They are just four little words. But the failure by Republican Congresswoman Marilyn Musgrave’s campaign to include them at the end of a television commercial could be an expensive mistake.
Musgrave’s television ad last week criticizing Democratic challenger Angie Paccione’s record on immigration did not end with the required disclaimer, “I approved this ad.”
That could jeopardize the financial edge Musgrave has in her tightening 4th District race against Paccione, who received a potential fundraising boost Monday from national Democrats.
Under federal law, any candidate who omits the “stand-by- your-ad” statement “shall not be entitled” to the discount television ad rate received by political candidates 60 days before an election.
The full rate can be almost twice that of the discounted rate – referred to in the industry as the lowest unit rate.
For instance, Musgrave this week is paying $1,300 per 30-second ad at KUSA-Channel 9 that runs between 6 and 6:30 p.m. An issue-committee ad running during the same time for 30 seconds is paying $2,500.
“If Musgrave’s costs go up, she can’t do as much and it’s just one more factor that can make a difference in a race,” said John Straayer, a Colorado State University professor. “She also may give the public the impression she has done something wrong.”
But Musgrave’s campaign isn’t worried that she will take a hit.
“We believe we were in substantial compliance,” said her volunteer campaign spokesman Guy Short. “We had the disclaimer on the front end of the ad. We moved it to the back. It’s taken care of.”
Short said the campaign has spent about $175,000 on television and expects to spend more over the next few weeks.
Musgrave’s cash on hand is well ahead of Paccione’s. Through July 19, Musgrave had more than $1 million, while Paccione had $420,000.
While the incumbent Musgrave has led Paccione on fundraising throughout the campaign, national Democrats added Paccione to their list of targeted races. That means she could soon see a significant boost in contributions.
For now, the decision rests with local television stations, which have little precedent to follow in deciding whether Musgrave should pay for her campaign’s mistake.
At least two of Colorado’s network affiliates – KUSA and KDVR-Channel 31 – have not decided whether to charge Musgrave a higher rate for the duration of the campaign.
Representatives of KCNC Channel 4 and KMGH-Channel 7 did not return calls.
However, David Fine, attorney for the state Democratic Party, said that lawyers for KCNC wrote him a letter saying that the statute is discretionary, not mandatory, and the station would decline to enforce it against Musgrave.
“Why pass a law making it a violation and then give the stations the kind of discretion that would render it toothless?” Fine said.
The meaning of the statute, passed in 2002, has never been litigated and falls into a no-man’s land of law, said Ezra Reese, an associate in the political law group of Perkins Coie in Washington, D.C.
Additionally, the matter has come up only a handful of times. Most recently, U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum, a Republican from Pennsylvania, ran an ad without the “I approved this message” at the end. A Pittsburgh station declined to give him the lowest rate last week, then suddenly switched its position, The Hotline, a publication on American politics, reported.
“The issue has come up very rarely,” Reese said.
Meredith McGehee, policy director of the Campaign Legal Center in Washington, D.C., said she was in the room when the statute was drafted four years ago.
The intent, she said, was that a candidate who violated the stand-by-your-ad provision could not get the lowest rate.
“Lawyers have argued that stations aren’t required to interpret the statute that way,” she said. “But if you are living by the spirit of the law, a candidate doesn’t get the lowest unit rate.”
Staff writer Karen Crummy can be reached at 303-954-1594 or kcrummy@denverpost.com.
