In Debate Senate Candidates Seek to Define Differences, by Andrea Estes, Boston Globe, January 6, 2010

In Debate, Senate Candidates Seek to Define Differences

By Andrea Estes
Boston Globe
January 6, 2010

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/01/06/in_debate_senate_candidates_seek_to_define_differences/

The three candidates for US Senate clashed yesterday over health care, abortion, and terrorism in one of their final three debates before the Jan. 19 special election to succeed Edward M. Kennedy.

But they agreed on one thing: Cardinal Sean O'Malley should release the names of any Irish priests accused of sexually abusing children in the Boston area.

A Waltham-based group, BishopAccountability.org, demanded last month that O'Malley, of Boston, and Bishop Thomas J. Tobin of Providence immediately make public the names of any such priests, in the wake of revelations of a coverup of abuse in the Dublin Archdiocese.

"I'd be happy to ask him to release them," said Attorney General Martha Coakley, the Democratic nominee, who also defended her record of prosecuting priests accused of sex abuse.

"We were incredibly active," she said, citing the prosecution of Fathers Paul Shanley and John Geoghan when she was district attorney of Middlesex County.

Coakley acknowledged that she never called for the resignation of former Cardinal Bernard Law, who was accused of shuttling errant priests from parish to parish to keep their abuse secret.

Terrence Donilon, a spokesman for the Boston Archdiocese, did not respond directly to the candidates' calls to release names, referring to a statement issued last week that said: "As the news from Ireland continues to unfold, we recognize that the revelations may serve as a painful reminder of the wounds many survivors carry."

During the debate, Republican state Senator Scott Brown accused Coakley of going easy on criminals, and weakening legislation such as Massachusetts' version of Jessica's Law - which provides 10- to 20-year mandatory sentences for certain sexual offenses against children. It was named for Jessica Lunsford, a 9-year-old Florida girl who was abducted and buried alive in 2005.

"I actually worked very hard on Jessica's Law," said Brown, who advocated longer sentences and more mandatory minimums. "Pressure from the attorney general's office weakened Jessica's Law. We had a chance to have a very, very strong law to protect our kids and keep sexual predators in jail for many, many years, not the short time they're getting. It's unfortunate we didn't do more."

Countered Coakley: "We passed a bill that made sense and kept the most dangerous people in prison."

With the Jan. 19 election two weeks away, the candidates sought yesterday to sharpen their differences and capture undecided voters. In a state where Democrats outnumber Republicans by 3 to 1, a new independent poll showed Brown within 9 percentage points of Coakley. (One percent said they would vote for the third candidate, independent Joseph L. Kennedy, with 7 percent undecided.)

During the debate, aired on WTKK's Braude and Eagan show, Brown repeatedly sought to put Coakley on the defensive. He accused her of supporting higher taxes, increased spending, and abortion rights that go far beyond what most people endorse.

"We both believe Roe v. Wade is the law of the land, but there are clear distinctions," Brown said. "She will go down there as a social crusader" and push for more liberal abortion policies.

Coakley said that was not accurate, and said, "I have no idea what Scott's position is on choice."

"He won't say he's for choice and he won't say he's prolife," she said. "He's supported by prolife groups. My position on choice is clear. I support women's choice."

Brown acknowledged filing a bill that would have allowed employees of Catholic hospitals to refuse emergency contraceptives for rape victims, if it conflicted with their religious beliefs. "If someone has been raped, they are certainly entitled to do what they feel they need to do to rectify their situation. There are many, many hospitals that can deal with that situation," he said.

Kennedy, a libertarian, lumped his opponents together, accusing them of supporting bigger government and greater intrusion into people's lives. He said that he would file bills to dismantle agencies that aren't effective, reverse tax increases, and bring home the troops from Iraq and Afghanistan.

Coakley said she had recovered millions of dollars for taxpayers and consumers by going after predatory lenders and investment banks. In turn, Brown asserted that he wrote the predatory lending law Coakley is "helping to enforce."

After the debate, the Coakley campaign challenged the statement, saying the attorney general's office used the state's 40-year-old consumer protection law to recover money from these companies.

"For Scott Brown to imply that he wrote the law that Martha Coakley used to recover tens of millions of dollars for taxpayers from predatory lenders is completely inaccurate," said Coakley spokesman Corey Welford.

The Brown campaign responded by pointing to a 2007 law that required anyone arranging mortgage loans to be licensed. The bill was designed to prevent foreclosures and crack down on deceptive lending, according to a press release issued at the time by Brown, who served on the conference committee that approved that law.

Brown yesterday reiterated his support for "enhanced interrogation" of terror suspects, including the practice of simulated drowning known as waterboarding. He said he disagrees with Senator John McCain, the Arizona lawmaker who endorsed Brown this week. McCain, a former prisoner of war, has referred to waterboarding as "a terrible, odious practice" that "should never be condoned."

"I have great respect for him, but I disagree with him on this issue," Brown said. "It's not torture. America does not torture."