Moxie Media’s Deceitful, Allegedly Illegal Attack Ads Against Local GOP Candidates

Guest blogger, Janis Richter

My 19 year old son is diagnosed with Asperger’s Syndrome, an Autism Spectrum Disorder. Imagine the outrage I felt when I opened my mailbox to discover a political attack ad against my husband (Dennis Richter, candidate for Washington State Representative in Legislative District 1, Position 1) which was addressed to my son, stating that “If you’re concerned about the risk of Autism…Then you should be concerned about the risk of politician Dennis Richter.” It is despicable that any false claim be made against my husband, but this one is particularly offensive! Dennis cares deeply about children affected by Autism, one of them being his own step son!

There is no way for Dennis to have been misconstrued. His position is very clearly stated on his website. In response to the deceptive claims made against him, he states on his campaign website:

Our political opposition is trying to deceive voters by misstating our positions on important issues. For example, one recent mailer said I am against screening for autism and breast cancer. This is a blatant lie, twisting what I believe about health care mandates. Put simply, I do not believe it is the function of state government to tell private industry what they have to sell to consumers. Any insurance company should be allowed to sell policies that provide a wide range of coverage. That will keep our health care costs as low as possible. We believe that voters will see through this type of strategy by our opposition and will side with the common sense solutions our campaign offers.”

By the way, my 19-year-old stepson, Jared, was diagnosed with Asperger’s syndrome (“high-functioning autism”) at an early age. It is a particularly low blow for my political opponents to deceitfully attack me over such a personal issue.

From the article A Mind-Bogglingly Complex Scheme Funnels $2.7 Million for Labor and its Allies in Washington-State Races – Berkey Case is Just the Beginning, published in Washington State Wire, we learn that Moxie Media, the company that funded the hit pieces against Dennis, “shuffles Campaign Cash Through 40 Political Action Committees”. Basically, it is a front group that deliberately and fraudulently conceals from the voters who is paying for the ads. The article states that “this year labor organizations and their allies have funneled as much as $2.7 million to independent campaigns for and against legislative candidates in this state. The Public Disclosure Commission has referred a case against the company to Attorney General Rob McKenna. He has filed suit against them.

Numerous candidates across our state are being vilified by attack ads put out by Moxie Media. Washington State Republican Party Chairman Luke Esser has called for the “Democratic candidates who have benefited from these sleazy shadow groups to “publicly renounce their activities and condemn the outrageous behavior of Moxie Media… If these Democrats remain silent they will be complicit with the politics of sleaze and cynicism. Those Democrats who won’t condemn the Moxie Media shadow groups are merely hoping that all the tangled webs of deception won’t be unwound by the media and the PDC until after Election Day. The voters deserve better than that.” I agree with that, and would add that these candidates who have been maliciously attacked deserve better too.

Editor’s Note: Heidi Munson has also been a victim numerous malicious ads. She is running for LD-1, Position 2.

Tremble, Washington! Evil Right-Wing Plots Are Afoot In WA LD1

Unsure whether or not their 1st LD candidates can win on merit in what appears to be a very bad year for Democrats (or a very good year for Republicans if you’re a glass-half-full kind of person), the Washington State Democratic Central Committee has chosen to instead muddy the waters with mail pieces intended to paint the Republican candidates, Dennis Richter (Pos. 1) and Heidi Munson (Pos. 2), with the extremist brush.

Should the State Legislature be overrun by these right wing extremists and their ilk, they will immediately put into effect a nefarious plan masterminded by Dennis Richter to “Abolish Social Security!” Once our seniors, deprived of their Social Security benefits, are sleeping under bridges and sharing Fido’s Alpo, they’ll  move onto Phase Two of their wicked scheme…Did you have hopes and dreams for your children’s education? Kiss those dreams good-bye, people! Under Heidi Munson’s direction, the U.S. Department of Education will be dismantled, causing schools across the country to immediately collapse into rubble. Rubble, I say!

Sounds silly, doesn’t it? But is it any sillier than bringing up issues that are clearly irrelevant to State governance concerning a phase-out of Social Security or cutting the federal Department of Education? Whether or not you agree with these positions, logic forces the honest person to acknowledge that Richter and Munson won’t be in any position to act on them in the State Legislature.

Richter’s other “offenses” include his preposterous idea that private businesses should be allowed to decide on their own which goods or services to offer based on consumer demand and an interesting proposal based on the Texas sunset model.

From Wikipedia:

The Texas Sunset provision was established in 1977. Under Texas law, all agencies – except universities, courts, and agencies established by the Texas Constitution – will be abolished on a specific date, generally 12 years after creation or renewal, unless the Texas Legislature passes specific legislation to continue its functions.

A 12-member Sunset Advisory Commission oversees the provisions of the Texas Sunset Act. The commission consisting of five members of the Texas Senate and one member from the general public appointed by the Lieutenant Governor of Texas, and five members of the House and one member from the general public appointed by the Speaker of the Texas House of Representatives. Legislative members are appointed for four-year terms, with half of the commission reappointed on or before September 1 of odd-numbered years, while public members serve two-year terms. The chairman and vice-chairman are appointed by the lieutenant governor and speaker, and the chairmanship alternates between the Senate and House every two years. The Commission is assisted by an executive director and staff, who review each agency subject to sunset provisions.

Under the process, each agency must perform for the commission a self-review of its roles and responsibilities, including areas in which its duties may overlap those of other agencies and the effect of the agency’s abolition on loss of federal funding. The self-review must be completed by September 1 of the odd-numbered year before the year when the agency would be otherwise abolished. The commission must then complete its own review by the following January 1 and hold public hearings by the following February 1.

About 20 to 30 agencies go through the sunset process each legislative session. Constitutionally-established agencies are subject to review, but they cannot be abolished under the sunset provisions.

The commission may recommend that an agency be continued in its present form (nearly always with recommendations to the legislature for improvement), consolidated with another agency, or abolished, with its duties either eliminated or transferred to other agencies.

Maybe not coincidentally, Texas is currently one of the – if not the most – fiscally healthy states, making the WSDCC’s contention that such provisions lead to excessive bureaucracy and “periods with no laws on the books” seem especially absurd.

As for Ms. Munson? You can’t vote for her because…Rush! Yes, she’s among the tens of millions totally non-mainstream people who make up Rush Limbaugh’s listening audience. Not only that, she opposes expanding State government beyond its Constitutional limits. If that’s not the crazy talking, tell me, what is?

So if it’s muddy water the WSDCC is looking for, how about this? We’ve been inundated with mail pieces paid for by the Washington State Labor Council AFL-CIO in support of the Democrat candidates in L.D. 1. If they’re elected, who will they answer to? The voters? Or the union bosses who purchased their seats for them?