An ad in Montana that hardly needs changing

August 10, 2005

Considering Bush’s 20-point victory over Kerry in Montana last year, one might assume this is a solidly-red state where Republicans dominate. Wrong. Montanans elected a popular Dem governor the same day they backed Bush, and Dems have taken hold of the state legislature. Now Montana’s Dems have their eyes on incumbent Sen. Conrad Burns (R), whom they believe is vulnerable. What’s more, they’re doing something about it.

In a sneak preview of the kind of problems many GOP lawmakers will be dealing with a year from now, the Montana Democratic Party has unveiled a hard-hitting new ad, reminding voters in the state of Burns’ inescapable connections to corrupt and disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff. (It’s really worth watching; these Montana Dems aren’t meek.)

The charge is hard to refute. The ad explains to voters that Burns took $136,000 “from notorious lobbyist Jack Abramoff, now under federal investigation.” After receiving the money, the ad explains, Burns then arranged a $3 million grant for an Abramoff client in Michigan.

Montana Republicans, apparently skittish about Burns’ position, immediately starting contacting TV stations, urging them not to run the ad because, as they argued, Abramoff never literally gave Burns campaign contributions, though the ad says he did. Does the state GOP have a point? No, and Michael Crowley helps explain why.

First, Abramoff himself did give $5,000 to one of Burns’s PACs (which can accept a higher dollar total than his federal campaign account). More to the point, Burns reaped the rest of that money from Abramoff’s Indian tribal clients, whose names should be familiar to any Abramoff-scandal junkie: the Michigan Saginaw Chippewas, the Louisiana Coushattas, the California Agua Calientes, and the El Paso Tiguas.

Coincidence, perhaps? Maybe the tribes supported Burns without Abramoff’s encouragement? Not likely. It’s clear that Abramoff gave his tribal clients highly specific instructions about how to distribute their political dollars, and that he watched over these donations carefully. Indeed, it appears that many tribal contributions physically passed through Abramoff’s hands before landing in the accounts of their congressional recipients.

Exactly. The truth is slightly worse than the ad. Abramoff not only pumped money into Burns’ PAC, he instructed his clients to start writing checks to Burns as well.

Nevertheless, the ad is getting a subtle makeover. This isn’t necessarily good news for Burns.

The Montana Democratic Party agreed Tuesday to change its ad criticizing Republican Sen. Conrad Burns for his dealings with a GOP lobbyist under investigation.

Party leaders said they will add two words to the television spot after a number of TV stations requested it be changed. The ad began airing statewide on Monday.

The ad will now tell voters Burns took money from Abramoff “and his associates.” Fine.

But just because the ad is getting three new words doesn’t make the situation any better for Burns. First, the senator and his aides will now have to come up with something new to whine about. The ad is still damaging, even with the edit, and the GOP won’t be able to complain about the meaning of the word “give” anymore.

Second, and perhaps more importantly, the controversy surrounding the ad has helped give it more mileage than the Dems could have hoped for. Even Montanans who might not have seen the ad have surely heard about it now. Is it possible that was part of the plan all along?

Maybe we should start framing the 8 (estimated; could be less with impeachment/resignation) Bush years as the “Republican Experiment” where the GOP was totally in charge and could do anything it wanted.

Here’s what we got when the GOP had a free hand:
Corruption on a scale unheard of
War
Record deficits due to the war and legislative pork bribes beyond belief
Global loathing directed toward us
Growing poverty
An anemic economy
Petty political vendettas that have harmed national security
The destruction of our military
Fewer civil liberties
Torture
Ignorance

The Democrats could milk this for decades (“See? This is what happens when you elect Republicans”). The GOP and its vision is discredited; all that’s left to do is educate the public. In that, I wish Montana well.

  • I like that they put Burns’ phone number up at the end and suggest viewers call and ask him to “start working for Montana.” They also have Abramaoff on video, making disgruntled/surprised faces while they describe the deal–much harder hitting than a still pic.

    Pretty good for Democrats.

  • Even Montanans who might not have seen the ad have surely heard about it now. Is it possible that was part of the plan all along?

    Is our Dem’s learning? Is they? Oh, I hope so!

  • I’m not as optimistic about this. The story will now be “Dems made false ad, back down under pressure.” This is why Republicans never retract a false statement or disavow a smear ad.

  • It is not a foregone conclusion how this will play out. Biff may be right; the Republicans will maneuver this to their advantage. On the other hand, the whole controversy may draw more attention to the wrong-doing than the add itself.

    However, there is one certainty in all of this. The Democrats were careless about the details in the add. Had the Democrats run the revised add in the first place, which is just as damning as their original add, the possibility of the Republicans using the dust-up to their advantage would not exist. Democrats should not depend on happy accidents like the Republican response to their carelessness backfiring.

    • Comments are closed.