Web Search powered by YAHOO! SEARCH
08.12.2008 2:12 pm

UPDATE: Nixon’s first post-primary ad targets gas prices

St. Louis Post-Dispatch
  • Email this
  • Print this

Democrat Jay Nixon has already pulled from Sarah Steelman’s playbook, and now he seems to be borrowing a little from Kenny Hulshof’s, too, as he attacks, well, Kenny Hulshof.

Nixon, the Democratic candidate for governor, released a television ad today that paints Hulshof as being in the pocket of Big Oil. Ironically, it was Hulshof who painted Steelman as being the Big Oil candidate during the primary, as the two clashed over ethanol.

There will be no ethanol clash this time; both Nixon and Hulshof are firmly in the pro-ethanol camp. But Nixon isn’t above pointing out that Hulshof voted for subsidies for Big Oil while in Congress.

The ad contrasts that with Nixon’s various attempts as attorney general to rein in price-gougers after Hurricane Katrina and other events caused the price of gas to skyrocket. In that regard, the ad is a bit misleading. It says “Jay Nixon took on oil companies,” which is true, but most of his price-gouging legal actions were brought against local gas station owners, not “Big Oil” companies such as Exxon.

Also, the ad says that the companies paid “huge” fines.

After 9/11, Nixon settled with nine stations for between $500 and $2,500 each, according to a Post-Dispatch article by Michael Sorkin. After Katrina, Nixon obtained fines from nine gas stations totalling $6,750.

UPDATE: Nixon spokesman Oren Shur weighs in: “Both candidates had opportunities in their current jobs to stand up to the oil companies, but only Attorney General Nixon actually did it.  In Missouri, Attorney General Nixon did everything in his power to take on the oil companies, while in Washington, Congressman Hulshof used his power to give billions to big oil companies.” Shur also says that the ultimate fines levied in the post 9/11 days were larger than the article I referenced. More than $49,700 in fines and another $10,250 in legal fees were collected from the stations, Shur says. When fines from the January 1007 ice storm in southwest Missouri are added in, the total of gas gouging fines is nearly $100,000.

4 comments

Comments are closed.

Negative right out of the gate. Maybe that is a jab? Try to evoke whatever negative Hulshof will counter with early? The word around the campfire has always been clear in regards to the Attorney General going after gas stations. When the dust settles on the reality of those fines and which stations faced the heat it may not look so great for candidate Nixon.

— LU 95
2:57 pm August 12th, 2008

What you call negative, most would call commentary on Hulshof’s voting record, that’s not negative campaigning. I’m beginning to think that the Hulshof supporters are just embarrassed about the votes he cast in Congress. The continual whining about going negative throughout this entire campaign is amazing to me. The primary was very clean by Sarah, her attacks were based upon votes cast by Kenny, but his supporters instead of trying to defend those votes keep complaining about negative campaigning.

— Smile
3:50 pm August 12th, 2008

The twisting of Hulshof’s record didn’t work for the Steelman, won’t work for Nixon either. The people of Missouri aren’t as stupid as some might think they are.

— ImperialPop
3:53 pm August 12th, 2008

When a person is labeled as “part of the problem.” it is an attack. That is what politicians do to make the opposing candidate look bad. I do not in any way support Congressman Hulshof. I am not that enthused about the Attorney General, which is why I humbly offer that the campaign do more to explain his agenda for leading MO rather than complain about who made friends in D.C.

— LU 95
10:51 am August 13th, 2008