For Immediate Release

May 31, 2016

Contact: Press@CatherineCortezMasto.com

Las Vegas, NV – Another day, another Washington Republican group propping up Congressman Heck’s campaign. The truth is: pro-Heck outside groups are trying to distract from Congressman Heck’s record of endorsing Donald Trump for President and his voting with his Party bosses in Washington nearly 90% of the time.

“Congressman Heck’s Washington Republican allies are desperately trying to prop up his campaign to distract from his voting nine times out of ten with his Party’s bosses against Nevadans,” said Zach Hudson, spokesperson for Catherine Cortez Masto for Senate. “From wanting to privatize Social Security, to voting to cut Pell Grants for 35,000 Nevada students and graduates, to accepting hundreds of thousands of dollars from the Big Banks after sponsoring legislation to give them a tax cut, to endorsing Donald Trump – who wants to ‘punish’ women who have abortions –Congressman Heck continues to put his Party bosses and special interests ahead of Nevada families. Should he emerge from his Primary with Sharron Angle, Nevadans will reject Donald Trump and Congressman Heck this November and elect a bipartisan problem solver like Catherine Cortez Masto to be our next Senator.”


Voiceover:America is being tested. National Security at risk. Stagnant wages. Great uncertainty.

Text: America is being tested.

Image: CNN: 56% of Americans think their kids will be worse off.


Heck Has Voted With His Party 90 Percent Of The Time. According to CQ, Heck voted with his party 87% of the time in 2014, 93% of the time in 2013, 89% of the time in 2012, and 90% of the time in 2011. [CQ Vote Studies, Accessed 5/18/16]

Heck Voted With House Conservatives To See Through Their “War On The Health Care Law” That Resulted In Government Shutdown. In September 2013, Heck voted for GOP budget that would delay the Affordable Care Act. The New York Times reported, “In the hours leading up to the deadline, House Republican leaders won approval, in a vote of 228 to 201, of a new plan to tie further government spending to a one-year delay in a requirement that individuals buy health insurance. The House proposal would deny federal subsidies to members of Congress, Capitol Hill staff, executive branch political appointees, White House staff, and the president and vice president, who would be forced to buy their health coverage on the Affordable Care Act’s new insurance exchanges. […] The House’s most ardent conservatives were resigned to seeing through their war on the health care law to its inevitable conclusion, a shutdown that could test voters’ patience with Republican brinkmanship.” [New York Times, 9/30/13; H.J. Res 59, Vote 504,9/30/13]

Heck Took Taxpayer-Funded Salary During The 2013 Government Shutdown.In October 2013, Heck did not appear on the Washington Post list of members of Congress who refused pay during the government shutdown: “A little more than a week after we started asking, nearly 250 lawmakers have said they will not accept their pay for the length of the federal government shutdown. By law members of Congress and the president will continue being paid during the impasse because they are paid with mandatory funds, not discretionary spending dependent on annual appropriations.” [Washington Post,10/10/13]

Heck Opposed Comprehensive Immigration Reform. “Democrats say Heck is against immigration reform. He says he isn’t, but favors a different approach. ‘I was against the bill passed by the Senate (referring to the 2013 immigration reform bill) because it didn’t do anything to secure the borders and it had provisions in it totally unrelated to immigration,’ Heck said.” [KSNV,5/3/16]

Heck Voted For House Republican Budget That Would Cut Spending By $5.5 Trillion And Turn Medicare Into A Voucher Program. In March 2015, Heck voted for: “Adoption of the concurrent resolution that would provide for $2.937 trillion in new budget authority in fiscal 2016, not including off-budget accounts. It would assume $5.5 trillion in spending reductions over the next 10 years, including by assuming repeal of the 2010 healthcare law. It also would propose reducing spending on Medicare and Medicaid and changing programs such as food stamps. It would call for restructuring Medicare into a ‘premium support’ system beginning in 2024, call for a deficit-neutral overhaul of the tax code that lowers rates and assume $147 billion in additional savings through ‘dynamic scoring,’ and would include instructions to committees to trigger the budget reconciliation process to cut mandatory spending. The resolution would call for fiscal 2016 base discretionary spending that adheres to the sequester-reduced defense and non-defense caps set by the Budget Control Act, and for future years it would assume a 10-year increase in defense caps of $387 billion while calling for cutting non-defense caps by $759 billion. As amended, for fiscal 2016 it would call for allowing $96 billion in uncapped war-related funding to provide additional defense funding beyond sequester-reduced caps, without requiring offsets.” The bill was adopted by a vote of 228-199. [CQ, 3/25/15; H. Con. Res. 27, Vote 142,3/25/15]

House Republican Budget Elimination Of Mandatory Funding For Pell Grants Would Likely Force Further Cuts To Eligibility And Benefits. In October 2015, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities CBPP Report on House Republican budget stated: “The plan freezes the maximum Pell Grant for ten years, even as tuition and room and board costs will continue to rise.  It also eliminates Pell Grant funding on the mandatory side of the budget (Pell Grants receive both mandatory and discretionary funding, as explained below), likely forcing further cuts in eligibility and benefits.  In addition, it would make student loans more expensive and cut other education and training programs (see box).” [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, “House Budget Committee Plan Cuts Pell Grants Deeply, Reducing Access to Higher Education,”10/21/15]

CBO: Eliminating Mandatory Funding For Pell Grants Would Increase Costs For Students – Students Who Borrowed $23,000 Would “Leave School With Additional Debt Of About $3,800 Because Of The Accrued Interest Costs.” In November 2014, the Congressional Budget Office Estimated impact of eliminating mandatory spending on student loans: “Under either alternative, borrowers who lost access to subsidized loans would pay interest on unsubsidized loans from the date of loan disbursement, which would raise their costs. If a student who would have borrowed $23,000 (the lifetime limit) through subsidized loans over five years beginning with the 2014–2015 academic year instead borrowed the same amount through unsubsidized loans, that student would leave school with additional debt of about $3,800 because of the accrued interest costs. Over a typical 10-year repayment period, the student’s monthly payment would be $43 higher than if he or she had borrowed that same amount through subsidized loans.” [Congressional Budget Office, Reduce or Eliminate Subsidized Loans for Undergraduate Students, 11/13/13]

Heck On Social Security: “This Pyramid Scheme Isn’t Working.” “Nevada freshman Rep. Joe Heck earned groans from a group of his constituents when he called Social Security ‘a pyramid scheme.’  Heck was in the middle of describing the program’s sustainability when he delivered the made-for-YouTube soundbite.   ‘The full retirement age is 67 and the lifespan is 80, so when they first conceived Social Security, they didn’t think they were going to be paying benefits for 13-15 years. That’s one of the reasons why this pyramid scheme isn’t working,’ he said in the clip above.   When the crowd audibly responded, he doubled-down:  ‘Well it is, when the people before you are paying … the people after you are paying for your benefits.’” [Politico, 6/3/11]

Heck Proposed Allowing Workers To Invest Retirement Funds In Private Accounts, Instead Of Social Security. “The two candidates also got into an angry back-and-forth in discussing veterans benefits, Medicare and Social Security. Bilbray said Heck wants to privatize Social Security, and she said he’s done nothing to raise Medicare reimbursement rates so doctors won’t drop patients. Congress had boosted reimbursement rates, but on a year-to-year basis instead of a permanent fix. Heck, sounding exasperated, said he introduced the first bill to ‘repair Medicare’ and reintroduced it this year. He said it passed the House. As for Social Security, Heck said he has proposed allowing younger workers to invest retirement funds as they like, instead of with the government.” [Las Vegas Review-Journal, 10/20/14]

Voiceover: Who can turn things around? The answer is Joe Heck. Battlefield tested. A general and dedicated commander. A medical doctor who understand the stakes.

Text: Who can turn things around? Joe Heck.

Scrolling Text:Battlefield Tested / Decorated Commander / Medical Doctor Who Understands The Stakes.


Heck Opposed American Recovery And Reinvestment Act, Saying It Increased Debt And Did Not Create Jobs. “Heck: Opposes the $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, says it increased government debt without creating jobs. Believes businesses fear potential tax increases under Democratic Congress.   ’The role of Congress is not to create jobs, it is to set the conditions under which the private sector creates jobs. And you do that through a stable, fair, predictable tax base.’ ” [Las Vegas Review-Journal, 10/25/10]

Heck Said The 2009 Stimulus Bill “[Continued] To Grow The Deficit [And] Job-Killing Policies Of [The Obama] Administration And This Congress. “They want to continue to talk about how successful their stimulus bill has been. [Inaudible] we just shed another 125,000 jobs from the payrolls of this country in the month of June. That doesn’t sound like success to me; does it sound like a success to you? All it does is continue to grow the deficit- unsustainable deficits- and the job-killing policies of this administration and this Congress.” [YouTube, Heck at KXNT First Friday, 7/2/15]

Heck: I Will Not Support The 2011 American Jobs Act. “HECK: I want to be clear on my answers and I’ll tell you. I will not vote for the American Jobs Act as a package as it stands right now.” [YouTube, Heck at Summerlin Town Hall,9/28/11] (VIDEO)

·      The American Jobs Act Provided $35 Billion In Federal Aid To Retain Or Hire Teachers, Police Officers And Firefighters. “President Obama’s plan to break his $447 billion jobs bill into bite-sized pieces doesn’t seem to be enhancing the chances that legislation actually gets to his desk for his signature. The Senate blocked the first stand-alone measure from the president’s jobs bill in a 50-50 vote lateThursday night. The measure was aimed at providing states with $35 billion in federal aid to retain or hire teachers, police officers and firefighters.” [PBS Newshour, The Rundown, 10/21/11]

·      The American Jobs Act Would Invest Over $258 Million In Nevada, Which Would Have Supported Up To 3,600 Educator Jobs. The American Jobs Act would, “invest $35 billion to prevent layoffs of up to 280,000 teachers, while supporting the hiring of tens of thousands more and keeping cops and firefighters on the job. These funds would help states and localities avoid and reverse layoffs now, and will provide $258,300,000 in funds to Nevada to support up to 3,600 educator and first responder jobs.” [White House, 9/9/11]

·      The American Jobs Act Implemented Reforms To Unemployment Insurance That Could Have Helped Put Nevada’s 88,000 Long-Term Unemployed Workers Back To Work. The American Jobs Act included “the most sweeping reforms to the unemployment insurance (UI) system in 40 years help those without jobs transition to the workplace. This could help put the 88,000 long-term unemployed workers in Nevada back to work.” [White House, 9/9/11]

·      The American Jobs Act Included New Program That Could Have Placed 1,400 Low-Income Adults And 3,300 Low-Income Youth In Jobs in Nevada. The American Jobs Act included “a new Pathways Back to Work Fund to provide hundreds of thousands of low-income youth and adults with opportunities to work and to achieve needed training in growth industries. Pathways Back to Work could place 1,400 adults and 3,300 youths in jobs in Nevada.” [White House, 9/9/11]


Heck Voted To Exempt From The Prohibition Any Covered Depository Institution That Limits Its Security-Based And Other Swap Activities To Hedging And Other Similar Risk-Mitigation Activities. In October 2013, Heck voted for: “Passage of the bill that would amend a provision of the 2010 financial regulatory overhaul law that prohibits the federal bailout of swaps dealers or participants. The bill would exempt from the prohibition any covered depository institution that limits its security-based and other swap activities to hedging and other similar risk-mitigation activities. Non-structured and certain structured finance swap activities also would be exempt. Under the bill, insured depository institutions and uninsured U.S. branches of a foreign bank would be considered covered depository institutions.” The bill passed 292-122. [CQ, 10/30/13; HR992, Vote 569, 10/30/13]

·      Bill Rolled Back Major Elements Of The Dodd-Frank Financial Regulatory Bill. “The House of Representatives, with bipartisan support, passed legislation on Wednesday that would roll back a major element of the 2010 law intended to strengthen the nation’s financial regulations by allowing big banks like Citigroup and JPMorgan Chase to continue to handle most types of derivatives trades in house. The bill, which passed by a 292-122 vote, would repeal a requirement in the Dodd-Frank law that big banks ‘push out’ some derivatives trading into separate units that are not backed by the government’s insurance fund.” [New York Times, 10/30/13]

·      Heck Voted Against Clarifying That Swaps Dealer Bailout Bill Would Not Limit The Authority Of Financial Regulators To Examine A Covered Depository Institution’s Compliance With Laws Prohibiting Commodity Market Manipulation. In October 2013, Heck voted against: “Brownley, D-Calif., motion to recommit the bill to the House Financial Services Committee and report it back immediately with an amendment that would clarify that nothing in the bill would limit the authority of financial regulators to examine a covered depository institution’s compliance with laws prohibiting commodity market manipulation, particularly of oil and biofuel prices, or to limit the activities of covered depository institutions in such markets.” The motion failed 190-223. [CQ, 10/30/13; HR 992, Vote 568, 10/30/13]

A Swap Was A Type Of Securities Exchange, One Type, A Credit Default Swap, Transferred Risk From The Owner Of A Stock To The Buyer Of A Swap In Exchange For Period Payments. “Credit default swap: A swap designed to transfer credit risk, in effect a form of financial insurance. The buyer of the swap makes periodic payments to the seller in return for protection in the event of a default on a loan. […] Swap: An exchange of securities between two parties. For example, if a firm in one country has a lower fixed interest rate and one in another country has a lower floating interest rate, an interest rate swap could be mutually beneficial.” [BBC Magazine, 8/4/09]

Fortune Magazine: Credit Default Swaps “Played A Critical Role In The Unfolding Financial Crisis.” “As Congress wrestles with another bailout bill to try to contain the financial contagion, there’s a potential killer bug out there whose next movement can’t be predicted: the Credit Default Swap.  In just over a decade these privately traded derivatives contracts have ballooned from nothing into a $54.6 trillion market. CDS are the fastest-growing major type of financial derivatives. More important, they’ve played a critical role in the unfolding financial crisis. First, by ostensibly providing ‘insurance’ on risky mortgage bonds, they encouraged and enabled reckless behavior during the housing bubble.” [Fortune Magazine, 9/30/08]

Heck Voted To Create A Safe Harbor From ThePenalties Under Wall Street Reform For BanksThat Originate Non-Qualified Mortgages That Do Not Comply With The Ability-To-Repay Requirements. In November 2015, Heck voted for: “Passage of the bill that would create a safe harbor from the penalties under the Dodd-Frank Act for banks that originate non-qualified mortgages that do not comply with the ability-to-repay requirements, as long as the bank retains the mortgage in its own portfolio. The bill would also create safe harbor for mortgage originators (brokers) if the mortgage lender is a depository institution and intends to hold the mortgage for the life of the loan, and the originator tells the consumer that the lender will hold the mortgage for the life of the loan. The bill would also require that prepayment penalties comply with current statutory requirements. Further, the bill would provide safe harbor to balloon payment loans, as long as these loans meet all other qualified mortgage requirements. As amended, the bill would clarify that systemically important financial institutions (SIFIs) are excluded from the safe harbor provisions under the bill.” The bill passed 255-174. [CQ, 11/18/15; HR 1210, Vote 636, 11/18/15]

·      The Bill Would Roll Back Regulations For Mortgages That Were Created To Prevent The Bad Lending Practices That Led To The 2008 Financial Crisis – It Would Extend An Exemption To A Rule From Just Small And Rural Banks To All Banks. “The House passed legislation Wednesday that critics argue rolls back regulations for mortgages that were created to prevent the bad lending practices responsible for the financial crisis of 2008. The Portfolio Lending and Mortgage Access Act, which was introduced by Rep. Andy Barr (R-Ky.), passed by a 255-174 vote. The bill extends a federal exemption meant for small and rural banks to all banking institutions. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) issued regulations last year that require lenders to ensure a borrower’s ability to repay a loan in order to obtain a qualified mortgage status, which provides lenders a ‘safe harbor’ protection from federal penalties and lawsuits brought by borrowers who have defaulted on their loans. But the bureau created an exemption to allow small and rural banks to achieve that qualified mortgage status without following the ability-to-repay rule, which requires a borrower’s debt-to-income ratio to be 43 percent or less. Banking organizations, which support extending the exemption, argued that the rule was too restrictive and caused mid-size community bankers to decrease or eliminate their mortgage businesses.” [The Hill, 11/18/15]

Heck Voted Against Ensuring Regulations To Prevent Fraud In Pension And Retirement Savings Accounts Would Not Be Limited. In October 2013, Heck voted against: “Tierney, D-Mass., motion to recommit the bill to the House Education and Workforce Committee and Financial Services Committee and report it back immediately with an amendment that would clarify that nothing in the bill would limit the Labor secretary’s authority to issue regulations that would prevent fraud in pension and retirement savings accounts, to require financial service providers to disclose fees and charges when advising employers or employees on pension and retirement savings accounts, or to promote investment education and sound financial advice to employers and employees on pension and retirement savings accounts.” The motion was rejected 195-223. [CQ, 10/29/13; HR2374, Vote 566, 10/29/13]

Voiceover: His focus: Rebuilding the economy. Creating Jobs.

Text: Joe Heck.

Scrolling Text:Rebuilding The Economy. Creating Jobs.


Heck Voted To Block Bring Jobs Home Act To Eliminate Tax Incentives For Companies Moving Jobs Overseas. In July 2012, Heck voted for a: “Sessions, R-Texas, motion to order the previous question (thus ending debate and the possibility of amendment) on the rule (H Res 724) that would provide for House floor consideration of the bill to repeal the 2010 health care law.” “The Previous Question would amend the rule to allow for consideration of H.R. 5542 – To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to encourage domestic insourcing and discourage foreign outsourcing.” The motion was agreed to by 238-184.  [CQ, 7/10/12, H.R.5542, Vote 456, 7/10/12;112th Congress Previous Questions]

·      The Hill: The Bring Jobs Home Act “Would End Tax Breaks For Companies That Send Jobs Overseas.” “Senate Republicans blocked a bill that would end tax breaks for companies that send jobs overseas. On Wednesday, the Senate voted 54-42 to end debate on S. 2569, the Bring Jobs Home Act — 60 votes were needed to advance the measure. Sens. John Walsh (D-Mont.) and Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) introduced the bill, which would give companies incentives to bring jobs back to the United States, including a tax write-off for the relocating costs and an additional 20 percent credit. Currently, U.S. companies can deduct from their corporate taxes some expenses of moving facilities overseas. Democrats said 2.4 million jobs have been outsourced in the past 10 years.” [The Hill,7/30/14]


Heck Voted Against Barring Tax Benefits In Bill To Inverted Domestic Corporations And Against Extending Tax Provisions For Two Years. In July 2014, Heck voted against a: “Van Hollen, D-Md., motion to recommit the bill to the House Ways and Means Committee and report it back immediately with an amendment that would extend the tax provisions for two years, through December 2015. It also would bar the application of the tax benefits in the bill to inverted domestic corporations.” The motion was rejected by a 185-227 vote. [CQ, 7/17/14; motion to recommit H.R. 4719, Vote 431, 7/17/14]

Heck Voted Against Prohibiting Inverted Domestic Corporations Formed After May 8, 2014 From Using Special Bonus Depreciation Rules. In July 2014, Heck voted against the: “Neal, D-Mass., motion to recommit the bill to the House Ways and Means Committee and report it back immediately with an amendment that would prohibit inverted domestic corporations formed after May 8, 2014 from using special bonus depreciation rules. It would exempt such corporations that do a substantial amount of their business in its country of incorporation.” The motion was rejected by a 191-229 vote. [CQ,7/11/14; motion to recommit H.R. 4718, Vote 403,7/11/14]


Heck Voted To Allow Awarding Contracts To Corporations Chartered Or Incorporated In Bermuda Or The Cayman Islands That Were Previously Incorporated In The United States.In July 2014, Heck voted against the: “DeLauro, D-Conn., amendment that would bar the use of funds provided in the bill for awarding contracts to corporations chartered or incorporated in Bermuda or the Cayman Islands that were previously incorporated in the United States.” The amendment was adopted 221-200. [CQ, 7/10/14; H.Amdt.1012 to H.R. 4923, Vote 387, 7/10/14]

Heck Co-Sponsored Bill To Put A 5.35% Tax Rate On Companies That Brought Their Headquarters To U.S. After Being Headquartered Overseas. “It’s an area in which Nevada Rep. Shelley Berkley, a Democratic member of the tax-minded Ways and Means committee, seems to have developed a taste for straddling the party line, and she’s doing it again to encourage companies working overseas to bring their profits back to the U.S., and create jobs. […] Texas Republican Rep. Kevin Brady also has a repatriation proposal out there that would bring the tax rate on re-Americanized profits down to 5.25 percent, and he has six Democratic sponsors on his bill. Nevada Republican Rep. Joe Heck also signed on as a co-sponsor to Brady’s bill on Wednesday of this week, just one day after Bloomberg first reported the news of Berkley’s developing proposal.” [Las Vegas Sun, 7/29/11]

Heck Voted For The FY 2013 House Budget That Would “Nearly Eliminate U.S. Taxes On American Corporations’ Earnings From Overseas Operations.” “House Republicans, searching for an election-year message amid a muddled political and economic landscape, will introduce a 2013 budget Tuesday that cuts tax rates and provides for just two individual brackets of 10% and 25%. The budget would end the Alternative Minimum Tax, which originally was aimed at the wealthy but ensnares a growing number of middle-class taxpayers each year. The plan would nearly eliminate U.S. taxes on American corporations’ earnings from overseas operations.” Heck voted for the concurrent resolution that was adopted by a 228-191 vote. [Wall Street Journal, 3/20/12; CQ, 3/29/12; H.Con. Res. 112, Vote 151, 3/29/12]

·      The Budget Called For A “Territorial” Tax System Where U.S. Companies Would Only Pay Taxes On Income Earned In The United States.“It calls for an overhaul of the tax code, under which the alternative minimum tax would be repealed, the six current individual income tax brackets would be consolidated into two, tax credits and deductions would be eliminated or curtailed, and the corporate tax code modified to reduce the top rate to 25 percent from 35 percent and converted into a ‘territorial’ tax system where U.S. companies would pay tax only on income earned in the United States.” [CQ, 3/29/12]

Reuters: “A Territorial System Would Prompt U.S. Companies To Shift Offshore Even More Income Than They Already Do And Jobs Would Follow, Worsening Unemployment And The Economy, Critics Say.” [Reuters, 9/14/11]

Citizens For Tax Justice: “Giving Corporations A Permanent Tax Exemption For Their Purported Offshore Profits Will Make Things Much Worse.” ‘Giving corporations a permanent tax exemption for their purported offshore profits will make things much worse. The only real solution is for Congress to do the opposite’ and repeal foreign income deferral, said Bob McIntyre, director of Citizens for Tax Justice, a left-leaning tax watchdog group.” [Reuters, 9/14/11]

Economist Kim Clausing: A Territorial Tax System “Would Significantly Increase Incentives For U.S. Firms To Move Economic Activity Abroad.” “By any measure, the U.S. system of taxing multinational corporations is broken. Because corporations can postpone paying U.S. taxes on foreign profits indefinitely as long as they keep those profits abroad, the current system encourages firms to move factories and jobs to low-tax destinations and to keep their profits reinvested abroad. Because the corporate tax code is full of loopholes that allow firms to book income from U.S. operations as if it came from operations in low-tax countries, corporate tax revenues are significantly reduced. I recently estimated that income shifting by multinational firms costs the treasury about $90 billion a year. That shifting of economic activity abroad has real costs for American workers. Because nearly everyone agrees that the system is broken, debates over reform are intensifying. Two main approaches have emerged… Others are pushing a different approach. They would move the United States to a territorial system in which the foreign income of U.S. multinational corporations is completely exempt from U.S. taxation. That approach would significantly increase incentives for U.S. firms to move economic activity abroad. U.S. tax payments for the income from foreign operations of U.S. multinational corporations would not simply be deferred; they would be completely erased. That would eliminate constraints on shifting income abroad.” [Kimberly A. Clausing, A Challenging Time for International Tax Policy, Tax Notes, 7/16/12]


Economist Kim Clausing: Under A Territorial Tax System, The 800,000 Jobs Created Overseas “Could Displace Jobs At Home.” “Under a pure territorial tax system, the tax incentive to locate jobs in low-tax countries would increase significantly, which I calculate would increase employment in low-tax countries by about 800,000 jobs… If U.S. unemployment rates are low, jobs abroad need not displace jobs at home, although the composition of jobs may change (and multinational corporate jobs are often good, high-wage jobs). In this economy, however, those new, low-tax-country jobs could displace jobs at home. With high unemployment rates, why further tilt the playing field in favor of jobs in low-tax countries? And given today’s budget climate, avoiding further erosion of the corporate tax base should be a priority.” [Kimberly A. Clausing, A Challenging Time for International Tax Policy, Tax Notes, 7/16/12]


Congressman Heck Opposed Raising The Minimum Wage. “Heck said the unemployment and under­employment rates are too high to raise the minimum wage. ‘What they need is a job,’ Heck said.’” [Las Vegas Review-Journal, 10/16/14]

Congressman Heck On Minimum Wage: “The Last Thing Our Economy Needs Is Another Mandate From Washington That Will Cost Us Jobs. Raising The Minimum Wage Will Not Increase Jobs.” In October 2014 Elko Daily Free Press column, Thomas Mitchell wrote, “Asked about the minimum wage issue after his Democratic opponent came out in favor of raising it not to $10.10 but to $15, Republican Rep. Joe Heck, whose 3rd Congressional District covers the southernmost reaches of the state, replied, ‘The last thing our economy needs is another mandate from Washington that will cost us jobs. Raising the minimum wage will not increase jobs, expand opportunity, or be a silver bullet to reduce poverty. Instead, it will cost mainly young and low-skilled workers the chance to get a start in the working world and learn critical job skills that will help them transition to more gainful employment.’” [Elko Daily Free Press, Thomas Mitchell Column, 10/22/14]

Las Vegas Review-Journal Editorial: “Heck Has Largely Ignored Efforts To Raise Wages For Working People.” In April 2014, Las Vegas Review-Journal editorial board wrote, “As our unemployment numbers lower and our economy recovers, income inequality should be decreasing — not growing exponentially — and yet for some of our elected leaders, that is simply not a priority. Instead of building on the progress and momentum to raise wages that Nevada voters built up nearly eight years ago, Sen. Dean Heller declared the minimum wage issue ‘solved’ and Rep. Joe Heck has largely ignored efforts to raise wages for working people. As representatives of Nevada, Sen. Heller and Rep. Heck should be actively supporting what the majority of Nevadans, and the majority of Americans, are in favor of — a federal minimum wage of $10.10 an hour.” [Editorial, Las Vegas Review-Journal, 4/29/14]

Heck Voted To Give The Federal Government Fast Track Authority To Negotiate Trade Deals.“The House advanced a measure that would give President Barack Obama ‘fast track’ authority to negotiate trade deals, a week after a similar effort was derailed by Democrats aligned with organized labor. […] Reps. Mark Amodei, Cresent Hardy and Joe Heck, all R-Nev., voted for it. Rep. Dina Titus, D-Nev., voted against it.” [CQ, 6/18/15; H.Res. 321, Vote 374, 6/18/15; Las Vegas Review-Journal,6/20/15]

Heck Voted For House Floor Consideration Of The Senate Amendment To TPA And TAA Legislation And Of The Senate Amendments To A Customs Enforcement Measure. In June 2015, Heck voted for the: “Adoption of the rule (H Res 305) that would provide for House floor consideration of the Senate amendment to a package (HR 1314) of Trade Promotion Authority and Trade Adjustment Assistance legislation and provide for floor consideration of the Senate amendments to a customs enforcement measure (HR 644).” The rule was adopted 217-212. [CQ,6/11/15; H.Res. 305 to HR 644 & HR 1314, Vote 359, 6/11/15]

Heck Voted To Authorize Trade Promotion Authority For Congressional Consideration Of Legislation To Implement U.S. Trade Agreements. In June 2015, Heck voted for: “Division III of the Ryan, R-Wis., motion to concur in the Senate amendment to the bill that would provide Trade Promotion Authority for trade agreements negotiated by the administration, under which they would be considered by Congress under expedited procedures without amendment, and would extend Trade Adjustment Assistance programs to help displaced U.S. workers. The portion of the Senate amendment covered by the division would authorize special ‘trade promotion authority’ for congressional consideration of legislation to implement U.S. trade agreements, under which such agreements would be considered in Congress under an expedited process and would be subject to simple up-or-down votes so they could not be amended. The expedited authority would apply to trade agreements entered into before July 1, 2018, although the bill would allow for extensions.” The motion was agreed to 219-211. [CQ,6/12/15; H.R.1314, Vote 362, 6/12/15]

Heck Voted To Allow Trade Promotion Authority To Be Added To Another Bill As An Amendment.  In June 2015, Heck voted for the: “Adoption of the rule (H Res 321) that would make in order a motion to concur in the Senate amendment, with an amendment, to the bill (HR 2146) that would grant Trade Promotion Authority, under which implementing legislation for trade agreements negotiated by the administration would be considered by congress under expedited procedures and could not be amended.” The rule was adopted by a vote of 244-181. [CQ, 6/18/15; H.Res. 321, Vote 373, 6/18/15]


Heck Voted Against Giving Trade Adjustment Assistance To U.S. Workers Harmed By Trade Agreements. In June 2015, Heck voted against: “Ryan, R-Wis., motion to concur in the Senate amendment to the House amendment to the Senate amendment to the bill that would extend Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) programs that help U.S. workers harmed by trade agreements until 2021 and the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) through FY 2025. The bill would also extend the HOPE and HELP programs for products from Haiti, retroactively renew and extend, through 2017, the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP), strengthen U.S. anti-dumping law, and expand opportunities for U.S. businesses in recreational performance footwear and outerwear.” The motion agreed to by a vote of 286-138. [CQ,6/25/15; H.R. 1295, Vote 388, 6/25/15]

Heck Voted Against Trade Adjustment Assistance For Workers Laid Off Because Of Trade Deals. In June 2015, Heck voted against: “Division II of the Ryan, R-Wis., motion to concur in the Senate amendment to the bill that would provide Trade Promotion Authority for trade agreements negotiated by the administration, under which they would be considered by Congress under expedited procedures without amendment, and would extend Trade Adjustment Assistance programs to help displaced U.S. workers. The portion of the Senate amendment covered by the division would reauthorize, through June 30, 2021, trade adjustment assistance programs and alternative trade adjustment assistance for workers laid off because of the impact of foreign competition. Offsets would include an extension of certain customs fees and prevention of certain taxpayers with high levels of foreign income from receiving the refundable portion of the child tax credit.” The motion was rejected 126-302. [CQ,6/12/15; H.R.1314, Vote 361, 6/12/15]

Voiceover: Joe Heck. He stands his ground for you.

Text: Joe Heck. Standing His Ground For You.


Cortez Masto Criticized Joe Heck As “Part Of The Mess” In Washington And Attacked Him For His Opposition To Increasing The Minimum Wage. “Cortez Masto said Republican opponent U.S. Rep. Joe Heck is ‘part of the mess’ in Washington, adding she differs with him on a variety of issues, such as raising the federal minimum wage. Heck has opposed increasing it, Cortez Masto supports increasing it.” [Las Vegas Review-Journal, 5/27/16]

Cortez Masto Aligned Herself With Gov. Sandoval On Education Funding And Criticizing Rep. Heck For Opposing Bipartisan Increase In Education Funding. “In a press re­lease pre­view­ing her speech to the Wo­men’s Cham­ber of Com­merce in Las Ve­gas, former Nevada At­tor­ney Gen­er­al Cath­er­ine Cortez Masto’s (D) cam­paign aligned her­self with Gov. Bri­an San­dov­al ® on edu­ca­tion fund­ing. The press re­lease cri­ti­cized Masto’s op­pon­ent, Rep. Joe Heck (R-03), for op­pos­ing San­dov­al’s ‘bi­par­tis­an in­crease in edu­ca­tion fund­ing,’ then goes on to say that Masto sup­ports the gov­ernor’s plan.” [National Journal, 1/15/16]

Cortez Masto Led 35 AGs On With Letter Urging Obama Administration & Congressional Leaders To Support Wide-Ranging Immigration Reforms. In April 2013, 8 News Now reported, “Catherine Cortez Masto is leading a group of 35 other attorneys general to send a letter to federal officials. The group is hoping Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano.. U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and other congressional leaders will support wide- ranging reforms. While they are hoping for their support.. They understand immigration policies are the responsibility of the federal government.” [KLAS, 4/9/13]

Cortez Masto Wanted To Keep The Affordable Care Act And Fix It, While Heck Wants To Repeal It. “On health care, Cortez Masto wants to keep the Affordable Care Act and fix it. Heck wants to repeal it and replace it. ‘What the health care bill does is get people access to health insurance, but not health care,’ Heck said. He wants to keep provisions that prevent insurance company abuses. ‘Nobody should be dumped from their policy the day after they get cancer or non-renewed because now the insurance company thinks they’re too old,’ he says.” [KSNV, 5/04/16]

Voiceover: U.S. Chamber of Commerce is responsible for the content of this advertising.

Text: Paid for by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.


U.S. Chamber Of Commerce: The Paycheck Fairness Act “Will Only Empower Plaintiff Lawyers And Get Courts Involved In Setting Salaries.” “Workforce discrimination still exists, and those who engage in it should be held accountable. However, the Equal Pay Act, signed into law in 1963, and other federal and state laws are in place to outlaw paying women lower wages for the same job. The Paycheck Fairness Act being debated in the Senate will only empower plaintiff lawyers and get courts involved in setting salaries. […] The bill would take compensation decisions away from employers and place ‘judges and juries in the human resources offices of American businesses.’” [U.S. Chamber of Commerce, 4/8/14]

U.S. Chamber Of Commerce Opposed The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. “The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the world’s largest business federation representing more than three million businesses and organizations of every size, sector, and region, urges you to oppose S. 181, the ‘Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act.’ This bill would amend Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and several other civil rights laws by effectively abolishing the statute of limitations for the vast majority of discrimination cases.” [U.S. Chamber of Commerce, 1/13/09]

U.S. Chamber Of Commerce Official Called The Minimum Wage “Counterproductive,” Saying It “Doesn’t Help.” “Yeah, you know, I think as a matter of economic theory, we would probably agree with you. It doesn’t help to have the government setting wage rates. It is ultimately counterproductive. It may make people feel good politically, but it does not help job growth. On the other side of the coin, you have to understand practical politics. Which is, you know, some level of minimum wage is very popular and is something that we are going to have to get used to living with on an on going basis, because it’s a part of our system.” [Think Progress, 1/11/11]

US Chamber Touted “Leading The Fight Against… Unions’ Ability To Organize.” “From pushing back on flawed OSHA proposed regulations, to leading the fight against Department of Labor and NLRB actions that would enhance unions’ ability to organize, to exposing the unions’ role in the efforts to impose a $15 ‘living wage,’ the Chamber is the leading employer voice on matters affecting workplace policy and these divisions of the Chamber ensure that the employer view will be well represented.” [US Chamber of Commerce Issues Page, accessed 09/19/14]

U.S. Chamber Of Commerce Said The DISCLOSE Act Is A “Partisan Effort To Silence Critics And Gain Political Advantage.” “U.S. Chamber of Commerce President and CEO Thomas J. Donohue issued the following statement today in response to the House Administration Committee’s markup of the so-called ‘DISCLOSE Act:’ ‘The DISCLOSE Act is an unconstitutional attempt to silence free speech and a desperate attempt by Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Chris Van Hollen and the immediate past chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, Senator Chuck Schumer, to gain political advantage in the 2010 elections.’” [U.S. Chamber of Commerce, 5/19/10]


Show more