John McCain on Civil Rights Republican nominee for President; Senior Senator (AZ)





Sub-sections under Civil Rights: Voting Record

Other issues under Civil Rights

Equal pay for equal work case was a trial lawyer’s dream

McCAIN: Obviously, that law waved the statute of limitations, which you could have gone back 20 or 30 years. It was a trial lawyer’s dream.

Source: 2008 third presidential debate against Barack Obama Oct 15, 2008

FactCheck: Pay discrimination still subject to time limits

The Facts:The legislation McCain was referring to was the Lilly Ledbetter Act of 2007. Ledbetter alleged that she had suffered years of unequal pay. Ledbetter’s case was throw out by the Supreme Court on the grounds that she should have filed suit within 180 days of the first unfair paycheck. The Lilly Ledbetter Act would allow people to sue up to 180 days after the last instance of pay discrimination--not the first, as curren law requires.

The Verdict:False. The legislation does not waive the statute of limitations on discrimination suits, as McCain says, but changes the interpretation of when the limitation begins in cases of continuing violations.

Source: CNN FactCheck on 2008 third presidential debate Oct 15, 2008

Supports CA Prop. 8: one-man-one-woman marriage

The muted announcements--McCain supports the proposed ban, Obama opposes it--will have little if any bearing on the presidential contest in California, but the ramifications are serious elsewhere.

McCain announced his support last week for the California ballot measure, known as Prop. 8. “I support the efforts of the people of California to recognize marriage as a unique institution between a man and a woman, just as we did in my home state of Arizona,” he said.

McCain’s case is a tricky one to make; he opposes the proposed federal constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, which Bush promoted in 2004. McCain’s nuanced explanation is that it’s up to the states to decide.

Source: By Michael Finnegan and Cathleen Decker, Los Angeles Times Jul 2, 2008

Voted against MLK holiday in 1983; now calls that a mistake

A: Well, let me say in 1983 I was wrong, and I believe that my advocacy for the recognition of Dr. King’s birthday in Arizona was something that I’m proud of. The issue in the early ‘90s was a little more complicated. I’ve never believed in quotas, and I don’t. There’s no doubt about my view on that issue. And that was the implication, at least, of that other vote. But I was wrong in ‘83, and all of us make mistakes, and I think nobody recognized that more than Dr. King.

Supported CA Prop. 209, canceling affirmative action quotas

Can anyone parse exactly what McCain thinks of affirmative action from that answer? In summing up his views in 2000, the National Journal wrote, "McCain supports affirmative action, although he's somewhat inconsistent on the subject. He opposed quotas, but has denounced initiatives that attempt to eliminate quotas or racial preferences." "Inconsistent" is one word for such a confusing triangle of beliefs.

Pro-Confederacy activist continues as top S.C. adviser

Private ceremonies fine, but no gay marriage

In 2004, he called the idea "antithetical in every way to the core philosophy of Republicans," and because it "usurps from the states a fundamental authority and imposes a federal remedy for a problem that most states do not believe confronts them."

Source: The Myth of a Maverick, by Matt Welch, p.177-178 Oct 9, 2007

Praised immigrants who join army to advance citizenship

Don’t ask, don’t tell is working; don’t tamper with it

ROMNEY: No, actually, when I first heard of the “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, I thought it sounded awfully silly. I didn’t think that would be very effective. And I turned out to be wrong. It’s been the policy now in the military for what, 10, 15 years, and it seems to be working. This is not the time to put in place a major change, a social experiment, in the middle of a war going on. I wouldn’t change it at this point.

McCAIN: We have the best-trained, most professional, best- equipped, most efficient, most wonderful military in the history of this country, and I’m proud of every one of them. There just aren’t enough of them. So I think it would be a terrific mistake to even reopen the issue. The policy is working. And I am convinced that that’s the way we can maintain this greatest military. Let’s not tamper with them.

Source: 2007 GOP debate at Saint Anselm College Jun 3, 2007

Confederate flag on top of capitol was wrong; in front is ok

A: It is not flying on top of the capitol. Yes, I was wrong when I said that I believed that it was up to the state of South Carolina. Now, after long negotiation amongst most parties, there is an agreement that that flag no longer flies on top of the capitol of the state of South Carolina.

Q: It is flying in FRONT of the capitol now.

A: Almost all parties involved in those negotiations believe that that’s a reasonable solution to this issue. I support it. I still believe that it should not have flown over the capitol, and I was wrong when I said that it was a state issue. But now I think it has been settled, and I think it’s time that we all moved on, on this issue -- especially the people of South Carolina.

Source: 2007 Republican Debate in South Carolina May 15, 2007

Leave gay marriage to the states

Gay Marriage - Believes it’s an issue best left up to the states. While in the Senate McCain voted “No” on a constitutional ban of same-sex marriage.

Hate Crimes - While in the Senate, McCain voted no on extending the definition of hate crimes to include sexual orientation.

Job Protection - Voted no on prohibiting job discrimination based upon sexual orientation.

Source: RSLevinson.com “All Things Queer”, review of 2008 gay issues Jan 1, 2007

John Lewis was as courageous as anyone could ever hope to be

Fear did not restrain Dr. King to resist repression

Source: Why Courage Matters, p. 91 Apr 1, 2004

1994: No Senate hiring discrimination by sexual orientation

Source: Man of the People, by Paul Alexander, p.166-7 Jan 19, 2004

1987: 1st Senate committee was Indian affairs, crucial to AZ

As a freshman senator and something of a POW celebrity in Washington, McCain also got a seat on the powerful Armed Services Committee, which controlled budgetary appropriations.

McCain's third committee appointment, to the Commerce Committee, has proved to be the area of his greatest legislative publicity. Tobacco legislation, and his advocacy for telecommunications deregulation, emerged from his role on this committee.

Support evangelism but don’t pander to evangelical leaders

Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell and a few leaders of the pro-life movement call me an unacceptable presidential candidate. Why? Because I don’t pander to them, because I don’t ascribe to their failed philosophy that money is our message.

We embrace the fine members of the religious conservative community. But that does not mean that we will pander to their self-appointed leaders. [These leaders] are corrupting influences on religion and politics. They shame our faith, our party and our country.

Neither party should be defined by pandering to the outer reaches of American politics and the agents of intolerance whether they be Louis Farrakhan or Al Sharpton on the left, or Robertson or Falwell on the right.

Source: Speech in Virginia Beach, VA Feb 28, 2000

Inter-racial dating ban is idiotic and cruel

McCAIN: Well Alan, I’ve taken a few risks in my life and I’m proud of those risks. Some of them are the proudest points of my life.

I was not invited to attend Bob Jones. I understand that it’s a fine academic school. If I had been invited, I would have gone and I would’ve started by saying, as I have gone to other places that people are not in favor of me, and I would have said: Look, what you’re doing, in this ban on interracial dating, is stupid, it’s idiotic and it is incredibly cruel to many people. I also happen to have an adopted daughter who’s from Bangladesh. And I don’t think that she should be subjected to those kinds of things. In fact, I will stand up and fight against those. You’ve got to bring the message to get these people in to the modern times.

Source: GOP Debate on the Larry King Show Feb 15, 2000

Career-long history of supporting Indian causes

When he arrived in Congress in 1983, McCain said, he was recruited for a slot on the Indian Affairs subcommittee by Mo Udall, a fellow Arizonan who made great strides to support Indian causes.

After taking the position, he won recognition for a tribe in Connecticut that was having trouble getting recognized. “Know which tribe?” McCain asked, then answered his own question. “The Pequot, now the proud owners of the largest casino in the world.”

Source: Boston Globe, p. A27 Jan 28, 2000

Ten Commandments would bring virtue to our schools

Source: GOP Debate in Johnston, Iowa Jan 16, 2000

Confederate flag is a “symbol of heritage”

Source: Holly Ramer, Associated Press Jan 16, 2000

Allow, but not mandate, school prayer

Source: Vote-Smart.org 2000 NPAT Jan 13, 2000

Would be “comfortable” with a gay president

Source: Buchanan Interview on “Equal Time” Dec 21, 1999

Flying Confederate flag should be left to states

Source: Bruce Smith, Associated Press Sep 4, 1999

1st Amend. not a shield for hate groups

Source: (x-ref Crime) Letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee Aug 13, 1999

Indian gambling OK; lottery is not

Source: Associated Press Aug 3, 1999

Hollywood should voluntarily self-censor sex and violence

Source: Press Release: “Media Violence” Jul 21, 1999

Supports Amendment against flag-burning

Source: www.mccain2000.com/ “Press Releases” Apr 28, 1999

We don’t need laws against Spanish language & culture

Source: Landon Lecture at Kansas State University Mar 15, 1999

Affirmative action OK for specific programs, but no quotas

McCain supports the following principles regarding affirmative action and discrimination: The federal government should continue affirmative action programs only if such programs do not include quotas

The Federal Government should consider affirmative action programs if ordered by a court to rectify specific programs.

Source: Project Vote Smart, 1998, www.vote-smart.org Jul 2, 1998

John McCain on Voting Record

Ban on same-sex marriage is unRepublican; leave it to states

Source: CNN.com, “Presidential bids” Nov 15, 2006

Voted YES on recommending Constitutional ban on flag desecration.

the flag of the US is a unique symbol of national unity... the Bill of Rights should not be amended in a manner that could be interpreted to restrict freedom... abuse of the flag causes more than pain and distress... and may amount to fighting words... destruction of the flag of the US can be intended to incite a violent response rather than make a political statement and such conduct is outside the protections afforded by the first amendment to the Constitution.

Proponents of the Resolution say: Fifty State legislatures have called on us to pass this amendment. This amendment simply says that "Congress shall have power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States."

In other words, in passing this amendment, we would give to Congress the power that the Supreme Court took away in 1989.

48 States had anti-desecration measures on the books before 1989. It was then that five unelected judges told those 48 sovereign entities that they were wrong.

Opponents of the Resolution say: I am deeply offended when people burn or otherwise abuse this precious national symbol.

I also believe that the values and beliefs that the American flag represents are more important than the cloth from which this symbol was created.

Prominent among these beliefs are the right to voice views that are unpopular, and the right to protest.

I oppose this amendment not because I condone desecration of our flag, but because I celebrate the values our flag represents. Flag burning is despicable. However, the issue is whether we should amend our great charter document, the Constitution, to proscribe it.

Is this a problem needing such strong medicine? Are we facing an epidemic of flag burnings?

Voted NO on constitutional ban of same-sex marriage.

Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution, nor the constitution of any State, shall be construed to require that marriage or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon any union other than the union of a man and a woman.

Proponents of the motion say: If Members of the Senate vote as their States have voted on this amendment, the vote today will be 90 to 10 in favor of a constitutional amendment.

Marriage is a foundational institution. It is under attack by the courts. It needs to be defended by defining it as the union of a man and a woman as 45 of our 50 States have done. The amendment is about how we are going to raise the next generation. It is not an issue that the courts should resolve. Those of us who support this amendment are doing so in an effort to let the people decide.

Opponents of the motion say: This proposal pits Americans against one another. It appeals to people's worst instincts and prejudices. Supporters rail against activist judges. But if this vaguely worded amendment ever passes, it will result in substantial litigation. What are the legal incidents of marriage? Is a civil union a marriage?

Married heterosexual couples are wondering, how, exactly, the prospect of gay marriages threatens the health of their marriages.

This amendment would make a minority of Americans permanent second-class citizens of this country. It would prevent States, many of which are grappling with the definition of marriage, from deciding that gays and lesbians should be allowed to marry. And it would write discrimination into a document that has served as a historic guarantee of individual freedom.

Voted NO on adding sexual orientation to definition of hate crimes.

Reference: Bill S.625 ; vote number 2002-147 on Jun 11, 2002

Voted YES on loosening restrictions on cell phone wiretapping.

Reference: Bill S1510 ; vote number 2001-300 on Oct 11, 2001

Voted NO on expanding hate crimes to include sexual orientation.

Reference: Bill S.2549 ; vote number 2000-136 on Jun 20, 2000

Voted YES on setting aside 10% of highway funds for minorities & women.

Reference: Bill S.1173 ; vote number 1998-23 on Mar 6, 1998

Voted NO on ending special funding for minority & women-owned business.

Reference: Motion to invoke cloture; Bill S.1173 ; vote number 1997-275 on Oct 23, 1997

Voted YES on prohibiting same-sex marriage.

Reference: Bill HR 3396 ; vote number 1996-280 on Sep 10, 1996

Voted NO on prohibiting job discrimination by sexual orientation.

Reference: Employment Non-Discrimination Act; Bill S. 2056 ; vote number 1996-281 on Sep 10, 1996

Voted YES on Amendment to prohibit flag burning.

Reference: Flag Desecration Bill; Bill S. J. Res. 31 ; vote number 1995-600 on Dec 12, 1995

Voted YES on banning affirmative action hiring with federal funds.

Reference: Bill HR 1854 ; vote number 1995-317 on Jul 20, 1995

Supports anti-flag desecration amendment.

Supports granting Congress power to prohibit the physical desecration of the U.S. flag. Proposes an amendment to the Constitution of the United States authorizing the Congress to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States.

Source: House Resolution Sponsorship 01-HJR36 on Mar 13, 2001

Require 90 day delay for compliance before ADA lawsuits.

H.R. 914/S. 872 the ADA Notification Act.

Republican Main Street Partnership Congressman Mark Foley (FL) introduced this legislation to protect the Americans with Disabilities Act from a growing number of lawyers who are generating huge sums in legal fees for pointing out accessibility violations by business when often simple fixes would bring properties into compliance with the ADA's accessibility standards. This variety of litigation abuse stems from the lack of any notification provision in the ADA. RMSP supports a 90-day delay between notification of an alleged accessibility violation and any legal proceedings. This notification will allow honest business owners to become ADA compliant without added legal expense while freeing up the courts to pursue legal action against bad players.

Source: Republican Main Street Partnership Legislative Agenda 02-RMSP8 on May 24, 2002

Limit interstate class-action lawsuits to federal courts .

H.R. 2341/S. 1712 Class Action Fairness Act.

Class Action suits, most often claiming product defects, have increasingly become fertile ground for unscrupulous trial attorneys. Using jurisdictional loopholes, trial lawyers are suing for enormous sums with little or no payout to injured parties. Multi-million dollar interstate lawsuits filed on behalf of irrelevant plaintiffs, often unaware that a claim has been filed, are filed in state courts. This increases the volume of claims filed, and leads to multiple, expensive, settlements. H.R. 2341, supported by Republican Main Street Partnership Reps. Judy Biggert (IL), Tom Davis (VA), Porter Goss (FL), Melissa Hart (PA), George Nethercutt (WA), and Rob Simmons (CT), eases the burden of addressing interstate claims in federal court. At the federal level, courts have greater resources and uniform rules. This provides a more appropriate venue for such cases and protects legitimate claimants ability to recover losses.

Source: Republican Main Street Partnership Legislative Agenda 02-RMSP9 on May 24, 2002

Rated 0% by the ACLU, indicating an anti-civil rights voting record.

The mission of the ACLU is to preserve protections and guarantees America’s original civic values - the Constitution and the Bill of Rights: Your First Amendment rights-freedom of speech, association and assembly. Freedom of the press, and freedom of religion supported by the strict separation of church and state.

Your right to equal protection under the law - equal treatment regardless of race, sex, religion or national origin.

Your right to due process - fair treatment by the government whenever the loss of your liberty or property is at stake.Your right to privacy - freedom from unwarranted government intrusion into your personal and private affairs.

Our ratings are based on the votes the organization considered most important; the numbers reflect the percentage of time the representative voted the organization's preferred position.

Source: ACLU website 02n-ACLU on Dec 31, 2002

Rated 33% by the HRC, indicating a mixed record on gay rights.

OnTheIssues.org interprets the 2005-2006 HRC scores as follows:

0% - 20%: opposes gay rights (approx. 207 members)

20% - 70%: mixed record on gay rights (approx. 84 members)

70%-100%: supports gay rights (approx. 177 members)

The Human Rights Campaign represents a grassroots force of more than 700,000 members and supporters nationwide. As the largest national gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender civil rights organization, HRC envisions an America where GLBT people are ensured of their basic equal rights, and can be open, honest and safe at home, at work and in the community.

Ever since its founding in 1980, HRC has led the way in promoting fairness for GLBT Americans. HRC is a bipartisan organization that works to advance equality based on sexual orientation and gender expression and identity.

Source: HRC website 06n-HRC on Dec 31, 2006

Rated 7% by the NAACP, indicating an anti-affirmative-action stance.

OnTheIssues.org interprets the 2005-2006 NAACP scores as follows:

0% - 33%: anti-affirmative-action stance (approx. 177 members)

34% - 84%: mixed record on affirmative-action (approx. 96 members)

85%-100%: pro-affirmative-action stance (approx. 190 members)

The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) has worked over the years to support and promote our country's civil rights agenda. Since its founding in 1909, the NAACP has worked tirelessly to end racial discrimination while also ensuring the political, social, and economic equality of all people. The Association will continue this mission through its policy initiatives and advocacy programs at the local, state, and national levels. From the ballot box to the classroom, the dedicated workers, organizers, and leaders who forged this great organization and maintain its status as a champion of social justice, fought long and hard to ensure that the voices of African Americans would be heard. For nearly one hundred years, it has been the talent and tenacity of NAACP members that has saved lives and changed many negative aspects of American society.

Source: NAACP website 06n-NAACP on Dec 31, 2006

Search for...



X

Page last updated: Feb 08, 2010