Slog - The Stranger's Blog

Line Out

The Music Blog

« Renters being routed? | Speaking of terrible writing..... »

Wednesday, July 12, 2006

Cantwell’s PAC Pledge Hedge

Posted by on July 12 at 11:59 AM

The State GOP did a good & overdue hit piece on Cantwell yesterday. They point out that despite Cantwell’s no PAC $$$ pledge, she does in fact, get help—through the Democratic Party—from PACs. For example, Washington GOP Chair Diane Tebelius points out that: “Cantwell’s recent TV ad was funded by the Washington State Democratic Central Committee which received over $177,000 dollars in PAC money in the current 2005-2006 cycle.”

Tebelius also points out that the Democrat Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) sends money to the state party organizations on behalf of candidates. Tebelius says in the GOP press release: “Voters need to know how much of the $3 million dollars of PAC money taken by the DSCC in 2006 is now being used by the Cantwell campaign?”

I think these are fair questions, given that Cantwell makes a big deal about not accepting PAC money.

Although, one of Tebelius’s bombs backfires. Her press release says: “While Cantwell Accepts No Money From AT&T’s PAC, She does accept donations From AT&T’s executives. Two vice presidents for congressional affairs at AT&T gave a total of $3,500. A lobbyist who lists AT&T as a client gave an additional $3,250. Cantwell serves on the Senate Commerce Committee, which is poised to take up legislation vital to the telecommunications industry.

It’s true that Cantwell is on the Commerce Committee—which took up the recent omnibus Telecom bill. Perhaps, the most heated controversy in that bill was the net neutrality amendment which AT&T lobbied against. (Indeed, in addition to its own lobbying, AT&T even funded a separate astroturf lobbying group called Hands Off the Internet, to kill the net neutrality amendment. That’s how important offing this amendment was to AT&T.) Anyway, the point is: Cantwell voted for the amendment…that is: Against AT&T. Sorry, Diane.

Although, again, I do think Tebelius’s first two questions are good ones. I’ve got a call into the Cantwell people to see what they say.


CommentsRSS icon

Amazing how you want Cantwell to be ethically pure and empty her gun of bullets in a definitely dirty gunfight where the opposition even used backdated Safeco stock options to finance their candidate.

So, do you push puppies on to train tracks as well? Or tell passing strangers that Big Dig company-made tunnels underwater are 'safe'?

So... um... it's dirty for Cantwell to accept help from the Democratic party because she personally took a no PAC pledge, but it's okay for McGavick to take PAC money directly?

Rather than getting credit for reducing her reliance on PACs she gets punished.

She only gets punished (or criticized anyway) for breaking her own pledge.

Shouldn't she be held accountable to her pledge?

Seriously.

Shouldn't people be accountable for what they say or claim?

Just because he pointed this out doesn't mean it's necessarily a big deal but it is interesting.

So, help me out. Did she pledge to take no PAC money, or to take no money from anyone who takes PAC money? Perhaps she also pledged to take no PAC money, but some of the people who give her money ALSO GIVE TO PACS!!! Eek!


Seriously, Josh, if it's a slow news day just go have a beer. You don't have to dig through Tebelius' halfass press releases and give oxygen to a non-story. This is just lazy.


So she, like every candidate on the face of the planet, accepts money from her Party's various committees, and this is the big scandal? I assume you use your head, but to let Tebelius lead you around on this one is frankly a little embarrassing. This will never, ever, in a thousand campaign cycles, get traction as a "scandal", except among the GOP mouth-breathing loyalists whose eyes bleed at the sight of a Democrat. You know, like Sound Politics, which should be in a suitable lather.....

....now.

The news here is that there's no news here.

All these questions were asked and answered in 2000 (likewise in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005).

The questions don't change. The answers don't change. And journo's pavlovian response to GOP chase-the-stick routines doesn't change.

I think it is interesting how people bring up the SAFECO stock on McGavick but Cantwell's seat was bought by Real Networks. Let's not forget Cantwell is a big business pro-war Democrat who will do anything to win- even lie and take PAC money.

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).