Carnahan’s office: Ads are funded by security violators
On Wednesday, the state GOP issued a release seeking more information on radio ads featuring Missouri Secretary of State Robin Carnahan, the Democrat’s presumptive nominee for Senate.
Carnahan’s office was quick to oblige.
The spots, which have been running during Cardinals and Royals radio broadcasts, feature Carnahan, the state’s chief securities regulator, warning investors about potential scams.
Laura Egderdal, a spokeswoman for Carnahan in Jefferson City, said today the office has been running similar ads on sports broadcasts for three years — long before Kit Bond’s U.S. Senate seat opened up.
The ads are not produced with tax dollars, Egerdal said. They are paid for through the state’s Investor Education and Protection Fund, which receives money from financial violators. Wachovia Securities, for instance, agreed to pay $2.8 million into the fund last year as part a settlement with Carnahan’s office over auction-rate securities.
“The state securities division is charged with educating Missouri investors and working to deter fraud,” said Egerdal said. “The companies and criminals who commit fraud paid for these ads — through penalties which fund educational initiatives. These public service announcements, which have been running for 3 years, are very effective at reaching Missouri investors and generating new enforcement activity in the securities division.”
Earlier, the director of Missouri’s Republican Party, Lloyd Smith, had questioned whether the ads were an attempt to up her name recognition as 2010 approaches.
Her statement that “the ads are not produce with tax dollars” is typical of the arrogance of public officials. If these funds were obtained by a government agency, under compulsion of law, they are just as subject to public accountability as if they were tax dollars.
Personally, I think it would be great if it was prohibited to use public funds to produce materials - radio advertising, printed materials, whatever, with the obvious exception of ballots and other election materials, and a very narrowly worded personal correspondence exception - containing the name of any elected official or candidate for office. It adds absolutely nothing to the usefulness of these ads to repeat Robin Carnahan’s name several times, but it does much to promote Robin Carnahan. This is equally true of the “Constituent Service” booklets which state legislators mail out, and even the “welcome” signs in some municipalities which prominently feature the name of the mayor. How about it, legislators?
Never gonna happen Nick. These pols on both sides know how to play the game. They plaster their name and face all over “public service announcements” knowing that uninformed voters may recognize the name or face when they go to the polls and that is what counts.
Nick, get over yourself. These are legitimate ads. The source of the funds is set aside specifically for the ads. Technically, if Carnahan wasn’t airing the ads, she wouldn’t be doing her job. I’m sure you would be jumping all over her then. We live in a time when securities fraud is a prevalent issue - especially among the elderly. How effective are the ads, its unclear. Still, its better than doing nothing.
I doubt you (and Roy Blunt and the State Republican Party) were as upset when Matt Blunt was doing the same thing as he prepared to run for Governor. Not only did Blunt have radio ads, but he also ran newspaper ads. The best thing of the newspaper ads was the picture of Blunt that took up a quarter of the ad space. There was nothing political with that though, right?
Mitch - I would ban it for politicians of EVERY party. And as I said, the point isn’t whether Carnahan should be airing such ads, but whether including her name adds to the effectiveness of the ad. The fact is, plastering your name in publicly funded advertising doesn’t serve constituents, it serves the elected official. That’s wrong, whether it’s done by Matt Blunt or Robin Carnahan.
Good old Mitch pointing the finger and saying, “But he did it first!” Makes you sound like the five year old that lives in my house.
Neither party is without sleaze. Just so happens the sleaze is oozing from Robin on this issue. Little Blunt is out of the political office holding business.
True, Matt is gone, but his daddy isn’t. I just find it ironic that Blunt is complaining about the same thing his son did. I’m sure its the same thing he has done - constituent reports, etc. I’m fine if you don’t think politicians should put their names on ads. I personally don’t see anything wrong with the ads. You’re entitled to your own opinion. I’m just point out the hypocrisy of Blunt and the GOP. Those who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.
Oh, and Amazed, thanks for resorting to name calling. There’s no better way to attack someone for being immature than being immature yourself.
> There’s no better way to attack someone for being immature
> than being immature yourself.
Like, for example, starting a post by saying, “Nick, get over yourself.”
Not exactly the same, but I see your point.
What a bunch of whiny babies the GOPers are! They’re just mad they didn’t have Kinder doing one first! THat’s all I’ve been hearing for 6 months is a bunch of cry babies who are all of a sudden getting exactly what they deserve!