NRCC exploits Spitzer — successfully?

March 13, 2008

The National Republican Congressional Committee, in light of its many problems, has become something of a punch-line lately. As retiring Rep. Thomas M. Davis III (R-Va), a former NRCC chairman, put it, “The House Republican brand is so bad right now that if it were a dog food, they’d take it off the shelf.”

But the Republicans’ House campaign committee keeps plugging along. In some instances, logic be damned, it even gets what it wants.

On Tuesday, within a few hours of the Eliot Spitzer scandal breaking, the NRCC hoped to connect the governor’s controversy to some of New York’s House Democrats. The committee sent out emails about Dems with titles such as, “Will John Hall Return Spitzer’s Sleazy Money?”

Even The Corner dismissed the NRCC’s efforts as being “a public relations exercise with no basis in moral reality.”

What I didn’t expect at all was for New York Dems to actually give in to this nonsense.

“New York Democrats should resign themselves to giving up the disgraced Governor’s sleazy cash before it’s too late and they find themselves being escorted out of office by the voters in November,” said NRCC spokesman Ken Spain.

Even after Spitzer resigned, the NRCC sent out a news release bashing three-term Rep. Timothy H. Bishop (D-N.Y.) for taking a $2,000 campaign donation from Spitzer.

“Will Tim Bishop Return Spitzer’s Sleazy Money?” the headline blared. Noting that Bishop ran on an ethics reform platform, the GOP release asked, “Will Democrat Tim Bishop live up to his promise of holding elected officials to a higher standard or will he run and hide from his campaign promises once again?”

Bishop quickly gave the money to charity, and in a statement said he was livid at Republicans for making Spitzer’s donations a campaign issue.

Then why did Bishop do what the NRCC demanded?

“That the NRCC is attempting to link this shocking and disturbing situation to individuals who clearly had nothing to do with it points to their utter desperation,” Bishop said. “If such smear campaigns are all they have to offer, then they are destined to remain in the minority for a long time.”

That’s all true, but the appropriate response, then, is to ignore the NRCC’s absurd demands, not actually give away the amount of Spitzer’s support.

What’s more, it’s not just Bishop. The NRCC went after Eric Massa, a Democratic House candidate, for accepting a contribution from Spitzer, and Massa also returned the cash. (Update: I spoke with the Massa campaign, which explained that he actually donated the money to a local charity, and didn’t “return” the money.)

Isn’t this only going to encourage the NRCC to pull similarly nonsensical stunts in the future?

It’s likely that the Dems just decided it wasn’t worth the trouble. Spitzer paid for sex, and they didn’t want to keep his campaign contributions and be associated with him. Fine.

But with this in mind, CREW raises a good point today:

In light of the National Republican Congressional Committee’s call for candidates and members of Congress to return soon-to-be former Gov. Eliot Spitzer’s (D) donations, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) wonders why members and the National Republican Senatorial Committee have not returned Sen. David Vitter’s (R-LA) contributions. As widely reported, Sen. Vitter has solicited prostitutes in the past. Rather than being condemned and ostracized, Sen. Vitter received a standing ovation at a Republican Caucus luncheon after his transgressions became public.

At this point, I suspect the Vitter-Spitzer comparison is growing tiresome, but it’s actually helpful in this case. The NRCC insists that Democratic lawmakers shouldn’t keep contributions from someone caught hiring a prostitute. It stands to reason, then, that Republican lawmakers should also not keep contributions from someone caught hiring a prostitute.

If so, CREW published a list of all kinds of GOP officials and campaign committees who’ve benefitted from Vitter’s generosity. Bishop and Massa returned Spitzer’s money — should we expect these Republicans to do the same with Vitter’s money?

Then why did Bishop do what the NRCC demanded? Because he’s a dem and the new spines are still a little fragile.
should we expect these Republicans to do the same with Vitter’s money?
that’s funny! i’d expect they’d keep it and laugh at us for cowering.

  • What-ever.

    I’d say go ahead and give it back, and then go after the Republicans for their shitty policies, and raise the money back tenfold from Democrats who are ready to bury those fuckers.

  • If so, CREW published a list of all kinds of GOP officials and campaign committees who’ve benefitted from Vitter’s generosity. Bishop and Massa returned Spitzer’s money — should we expect these Republicans to do the same with Vitter’s money?

    Sure seems like the Dems returning the money, and the GOP not returning the money, reinforces a strong theme for the Dems–culture of corruption.

    “People make mistakes, Republicans and Democrats. The difference is that Republicans don’t care. Democrats do care and that’s why they won’t keep campaign contributions from officials that have broken the public’s trust. Why won’t the GOP return money from corrupt politicians? Do they just love money too much? Is all their money from corrupt sources?”

    Had the NY Dems not returned the money, it would have weakened the Dem branding of the GOP with the culture of corruption tagline. I think the House Dem caucus should applaud the NY Dems move and then give them 2x the amount they had to return. And then challenge the NRCC to do the same. When they refuse, its yet another opporutnity to reinforce the culture of corruption/all-Republicant’s-care-about-is-money theme.

  • Sure seems like the Dems returning the money, and the GOP not returning the money, reinforces a strong theme for the Dems–culture of corruption.

    This is a good point. The Dems can afford to return money tied to Spitzer right now. The GOP can’t afford to return any money. So the Dems might as well do it and then turn around and shove the NRCC’s own press releases back in their faces.

    Bishop didn’t seem to handle this quite right. The best way to handle this is to make sure that everyone knows that the NRCC are being GIANT hypocrites every time they demand something like this. CREW did the right thing, and the Dems should follow their example. Dems are terrible at this kind of political ju-jistsu but damn – this is right in their faces.

  • I’m just wondering what they had to do for that $2000 donation. 🙂

    I say get rid of any Spitzer monies. I do see the point that it encourages the NRCC to utilize this same tactic in the future (let’s hope there is no similar future incident), but I would prefer to wash our hands of this and take back the issue of the culture of corruption.

  • Bishop should have given the money to the NRCC. Then asked them what they were going to do with it. 🙂

  • More of the same…IOKIYAR.

    Outrage is for dems and dems alone. Goopers have no morals or ethics for themselves.

  • Since when is Spitzer’s money sleazy? I thought he just spent it on sleazy things. I’m rather shocked that Republicans would call money “sleazy.” It is, after all, their most desired object and, at times, their god.

  • ZOMG! A Democrat had sex therefore everything he touched is now tainted!

    What a crock. Instead of Democrats caving to the “dirty money” meme, they should say the more money Spitzer gave to them, the less he spent on hookers. Those donations prevented him from even further debauchery.

  • What a man spends on women should be his own damn business. I can’t figure out how a dude so savy in finance did not see this coming. Move cash and see how much scrutiny comes your way. Every one is either consevative or liberal. I view both parties as the same. They spend money that does not exist and print more. No matter who you vote for the system has to much power over your life.
    your are either minding your own business or your minding some one elses. Your either spending your money or they are spending it for you. One truth. You will go as you arrived. (owning nothing )

  • If you happen to live in the district of one of the listed republicans, let them not, that for their own integrity , they NEED to donate the money to a ‘liberal’ cause.
    🙂
    2006 Cycle:

    National Republican Senatorial Committee – $25,000

    House members:
    Charles Boustany, Jr. (R-LA) – $1,000
    Steve Chabot (R-OH) – $2,500
    Jim Gerlach (R–PA) – $2,000
    Deborah Pryce (R-OH) – $2,000
    Mark Souder (R-IN) – $2,000
    Heather Wilson (R-NM) – $2,000

    Senate members:
    Bob Corker (R-TN) – $10,000
    John Ensign (R-NV) – $5,000
    Orrin Hatch (R-UT) – $5,000
    Jon Kyl (R-AZ) – $6,000

    2008 Cycle:

    Senate member:
    Mitch McConnell (R-KY) – $1,000

  • If all Eliot Spitzer did was patronize a prostitute, he’d still be Governor. Don’t forget, the only reason we know about Vitter is because his phone number was linked to the DC Madam investigation. He was outed by the media, not law enforcement.
    Eliot Spitzer, on the other hand, was the subject of a criminal investigation, which began with unusual cash transfers, which may lead to money laundering charges, not to mention violations of the Mann Act, since his tart crossed state lines.
    Let’s also not forget how many times Democrats called on Republicans to return contributions. Kirsten Gillibrand once called on her opponent to return money from a strip club owner, simply because she found his profession morally offensive. She, too, has returned Spitzer’s cash, as has Michael Arcuri, who was a District Attorney before coming to Congress.
    The problem isn’t the donation. It’s the hypocrisy.

    • Comments are closed.