Reilly, Woodall, and the Social Compact


At our last debate, Rob Woodall said that the difference between us is that he’s for “freedom” and I’m for “security”. Mr. Woodall was wrong. The choice between his perspective and mine is really between telling Americans “you’re free, so you’re on your own – ‘good luck’ and ‘best wishes’ to you”, and my belief that with freedom comes responsibility in how we exercise that freedom.

We have a responsibility to each other, I believe. Americans cannot leave groups of our fellow citizens behind while our country moves forward. We certainly can’t write off 47% of the population as Mitt Romney suggested recently at a Florida fundraiser.

We have to remember that we’re all in this together, and that all Americans should have freedom, justice, and equal opportunity to pursue the American dream. “Shared prosperity” and “shared sacrifice” have to be common ideals that unite us. We can’t permit further erosion of the middle class. We can’t allow wealth and opportunity to become ever more concentrated in the top 5% of our population.

Ultimately, Americans are one people, and we have to move forward together. That’s our social compact. That’s my governing philosophy.

Privacy and the Constitution

If Mr. Woodall’s perspective were ever to become the law of the land, it could dramatically alter our freedom from government interference in our private lives, from access to contraception to one’s right to simply be left alone in one’s own home. The Constitutional right to privacy has been settled law in our country for decades, and should remain so.

Rob Woodall says his constitution does not allow for a right to privacy


Rob Woodall on the Right to Privacy

At the League of Women’s Voters Forum on Monday, October 15, 2012, Congressman Rob Woodall stated that “My Constitution does not contain a right to privacy”.  I, along with the Supreme Court of the United States, disagree!

Rob Woodall says his constitution does not allow for a right to privacy