“Sex Ed” Fallon
May 28th, 2008 at 08:26am Geraldine
Although Ed Fallon has been painted as unelectable for a variety of reasons, including his support for Ralph Nader in 2000, what really makes him vulnerable is his repeated votes to protect sex offenders versus the general public. Fallon was the only state representative to vote against a bill that banned sex offenders from living within 2000 feet of a school or day care center, Fallon was the only member of the Iowa House to voted against against extending the statute of limitations for prosecuting child sex abuse, Fallon was the only member of the Iowa House to vote against increased funding to monitor sex offenders and Fallon also voted against tougher penalties against people who solicit children to commit a sex act. Fallon even cast the sole vote against making bestiality a crime!
This repeated pattern of voting against public safety raises grave questions about Fallon’s judgment. While some Democrats have been painted as “soft on crime” in campaigns in the past, it is apparent from Ed Fallon’s record that he is one of the few who is genuinely soft on crime and in a highly disturbing way. This is not about someone who favors rehabilitating prisoners, Ed Fallon wants sex offenders to be able to avoid prosecution for their crimes. This is not someone who thinks non-violent offenders shouldn’t be in jail, Ed Fallon thinks child molesters shouldn’t be imprisoned. Not to mention that although Ed Fallon crusades against hog lots, “Sex Ed” seems to think that sexually assaulting animals is perfectly fine.
“Sex Ed” Fallon has a record that is disturbingly out of touch with most people’s basic values. He finds campaign finance reforms promoted by Paul Wellstone and Russ Feingold to be appalling but thinks it’s perfectly fine to have sex with sheep. He thinks its acceptable to make up statements from the FEC but it’s wrong to lock away people convicted of molesting children. While Fallon may boast a degree in Religious Studies, it’s clear that he didn’t take too many courses in morality.
Related Posts
- Clinton, Feingold Call Fallon
- Ed Fallon Displays Agricultural Expertise
- Fallon Sleaze Hurts Fundraising
- Is Fallon Loyal To The Party?
- Wellstone and Feingold for Closing Fallon Loophole
Entry Filed under: Campaign 2008, US House, Leonard Boswell
Related Searches: campaign finance reforms, ed fallon, child sex abuse, paul wellstone, ralph nader
4 Comments Add your own
1. noneed4thneed | May 28th, 2008 at 1:42 pm
The sex offender law has proven to be a horrible law. It passed because every lawmaker, except for Fallon, was scared to death of being labeled soft on crime. County Attorneys across the state have said the law has made it more difficult to monitor and capture sex offenders. Ed Fallon had the foresight to see this years ago.
2. Dean | May 28th, 2008 at 8:02 pm
“While Iowa Progress’s coverage of the 3rd District has been entirely factual and every statement made has been true, it is still clear that some posts have become increasingly snarky and vitriolic. This is highly regrettable.”
It doesn’t mean much to apologize for the manner this blog has been written if you turn right around and take it way over the top again. As I’ve said before, this blog is the epitome of dirty politics and is just plain bad journalism.
3. George K | May 29th, 2008 at 11:59 am
You are certainly right about the that particular sex offenders law. But I just can’t see a good explanation for why someone would vote against bestiality. I am sure Fallon did so for good reason but the justification for it is eluding me.
4. desmoinesdem | June 12th, 2008 at 4:40 pm
I wasn’t living in Iowa at the time, but what I have heard is that Fallon thought there would be no practical way to enforce the bestiality law.
This post is highly deceptive regarding the sex offender residency restriction. Prosecutors and children’s advocates agree that these laws do not work.
It is false to claim that “Ed Fallon wants sex offenders to be able to avoid prosecution for their crimes.” The bill he voted against was about restricting where sex offenders can live, not about whether they should be prosecuted.
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed