- Schaffer vs. Udall
- View From A Height
- Thinking Right
- Mt. Virtus
- Rocky Mountain Right
- Slapstick Politics
- Daily Blogster
- Hugh Hewitt
- Hot Air
- Fox News
- Real Clear Politics
- Rocky Mountain News
- Denver Post
- Debka Files
- Talking Points Memo
The Senate Race
Rocky Mountain Alliance of Blogs, 2.0
My personal musings about anything that gets on my radar screen--heavily dominated by politics.
|The Democrats Cheated?!? Say It Ain't So!|
Prompted by a press release from the office of Ken Lambert, I did a quick google search and found this:
A Democratic political committee which compared a 2004 Republican House candidate to the "smarmy" Eddie Haskell on Leave it to Beaver was recently fined $36,000 - by far the largest levy in Colorado political history. . .
The fine was levied by Administrative Law Judge Matthew Norwood against the Alliance for Colorado Families, which raised almost $1 million during last year's campaigns from Tim Gill, Pat Stryker and other wealthy Democrats. . .
After Lambert lost, the El Paso County GOP chairman sued Alliance for Colorado's Families on his behalf, noting that its contributors gave far more than the $500 individual limit on gifts to political committees.
The alliance, a "527" group, claimed it wasn't really a political committee because its major purpose wasn't taking sides on candidates.
But, said the judge, according to Colorado law a political committee is a group that's accepted or made made expenditures of more than $200 to back or attack a candidate.
And the alliance clearly had.
I would hope that this would be just the first in many such suits against the Alliance. In my own district, Jessica Corry was hammered by (by my count) 5 full-color, glossy mailings which played pretty loosely with the facts, and were clearly designed to champion her defeat. I don't have any idea how much such mailings cost, but they should be substantial enough to warrant a noticable judgment against the Alliance. And, at any rate, it isn't about the fine--that's pretty much pocket change to Rutt Bridges--but multiple findings of campaign law violations should make a fairly forceful point to the Colorado electorate next time around.
I would also hope that the state GOP uses this ruling, and those that follow, as a powerful weapon in the next election campaign. Something along the lines of "What does it say about this shadow committee that it works exclusively--AND ILLEGALLY--on behalf of Democrats? What does it say about Democrats that they need illegal help to but elections?"