|
that made the push for the ad that featured Terry.
Horton said Pfizer decided to pull the ad when the controversy erupted.
"I don't really see their gripe," Horton said. "At the same time we don't want the Share Card to be a political football, and when people started kicking it around, we decided to take the ad off the air."
Though it was zapped from the airwaves, the ad is still raising some eyebrows.
Common Cause Legislative Director Matt Keller said his organization is "seriously contemplating" filing a complaint with the Federal Election Commission or asking the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct to look into the matter.
"This is pretty brazen move, even for Congress and for the corporations that play the game here in Washington," Keller said. "This is an abuse in the sense that endorsing this corporate product puts Mr. Terry in an incredibly favorable light right before an election. And the fact that a corporation is spending its own money on making this happen is either a violation of federal election law or it's a violation of the House gift ban."
Just where does the law stand on this matter?
In his 1994 Senate race, Ohio attorney Joel Hyatt (D) and his law firm got into trouble for running ads that the FEC said improperly promoted his Senate campaign. He and the law firm ended up paying an $11,000 fine.
Two years ago, Nevada Senate candidate Ed Bernstein (D) also came under scrutiny when his law firm financed ads touting his business - with the slogan "Ed Bernstein cares" - during the midst of his campaign against now-Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.).
Current federal election law strictly prohibits corporations from providing anything of value to a federal candidate's campaign. However, experts said it is unclear how the law would be applied to the ad that featured Terry since there was no "express advocacy," or words encouraging his election or defeat.
It appears that the Pfizer ad would, however, be prohibited under the new campaign finance law that goes into effect Nov. 6.
The new law, aimed at cracking down on so-called sham issue ads, forbids any corporations from financing so-called electioneering communications, which are broadcast ads that feature the name or likeness of a federal candidate within 60 days of their general or 30 days of their primary election to a specific target audience.
But Terry's allies insist that all the uproar is for naught - it's simply his political opponent "grasping at straws."
"We're running against a guy, who just over 10 days out [from Election Day] has $30,000 in the bank and is 30 points behind," Terry campaign manager Carlos Castillo said. "He's running out of ideas to talk about, and running out of money to use ... they're desperate."
|
|
