posted April 20, 2006 02:18 AM              

I do not like it when the Republicans out and out lie or distort the truth and neither do I condone or like it when the Democrats or organizations that I support do the same. It is not right for MoveOn.org to place this ad if it is not true. That just contributes to the dishonesty in this country. However Johnson lowered herself to the same level with a retaliatory ad twisting the truth. Why can't we just have some honesty and decency in politics?

Caught "Red-Handed?"
Controversial $1.3 million ad campaign attacks four Republicans for stance on price-gouging legislation.

April 6, 2006

Summary

A MoveOn.org Political Action ad campaign says four House Members have been "caught red-handed" accepting money from energy companies, and voting "against bills that would have penalized those companies for price gouging." The ads compare the four with convicted former lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

In fact, none of the four members have done anything illegal. They opposed Democratic legislation that would have made it a crime punishable by up to 10 years in prison to charge an "unconscionably excessive" price for gasoline, whatever that means.

Rep. Nancy Johnson responded with an ad saying MoveOn "compared America's leaders to Nazis," which isn't exactly true. MoveOn.org Voter Fund did show a digital ad on its website for a time in 2004 comparing President Bush to Hitler. However, the ad was not paid for or produced by MoveOn; it was produced by another group as a contest entry, and MoveOn pulled it and apologized when objections were raised.

Analysis

On April 3 MoveOn.org Political Action announced they would be airing television ads against four Republican House members: Deborah Pryce of Ohio, Chris Chocola of Indiana, Nancy Johnson of Connecticut, and Thelma Drake of Virginia. The ads are called “Red Handed – Energy” and they are scheduled to air on local television stations in the members’ districts.

MoveOn.org Ad: "Red Handed - Energy" (Rep. Pryce)

(On Screen: a folder and a photograph of Deborah Pryce.)
Announcer: Congresswoman Deborah Pryce. She accepted more than a hundred thousand dollars from energy companies and she voted against bills that would have penalized those companies for price gouging.
(On Screen: a series of black and white photos of Pryce flash across the screen.)
Announcer: Instead of protecting us, Congresswoman Pryce has been caught red-handed, protecting oil company profits while we pay more at the pump.
(On Screen: a close-up of Pryce's hand in one of the black and white photos. An invisible brush stains her hand red. )
Announcer: Tom DeLay, Dick Cheney, Jack Abramoff. And now Deborah Pryce. Another Republican caught red-handed.
(On Screen: Pictures of DeLay, Cheney and Abramoff flash across the screen. All of them have red-stained hands .)

The ads say the four were "caught red-handed, protecting oil company profits,” and that they “voted against bills that would have penalized [energy] companies for price gouging.” The message is reinforced by a powerful visual image of black and white photos of each member – their hands stained a vivid red – along with similar crimson-stained images of Jack Abramoff, Rep. Tom DeLay, and Vice President Cheney.

NBC stations in Hartford, CT and Columbus, OH have said they will not be running the MoveOn ads. Neither station specified what they found objectionable.

Red-Handed?

These ads strongly imply that the four House members have been caught committing a crime, which isn't true.

The Oxford English Dictionary defines the term “red-handed” as being caught “in the very act of crime.” In fact, one meaning given by the OED is, "fresh from the commission of murder or homicide; having the hands red with blood."

The ad's implication of a crime is strengthened by the juxtaposed images of Abramoff, who has been convicted of fraud, tax evasion and other corruption charges, and of DeLay, who was indicted in Texas and accused of laundering campaign money, which DeLay denies.

Unlike Abramoff and DeLay, however, none of the four House members has been accused of any crime, and we could find no mention of any of the four in news stories about Abramoff's illegal and questionable activities. Pryce returned $8,000 in donations she received from Indian tribes represented by Abramoff, The AP reported. The Columbus Dispatch also reported that Pryce was among dozens of House Republicans who held fundraisers at Signatures, a restaurant once owned by Abramoff.

The Legislation

The ad also mischaracterizes the price-gouging legislation that the four Republicans opposed, saying that the measures "would have penalized those (energy) companies for price gouging." In fact, it's not clear the legislation would have penalized anybody.

Support for the legislation was divided along party line. It was unanimously supported by House Democrats and opposed by almost every House Republican. Three similar measures came to a vote, and all were defeated. One attracted three Republican votes, another two, the most stringent measure was killed on a pure party-line vote . All would have established staggeringly large penalties for "price gouging" in the future – the most stringent provided for fines up to $100 million and prison terms of up to 10 years. But all three would have defined "gouging" in hazy and subjective terms that could prove difficult to enforce or uphold in court.

What the legislation would have prohibited is selling petroleum products at a price that is "unconsciously excessive" or "indicates the seller is taking unfair advantage." What's "unfair" or "unconscionable" is of course a matter of opinion. And there's no clear economic definition of what constitutes an "unconscionable" price.

As the Federal Trade Commission's chief economist Michael A. Salinger noted in a Feb. 27 speech to the Boston Bar Association:

FTC's Michael Salinger: Just down the road at Boston University, where I have taught for many years, we do not teach “unconscionable” as a well-defined economic term. . . As far as I can tell, placing the term in a statute gives a district attorney or, in the case of a federal statute, a US attorney the right to go after whichever gas stations charge the highest prices.

So, saying that the anti-gouging proposals "would" penalize energy companies is misleading. It might or it might not. The ad would have been accurate to say the legislation "might have" penalized future price gouging. It certainly would not have penalized prices charged in the past, since none of the measures would have taken effect until enacted, and could not be applied retroactively.

Campaign Money

The ads begin by saying how much each of the four Representatives have received from energy companies. It's true that all four did receive political donations from energy companies as described, but so did many Democrats. According to The Center for Responsive Politics Rep. Bart Stupak of Michigan, who sponsored two of the three price-gouging amendments favored by MoveOn, received $292,826 from energy and natural resources PAC's since his election in 1992, more than any of the four Republicans targeted by MoveOn's ads.

Johnson Responds

Nancy Johnson for Congress Ad: "Vile"

(On Screen: A still photo of the MoveOn.org ad “Red Handed” next to a photo of Chris Murphy.)
Announcer: A radical group whose ads have been called “shameful” and “misleading” is at it again – helping politician Chris Murphy.
Announcer: This group compared ’s leaders to Nazis. The Anti-Defamation League called their ads “vile and outrageous.”
(On Screen: Clips of footage from the 2004 MoveOn.org Voter fund ad submission next to the Anti-Defamation League Logo.)
Announcer: The truth is Nancy Johnson fought to lower gas prices and voted to penalize oil companies for price gouging.
(On Screen: Footage of Johnson and clippings from The Herald with the headline “Johnson calls for federal gas tax hiatus.")
Announcer: We deserve better than hateful and dishonest attacks from Murphy’s Washington cronies.
(On Screen: The MoveOn.org “Red Handed” ad still and the photo of Chris Murphy.)
Johnson: I’m Nancy Johnson and I approved this message.
(On Screen: Short clip of Johnson)

Rep. Nancy Johnson responded with an ad including still photos from the MoveOn ad along with photos of her Democratic challenger, Chris Murphy. Johnson’s district is one of the two where NBC’s local stations refused to air the MoveOn ad, though other stations in the district are running it.

Johnson’s ad begins by saying MoveOn is “at it again – helping politician Chris Murphy,” and that “[MoveOn] compared ’s leaders to Nazis.”

That's a reference to one of two ads that appeared for a time on Moveon's website, comparing Bush to Hitler. Johnson's ad shows clips of one with footage of Hitler and a picture of President Bush. It said, "What were war crimes in 1945 is [sic] foreign policy in 2003." The ad wasn't produced by MoveOn, however. It was produced by an outside group and entered in a MoveOn competition for anti-Bush commercials. When Republicans objected, and the Anti-Defamation League called it "vile," MoveOn quickly removed the ad and apologized, saying it “slipped through [their] screening process.”

Price Gouging