Setting the Record Straight

Washington special interest money is pouring into North Jersey and pushing misleading attacks on Jay Webber and his record. This district is a "must win" for Nancy Pelosi and liberal leaders in DC in order to take control of the House. They're not holding anything back and they'll do and say anything to win. The Webber campaign is offering responses here to make sure voters have the whole truth.


FIB: Mikie Sherrill claims Jay Webber supports the SALT deduction cap. 

(“Sherrill Slams Congressional Plan To Make SALT Cap Permanent,” Insider NJ, 9/7/2018)

FACT: Jay Webber is opposed to the SALT deduction cap, but supports the tax reform package as a whole because it provides New Jersey families real tax relief. 

Jay has been open about his opposition to the SALT deduction cap and will work to overhaul that portion of the tax bill in Washington. (Simone Pathe, “New Jersey House Race Becomes Ground Zero for Tax Debate,” Roll Call, 8/1/2018)

Even with the SALT deduction cap, Jay still supports tax reform because it is a net benefit for New Jersey families. The Heritage Foundation estimates families in New Jersey’s 11thDistrict will save $4,153 in 2018 (“Tax Cuts in Every Congressional District in Every State,” Heritage Foundation, 6/23/2018); the House Ways and Means Committee estimates an average savings of $6,040 (“By the Numbers: Tax Cuts and Jobs Act Delivers Tax Cuts for Families in Every Congressional District,” House Ways and Means Committee, 12/21/2017).  

That relief has been a driver of the robust economic growth our nation is enjoying, and that is helping Americans live more prosperous, confident lives.  Talking about only one portion of a tax package that has many different facets, as Mikie Sherrill does, is myopic and misleading.

There is only one candidate in the race who will be able to win any relief on the SALT deduction cap in the next Congress and in negotiations with the President, and that’s Jay.  A Democrat in the minority, or even a Democrat-controlled House of Representatives, will not gain any ground on this policy priority.


FIB: Mikie Sherrill claims that Jay Webber voted against “equal pay for equal work” in New Jersey. 

(“Sherill calls out Webber on Equal Pay Vote,” New Jersey Globe, 3/26/2018)

FACT:  Jay supports equal pay for equal work, plain and simple.

Equal pay for equal work has been the law of the land in New Jersey for decades, and as a lawyer, Mikie knows it.  The legislation Mikie cites to make this false attack was deeply flawed and a giveaway to special interests.  Even the New Jersey Law Journal said it was a bad bill and expressed concern that it will mostly benefit lawyers. (‘Equal Pay Act’ is a Misnomer,” New Jersey Law Journal, 6/4/2018)

The husband of a Harvard-trained lawyer and father to four daughters, Jay believes that the law should protect women from discrimination in the workplace in the form of unequal wages for performing the same work.  In fact, an attorney himself, Jay dedicates much of his professional life representing women who have been treated unfairly in the workplace.

The recent bill that Jay voted against called the “Equal Pay Act” actually called for equal pay for “substantially similar” work. As noted by the New Jersey Law Journal’s Editorial Board, this bill would likely “bestow benefits largely on the lawyers litigating its meaning,” rather than individuals in the workforce who need protection. The New Jersey Law Journal goes on to explain the bill passed will simply “thrust New Jersey businesses into a morass of statistics and litigation,” and does nothing to actually add to the important cause of providing equal pay for equal work.  And in addition to distracting from that important goal, the law will cost New Jersey employers – women-owned businesses included -- millions of dollars in unnecessary settlements and litigation costs.  That will be money those employers cannot use to hire new employees or raise the wages of their existing workforce.  (“‘Equal Pay Act’ is a Misnomer,” New Jersey Law Journal, 6/4/2018)


FIB: Mikie Sherrill claims Jay Webber voted against gun bans for domestic abusers.

FACT:  Jay stood strong for victims of domestic abuse and insisted on tougher penalties for those who use guns in the commission of their crimes.  Jay voted YES to the best and right bill on surrender of firearms by domestic abusers.

In the State Legislature, some Democrats pushed a bill that gained no new ground for domestic violence victims, but rather codified existing judicial practice and was redundant of federal law. Rather than voting for a bill that did not advance the cause of safety for victims of domestic violence, Jay voted No, so that the sponsors of the bill eventually agreed to a measure with real teeth.  Jay supported the bill that eventually became law and limited gun access for domestic violence offenders AND increased criminal penalties for offenses, including the maximum sentence for repeat offenders. (Matt Arco, “Christie signs bill limiting gun access for domestic violence offenders,” The Star-Ledger, 1/9/17)

Former U.S. Rep. Gabby Giffords applauded Jay’s bipartisan approach.  “Today, the Garden State became a safer place to live,” Giffords and her husband, Mark Kelly, co-founders of Americans for Responsible Solutions, said in a statement.  “This is a real victory for the kind of common sense and bipartisanship that our country needs a lot more of[.]” (Matt Arco, “Christie signs bill limiting gun access for domestic violence offenders,” The Star-Ledger, 1/9/17)


FIB: Mikie Sherrill claims Jay Webber supports Conversion Therapy.

FACT: Jay Webber is opposed to anything that would harm our children. Jay believes that in this country, people have the right to be who they want to be and they have the right to live the way they want to live.

The harmful practices often referenced when discussing Conversion Therapy aren’t taking place with licensed therapists. Any bill to stop conversations between licensed therapists and their patients would not have protected children from any abusive practices being performed by those who are unlicensed. Instead, it would have legislated what a licensed therapist can and cannot say with a patient. Jay believed this would have been government overreach gone too far, and it would not have actually solved the problem lawmakers sought to address.  

Jay simply believes it would have been bad policy for the government to interfere in conversations between licensed therapists and their patients.

The liberal Star Ledger Editorial Board agreed with Jay, not once, but twice. On October 8, 2012, the Star Ledger Editorial Board argued against the ban saying “lawmakers should stay out of psychotherapy. On politically charged issues such as this, they’re particularly prone to mistakes.” Again, on March 22, 2013, the board wrote against the ban saying “lawmakers should vote against this well-intentioned bill. Because the truth is, it won’t have much effect on the fringe practice of this therapy. And what it will do is set a dangerous precedent.”