What's this Blog About?

Politics in Wisconsin as they roll up to every level... and some other thoughts that may cross my mind are explored here from my lefty point of view. My values shape my opinions. You'll always find them in here. Let's have some fun exploring why Liberal values are American values!

Your comments are both welcome and encouraged!
(The watercolor is called Magnolia Tree for Momma, by Audrey Crawford)

Tuesday, November 14, 2006

Idiot on Blog May Have Confessed to Federal Election Crime by Van Hollen Campaign

Go to this conservative site:

Read the comment by dailytake.

This whole story started as a rumor that Van Hollen dropped last minute flyers all over Dane that said in effect, you can vote for Doyle, but while you're doing that vote for me instead of Falk.

The rumor was confirmed by the Van Hollen campaign in the comments at Ask Me Later.

Cardinal Election Campaign Rule #1:

The day before an election, Don't Do GOTV For Your Opponents!!!

This tactic may have won Van Hollen a job, but poor Green was left out in the cold with a whole new crop of voters who didn't like him reminded that they needed to vote the night before the election. If I was a repug for Green, I'd be enraged! This is flat out a self-serving hanging of the Green campaign by the Van Hollen folks!!!

Now here's where dailytake's comments get interesting... He says "we targeted Doyle donors...". The only way he could have known for sure that they were "Doyle donors", was to pull the Campaign Finance Report. Later on, he says "where we saw Doyle lawn signs". Did this guy just slip on the facts? Here's another interesting point, how hard would it be to pull the list of Doyle/Lautenschlager donors and cross reference them for a drop list? My guess is THAT list is about 1,000 names... So did he pull the CFR's or did they just randomly drop 1,000 flyers on doors with Doyle lawn signs? If I was a campaign strategist, the point of the latter would be useless...

It may be a Federal crime to use a campaign finance report of donors to campaign for an opponent unless you are using the report to correct an errant statement by the opposition.


The question mark is, does soliciting votes using an opponent's donor report without actually using a message to correct a wrong by your opponent constitute a direct solicitation? I'm not an attorney, but this sounds like a really close line that has been touched on here and I'm curious if anyone knows anymore about this type of law.

Anyone out here have any idea if I'm on to something or just misinterpreting???

In fact, the law allows for "salting", or placing a certain number of false names on your report, of a list in order to find out if your list is being used illegally.

Did Van Hollen's campaign improperly use the CFR for electioneering purposes? I don't know, but if so, this should be investigated...

How ironic would it be if the new Attorney General broke Federal Campaign laws to get elected????


Georgia said...

Not ironic - MORONIC.

And - let's look at many prominent Repugnants - - - no great brain trust there either.

Let's hope that some good detecting gets to the base of this mystery/crime - and that somebody answers.

On Wisconsin!!!!

Ben Masel said...

The Federal law only applies to misusing reports filed by campaigns for federal office. I though there was similar language in Wisconsin Statutes, but have not turned it up in a halfhour search. All the time I have for it tonight.