Uncategorized

Why are right-wing attack groups afraid to say who paid for their big media buy?

One of the more interesting developments in state political world last week was the news that right-wing groups behind the big media buy that attacked Governor Perdue and misleadingly defended the reactionary, teacher-slashing 2012 state budget need to disclose who paid for the ad campaign. Good government watchdog Bob Hall of Democracy NC has called the matter to the attention of the State Board of Elections. A review of the law makes it clear that Hall is right.

The dispute centers on whether Governor Perdue — a target of the ads — meets the definition of “candidate.” Here is the relevant statutory provision:

“(4)        The term “candidate” means any individual who, with respect to a public office listed in G.S. 163?278.6(18), has taken positive action for the purpose of bringing about that individual’s nomination or election to public office. Examples of positive action include:

a.         Filing a notice of candidacy or a petition requesting to be a candidate,

b.         Being certified as a nominee of a political party for a vacancy,

c.         Otherwise qualifying as a candidate in a manner authorized by law,

d.         Making a public announcement of a definite intent to run for public office in a particular election, or

e.         Receiving funds or making payments or giving the consent for anyone else to receive funds or transfer anything of value for the purpose of bringing about that individual’s nomination or election to office. Transferring anything of value includes incurring an obligation to transfer anything of value.

Status as a candidate for the purpose of this Article continues if the individual is receiving contributions to repay loans or cover a deficit or is making expenditures to satisfy obligations from an election already held. Special definitions of “candidate” and “candidate campaign committee” that apply only in Part 1A of this Article are set forth in G.S. 163?278.38Z.

Since Governor Perdue is still receiving money and paying off old debt, she clearly meets the definition.  So what does this mean? It means that the recent AFP/Civitas attacks clearly amount to “electioneering communications.”  Here’s the definition of those:

 “8j)       The term “electioneering communication” means any broadcast, cable, or satellite communication, or mass mailing, or telephone bank that has all the following characteristics:

a.         Refers to a clearly identified candidate for elected office.

b.         Is aired or transmitted within 60 days of the time set for absentee voting to begin pursuant to G.S. 163?227.2 in an election for that office.

c.         May be received by either:

1.         50,000 or more individuals in the State in an election for statewide office or 7,500 or more individuals in any other election if in the form of broadcast, cable, or satellite communication.

2.         20,000 or more households, cumulative per election, in a statewide election or 2,500 households, cumulative per election, in any other election if in the form of mass mailing or telephone bank.”

So what does this mean? All it means is that AFP and Civitas have to tell us who forked over the half-million bucks to run the ads. You’d think it wouldn’t be that big of a deal — I mean we probably have a pretty good idea, right? But, of course, look for the AFP/Civitasers to stonewall the whole thing as long as possible. God forbid that they publicly acknowledge what we’ve all long known about who foots the bill in the right-wing-overse.

 

 

2 Comments


  1. gregflynn

    April 2, 2012 at 10:57 am

    So ironic that Civitas runs a feature called Carolina Transparency but won’t disclose who is funding the media campaign they co-sponsor. It should be renamed Carolina Translucency.

  2. James

    April 2, 2012 at 1:37 pm

    Or Carolina Opaquity

Check Also

Editorial: GOP budget proposal is “monument to bad management”

This morning’s Capitol Broadcasting Company editorial on WRAL.com ...

Top Stories from NCPW

  • News
  • Commentary

More than a month after a deadline to correct faulty campaign finance reports, N.C. Sen. Ralph Hise [...]

Even before he dropped the gavel on the Senate Finance Committee meeting, Sen. Jerry Tillman, a noto [...]

The $23 billion budget deal speeding through the N.C. General Assembly this week includes a platoon [...]

Royal Diadem Jewelers in Greensboro sets itself apart in a number of small ways - fast and friendly [...]

The final budget that lawmakers have proposed fails to strengthen the foundation of North Carolina’s [...]

Most of the initial headlines about the final budget agreement announced Monday afternoon by legisla [...]

Unexplained, backroom maneuver would rob already underfunded anti-poverty program There’s no denying [...]

Women and their access to health care has been in the news these past few months, as the plan to rep [...]

Featured | Special Projects

Trump + North Carolina
In dozens of vitally important areas, policy decisions of the Trump administration are dramatically affecting and altering the lives of North Carolinians. This growing collection of stories summarizes and critiques many of the most important decisions and their impacts.
Read more


HB2 - The continuing controversy
Policy Watch’s comprehensive coverage of North Carolina’s sweeping anti-LGBT law.
Read more