
 
Posts: 2038
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2002 2:01 am

Re: Tomasek for State Senator

Postby sean_czarniecki on Wed Aug 18, 2010 12:56 pm

Jamison,
Thank you for coming to this site to answer questions. As a conservative, I would say that I lean toward your positions on many/most issues. Your response about putting gay marriage on the ballot because that is what the voters wanted brings me to issue that all of us have a problem with - are we voting in someone that best fits our views, or someone who will represent the majority of the constituents? For example, perhaps *you* personally don't want an issue brought up for vote, but you receive an overwhelming number of phone calls from your constituents which shows that you don't represent the majority of them. What do you do? Vote with your conscience, or vote to represent the people? Tough one. We all want our representatives to vote as we would. That is not likely to happen 100% of the time. Therefore, we elect someone who *best* represents our views (and get mad when they don't vote the way we want them to). However, in those times when it is clear that the majority of constituents feels differently from the representative, will that representative vote against their belief system? I know that each issue can bring a different result, but I would like to hear your thoughts on this. The way that you worded your response on gay marriage actually left out where you personally stand on the issue - I'm okay with that, but your stance would be stronger on issues if you stated something like "I personally would want X to be done, but I received an overwhelming number of calls from my constituents who wanted Y to be done" or "While this bill has some bad things (name them), to me, the good things (name them) outweigh the bad." This really informs people of the thought process that our representatives have to go through when evaluating what is before them.

Anyways - good luck!

Sean
sean_czarniecki
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu May 02, 2002 1:01 am

Re: Tomasek for State Senator

Postby splice on Wed Aug 18, 2010 1:11 pm

sean_czarniecki wrote:Jamison,
The way that you worded your response on gay marriage actually left out where you personally stand on the issue - I'm okay with that, but your stance would be stronger on issues if you stated something like "I personally would want X to be done, but I received an overwhelming number of calls from my constituents who wanted Y to be done" or "While this bill has some bad things (name them), to me, the good things (name them) outweigh the bad." This really informs people of the thought process that our representatives have to go through when evaluating what is before them.

Anyways - good luck!

Sean


It seems to me that he stated how he would like to see that issue addressed. Tomasek's reply also showed that he felt that his constituents opinions are paramount. Why are you trying to paint him into a corner?
splice
 
Posts: 344
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 2:01 am

Re: Tomasek for State Senator

Postby GuitarTeacher on Wed Aug 18, 2010 2:57 pm

On the social issues, I'm very strongly pro-life, am sincerely disappointed to hear that he is not, and will do cartwheels down the street when a politician in this state shows him/herself as truly pro-life.

That said, I'm still voting for him, because finding a pro-life politician in this state (or one who will admit to it) is near impossible, so it's not anything I can base my vote on.

Now folks, please don't turn this into a debate on the issue, I'm just talking about the views of politicians here. I'm pro-life, if you're not, it's your opinion.

As far as gay marriage, I have no strong opinion. I don't live the lifestyle and nobody is physically harmed by it, so I don't see why it's such a big deal to deny it. I can see why certain religions would not perform the ceremony if it's against their belief, but not every marriage happens in church.

As long as the vows are taken seriously, which today they are often not, even in straight marriages, I have no particular problem with it and think a LOT of negative energy has been exuded for what should be a simple issue.
==========================================
"A painter paints pictures on canvas.
But musicians paint their pictures on silence."
-Leopold Stokowski
User avatar
GuitarTeacher
 
Posts: 698
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2007 1:01 am

Re: Tomasek for State Senator

Postby sean_czarniecki on Wed Aug 18, 2010 6:59 pm

Splice - I'm sorry - I actually am not looking for an answer from him on this particular issue. I was actually just using it as an example. My main point was that if our representatives actually explained why they voted one way or another, it might let constituents see that they are thinking about the issue fully. Of course, if they are just voting the party-line, then they will have nothing to say. Take Scott Brown, for example - has he voted the way everyone wants him to? Nope. However, if you choose to listen, he explains the reasons for voting one way or another, showing that he has thought about the issues, both good and bad. You have to respect that he has actually read the bills and has formed opinions on the issues.

My main discussion point in the post was actually about whether or not our representatives should just vote their beliefs, or if they should vote based on the majority of their constituents. Some representatives don't really care about their constituents and would never change their vote based on phone calls. I'm not saying it is wrong, but I would like to think that some might change their minds if there was enough pressure from the people (not mentioning any specific issue). Otherwise, why bother calling them?
sean_czarniecki
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu May 02, 2002 1:01 am

Re: Tomasek for State Senator

Postby tomasek1000 on Thu Aug 19, 2010 1:34 am

Sean-

I am happy to answer your question about beliefs vs. representation. I was on the radio (WCCM, podcast on my FB page or on their web site) yesterday and I clearly stated my views.

I will represent the interests and views of the district. There are times when maybe I will have more information. It is then my job to raise awareness of issues so that people understand my positions.

On the radio I specifically cited the example of Sen Tucker and gambling. I could pine for a time before the Lottery existed, the Catholic Church had Beano (Bingo was outlawed) the cops had a bunko squad, and in Las Vegas when you were out of cash, you were done. Those days are gone and MA residents are spending $950M a year in RI & CT. I want a piece of that to stay in MA (and not to increase spending!)

Sen Tucker is the strongest anti-gambling proponent in the state. I think her arguments are off base, but she is part of the "I know better" crowd. I am not hungering for gambling personally (I do like online stock trading) but I hear about all the time. People want it, so I am for it.
Formerly Tomasek for Senator, now just Jamison Tomasek
tomasek2010@gmail.com
tomasek1000
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2009 4:57 pm

Re: Tomasek for State Senator

Postby tomasek1000 on Thu Aug 19, 2010 1:40 am

PS

Of course you can't represent 100% of the opinion, but you can gain some sense of what the majority of the people want.

Some issues are just common sense.

Some have strong supporters who want it entirely their way or they are not happy.

So there's a path out there when it comes to legislation.
Formerly Tomasek for Senator, now just Jamison Tomasek
tomasek2010@gmail.com
tomasek1000
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2009 4:57 pm

Re: Tomasek for State Senator

Postby sean_czarniecki on Thu Aug 19, 2010 6:38 am

Excellent responses. That's what I was looking for.

Thank you!
sean_czarniecki
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu May 02, 2002 1:01 am

Previous

Return to General Legislative Issues