To The Daily Sun,
It has been saddening to watch the vicious attacks on Kelly Ayotte this election season. Kelly is one of the nicest and most bipartisan senators in Congress, and she is an ideal fit for New Hampshire given its close balance between Republicans and Democrats.
Some of the criticisms leveled at Kelly Ayotte by the DSCC (Democratic Senate Campaign Committee) are flat-out lies, and others shade the truth.
One of the lies is that overturning Roe v. Wade will deprive New Hampshire women of the right to an abortion. Nothing could be further from the truth. If Roe v. Wade is overturned, which not only is unlikely but which Kelly Ayotte cannot vote on anyway, the governing law would be New Hampshire state law. All anti-abortion laws in New Hampshire were repealed in the late 1990s, and the only restriction that has been added since is a parental notification law for minors, and even that has an option for a judge to intervene at the request of the minor. So if Roe v. Wade is overturned, New Hampshire women will be unaffected, and thus it should not be a campaign issue.
Another claim by Maggie Hassan is that Kelly Ayotte voted with the Koch Brothers 90 percent of the time. I'm not sure how that's possible since neither Charles nor David Koch, nor their other two brothers, are in the Senate and thus do not cast votes. Frankly, I have a great deal of respect for Charles and David Koch. They could teach Maggie Hassan and Hillary Rodham Clinton much about integrity.
Maggie Hassan also claimed that Kelly Ayotte voted to cut funding for Pell grants by $90 billion. Without going into a lot of detail, let's just say that Politifact rated the claim mostly false.
And what about Maggie Hassan? She has been a mediocre governor who barely rated a C in the latest Fiscal Policy Report Card on America's Governors by the Cato Institute. That follows a D rating in her first two years, and had she had a Democratic (majority in the) Legislature to rubber-stamp her profligate ways, she would have rated worse. Keeping her out of the U.S. Senate is imperative, since electing her could give Democrats control of the Senate, and that would provide no check on Hillary Rodham Clinton if she prevails against Donald Trump as expected.