Candidate pasts loom large in Democratic primary for U.S. House seat

CEDAR RAPIDS - It was Bill Clinton who famously said, 'By and large, almost all elections are about the future.”

As much as the candidates in the Iowa U.S. House 1st District primary say their race is about the future, Pat Murphy and Monica Vernon spend a lot of time talking about each other's past records.

Murphy, for example, repeatedly pokes at Vernon for being a registered Republican until 2009, and suggests switching her registration was more of a political calculation than a reflection of her embrace of Democratic principles.

'It's not just a label, but a representation of what you believe …

fighting for the middle class, raising the minimum wage and protecting Social Security and Medicare,” Murphy campaign manager Mike McLaughlin said. 'Those are Democratic values and ideas that Pat has fought for.”

Likewise, Vernon repeatedly questions Murphy's commitment to a woman's access to abortion, suggesting women can't trust him when it comes to their reproductive choices.

'It's time he owns his record,” Vernon campaign manager Michelle Gajewski said. 'He's spent a lot of time hiding from his anti-choice record of votes against women's access. That tells me he can't be trusted.”

The Murphy campaign contends that during his 24-year legislative career, voters trusted him to support a state Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay law, making Iowa the first state to require equal pay for equal work, increase the child-care tax credit, require insurance coverage for newborns and prevent insurers from denying contraceptive coverage, and protect abortion rights for women regardless of where they live in Iowa.

The Vernon campaign shoots back with Murphy's role in forming a Dubuque County pro-life organization and his 100 percent rating from Iowa Right to Life. He has a 0 percent rating from Planned Parenthood's political action committee.

'His record is one of votes against women's access,” Gajewski said. 'I don't know if he's changed.”

Vernon has been clear about why she changed parties, 'but I don't know if he's changed,” Gajewski added.

It's clear he's been pro-choice longer than Vernon has been a Democrat, McLaughlin countered.

'The truth is that Pat is pro-choice, and when he was Speaker of the House he defended the right to choose,” McLaughlin said. 'In the legislature, Pat worked hard to protect tele-medicine and funding for Planned Parenthood. Pat was doing all of this while Monica was still supporting and donating to pro-life Republicans.”

In the past Murphy has been endorsed by NARAL Pro-Choice America and Planned Parenthood political fund, he added.

Vernon and Murphy do spend time talking about jobs and trade, making farmers pay to clean up the water supply, protecting Security and Medicare and making college affordable. However, time and again - especially in their debates - the Democratic hopefuls return to the past.

It's not clear whether the history lessons are benefiting either candidate. Gajewski said Democratic primary voters simply don't care that Vernon switched parties.

'We talk to voters every single day,” she said. 'They care about Social Security, college affordability, jobs and training and how she would improve the economy, …

not that she used to be a Republican.”

McLaughlin disagreed.

'When Pat call primary voters, it is a big issue,” he said. 'They see Pat as someone who can be trusted because he has record of getting these things done. He has the longest, most extensive record of doing these things.”

It's his record on abortion rights that Vernon is aiming at. Along with Emily's List, her campaign said he repeatedly has supported backdoor attempts to restrict abortions, such as requiring parental choice and imposing waiting periods for women seeking abortion.

That takes added importance this year, Gajewski said, because of efforts at the state and federal levels to defund Planned Parenthood, an organization that, in addition to providing abortions, offers breast cancer screening and other health services.

'These are real issues here for women,” Gajewski said. 'His votes have taken away access. Vote after vote has been to restrict a woman's ability to make decisions about her health care.

'When Iowa's women needed Murphy to stand up for them, he was not there,” she said. 'With people talking about rolling back the clock on abortion rights we couldn't possibly have enough people in Congress standing up for women.”