Rep. Jim Lyons Playing Fast and Loose With His Voting Record
Tea Party freshman who fought to eliminate school-based health centers now brags about bringing home the bacon
BOSTON –Just a few short months ago, Republican Rep. Jim Lyons led the charge on Beacon Hill to eliminate funding for school-based health centers in the Commonwealth. Now, with Election Day on the horizon, the Tea Party freshman is trying to convince voters that he is a champion of the important programs only local and state governments can provide.
In a post on the Patch, Lyons appears to take credit for local aid to Andover schools, though he does not mention his amendment to next year’s budgets that would have forced public schools to fire school nurses and close down school-based health centers.
In the post, Lyons goes so far as to say, “our most vital services are provided through our local communities: education, police, fire, libraries, public works, and public safety.”
“It’s good that Jim Lyons now recognizes local schools provide some of the most vital services folks rely on, but a few months ago he was fighting to get rid of the health centers and school nurses who provide those services,” said Massachusetts Democratic Party Chair John Walsh. “Maybe Lyons has had a change or heart, or maybe he is realizing that the extreme Tea Party rhetoric that wins him praise from Republicans on Beacon Hill doesn’t sit so well with middle-class families in Andover and Tewsbury.”
Bryan McGonigle2
10:53 am on Wednesday, July 18, 2012
A nurse in a school is one thing but a school-based health center? Isn't that kind of wasteful?
What does a school-based or government health center do that a normal health center can't? For example, we don't have a work-based health centers.
Michael Quinlan
11:12 am on Wednesday, July 18, 2012
A fully staffed school-based health center can provide abortions on-site.
Bill Kelly
4:59 pm on Wednesday, July 18, 2012
Your statement is fear mongering at its worst
Michael Quinlan
3:23 pm on Thursday, July 19, 2012
Patch - how is the Massachusetts Democrat Party a 'Local Voice'? Their office address is in Boston.
Bill Kelly
10:05 am on Saturday, July 21, 2012
Bryan- I was wondering about that too- Can any organization post to the Patch no matter where they are located and what their message is?
Bryan McGonigle
12:33 pm on Saturday, July 21, 2012
The "Local Voices" feature has been changed so that anyone can sign up to blog. I can delete blogs if they are against terms of use. Since this blog post is about the election North Andover is voting in, I think technically it qualifies. Just like if the MassGOP blogs about this state rep race, it can be posted here.
Cool Fusion
10:41 am on Saturday, July 21, 2012
"Patch" IS NOT a free-lance benevolent community enitity, It is a For-Profit business; a subsidary of AOL which purchased it from the left leaning Huffington Post. I could be wrong as I have no evidence, but i suspect that these are paid advertisments from the State Democratic Party. Perhaps, Bryan can shed a llitle light on why Patch continues to publish these self-serving political attack articles from partisan sources .
Bryan McGonigle
12:38 pm on Saturday, July 21, 2012
Cool Fusion, you may want to check your facts. Huffington Post has never owned Patch. Patch was purchased by AOL a couple years ago. Last year, AOL then bought Huffington Post Media Group. Some Patch stories that stand out or have national appeal have been picked up by the Huffington Post, but that business has never owned Patch. As for claims that these are paid ads, they are not. Like I said, anyone can blog. If the blog post is relevant to that Patch's town. In case you didn't notice, Rep. Lyons himself is now a Patch blogger and so is State Sen. Bruce Tarr. Neither of them pay for that access either. No one pays to blog. Political ads are on Patch but they are paid ads and not news articles or blogs.
Massachusetts Democratic Party
10:45 am on Saturday, July 21, 2012
No, this is not a paid advertisement. We're allowed to post info about North Andover, just like everyone else is. In a free country, Freedom of Speech extends even to those you don't agree with.
-KF
Cool Fusion
11:23 am on Saturday, July 21, 2012
I am led to believe that "Hate Speech" does not legally exist in the realm of Freedom of Speech. Vilifying the Tea Party with abusive and defamatory language is not constructive to civil discourse and qualifies more as "bullying tactics". When one has nothing positive to offer, the only recourse is to slime the opposition which seems the theme of these orchestrated negative attack ads.
Thomas
3:10 pm on Saturday, July 21, 2012
wow cool fusion - talk about calling the kettle black! You & Quinlan make a hilarious tag team! Thank you for being an endless source of amusement.
Michael Quinlan
8:51 pm on Saturday, July 21, 2012
Thomas, Your shoes are too tight. Relax.
Cool Fusion
10:50 pm on Saturday, July 21, 2012
Thank you Bryan for correcting the record of the cronological order of the AOL connection. The Huffington Post was founded by Arianna Huffington in 2005 which AOL acquired in 2011 and made Arianna Huffington the new editor-in-chief of The renamed "Huffington Post Media Group" and in the process included the prepurchased "Patch.com Inc". Tomatoe, Tomato.. Arianna Huffington still runs the show although AOL is far from free of the internal corporate office power politics that compete for alpha dog status.
Bryan McGonigle
11:07 pm on Saturday, July 21, 2012
No, it's not tomato tomato. You claimed, incorrectly, that AOL "purchased Patch from the left leaning Huffington Post." That is incorrect. Huffington Post has never owned Patch, and AOL owned Patch way before it bought Huffington Post. Your logic (that since they are both owned by the same company they both have the same characteristics) would say that, since the company that owns Fox News owns Fox Network, then Fox Network shows are all conservative-leaning. Watch an episode of The Simpsons or Family Guy and then see if that makes sense. Patch sites are hyperlocal news outlets operated by individual Patch editors (presumably from various personal political leanings) in 900 different diverse communities from Massachusetts to Florida and out to California. A political agenda probably wouldn't even be possible, given the diversity of audiences geographically. Patch is politically neutral. The blogs, of course, are not, because they are opinion. You have yet to show one reason to think Patch has some big political conspiracy (other than the fact that we don't crusade against the candidates you dislike).