Republican Mike Coffman and Democrat Andrew Romanoff. (The Denver Post)
Following and , Republican U.S. Rep. Mike Coffman and Democratic challenger Andrew Romanoff each have a new TV ad out in the last 24 hours. Wisely, both opted against purely negative ads and instead went for spots that contrast themselves with their opponent, often a more effective style.
In both cases, the ads largely stick to factual citations, with a little spin thrown in, though Coffman’s sharp-edged spot includes one reference about Romanoff that could use a little more context.
The ads come as some prognosticators are shifting away from calling suburban Denver’s 6th Congressional District race, among the most competitive House contests in the nation this year, a pure tossup. Amid momentum elsewhere for Republican candidates, the (paywalled) now rates the Coffman/Romanoff race as “Toss-Up/Tilt Republican.” classify the race as “Leans Republican.” It’s hard to know, since there’s been no public polling in the race, though some commentators noted that Romanoff was more aggressive than Coffman in this week’s debate.
Here’s a quick look at the ads.
.
The argument: The Coffman ad, , begins by quoting snippets of a frequently quoted that criticized Romanoff as “another politician willing to grossly distort reality” who ran an attack ad that was “below-the-belt,” “shameless” and “cynical politics at its worst.” Small-type citations note the editorial was from 2010. Romanoff attracted heat that year when he ran an aggressive, unsuccessful campaign in the Democratic primary against Sen. Michael Bennet. The ad says Romanoff’s record is worse than his campaign style because he “doubled seniors’ property taxes” in 2003. (More on that in a moment.)
The spot then pivots to praise Coffman’s record in Congress using words from favorable assessments by Post and Colorado Springs Gazette editorials. It also cites Planned Parenthood’s who “showed courage” in voting for reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act last year. The narrator says Coffman is a lawmaker focused on finding solutions.
What’s missing: Since most of the assertions are straight forward, I’ll focus on the one about Romanoff doubling seniors’ property taxes. Essentially, Coffman is pinning on Romanoff a bipartisan 42-23 vote in 2003 to suspend a property tax exemption, a move that Republican leaders saw then as key to balancing the budget. The voter-passed homestead exemption for homeowners older than 65 exempts 50 percent of the first $200,000 of the home’s actual value. It had been in effect for a year when lawmakers, under Republican control of the House and Senate, reluctantly exercised a provision of the constitutional amendment for hard fiscal times to suspend the exemption for three years. Forty-one Republicans and 19 Democrats in both chambers went along with the suspension, . So, Coffman’s claim is true for Romanoff, and for an even larger number of his fellow Republicans, regarding a temporary suspension of a relatively new tax break.
The response: “Families in this district are facing real challenges, and Mike Coffman has nothing to offer except stale character attacks,” Romanoff spokeswoman Denise Baron said. “Mike Coffman can’t defend his record of voting against middle class families and voting to restrict women’s rights, and the voters of this district will see through these desperate attempts to distract from his failed record. “
Now, Romanoff’s ad:
.
The argument: Romanoff’s ad, , flips the equation, first praising Romanoff’s record before hammering Coffman. Addressed to families, the ad cites then-Speaker Romanoff’s sponsorship in the Colorado House of successful bills that created laws meant to and to . The ad then pivots to the contrast of portraying Coffman’s record in Washington in recent years as one heavy on “giving tax breaks to millionaires” and “slashing Medicare to pay for it.” (More on this below.) It asserts that Coffman’s votes are “hurting the middle class.” Romanoff ends the ad by saying he will look out for middle-income earners in Congress.
What’s missing: Romanoff’s assertions about Coffman include on-screen citations of votes and dates without saying which bills he was voting on. In all cases, the votes they cite were Coffman supporting House Republicans’ alternative budget plans, spearheaded by Rep. Paul Ryan or the Republican Study Committee. Those never became law and drew fierce opposition from Democrats. The proposed budgets, between 2011 and this year, included varying provisions that for those earning more than $1 million a year. And they typically proposed changes to Medicare that included raising the age of eligibility to save money or converting the entitlement to a private insurer-based system with government support for participants’ premiums. The GOP budget plans were intended to focus on reducing government spending.
The response: Attempts to get the Coffman campaign’s response to the ad so far have not been successful. I’ll update this post when I hear back.
