THE STATE HOUSE REPUBLICANS launched a TV ad using its soft money from the PAC the Reagan Fund to support Joel Hussey, the Republican candidate for the State’s House of Representatives in the 45th Legislative District. In supporting Hussey, the ad attacks Roger Goodman – Hussey’s democratic opponent – for allegedly costing the state millions of dollars for cracking down on drunk drivers. But here is the problem with the ad: the attack on Goodman is one big, fat lie.
The television ad falsely claims that Goodman sponsored DUI legislation that has cost Washington State millions of dollars by violating federal funding laws. But that is simply not true. And here is why it is not true:
The Republican’s television ad cites an outdated April 6, 2012 political blog posted on Publicola. That blog post claimed that Goodman’s DUI law caused Washington to lose about $11 million in federal highway funding. But – and this fact is omitted by the pro-Hussey campaign – the Publicola blog post was later deemed false.
Goodman’s DUI law does not cause Washington to lose any federal funding. Instead, the federal money is allocated to the State’s highway safety fund to pay for high priority projects, such as creating additional safety measures for Route 2 near Monroe and Route 195 near Spokane, both of which are terribly dangerous roads. Notably, Hussey has not condemned the ad’s lies or called for its removal.
It is an old political tactic to strike at your opponent’s strengths. And Goodman’s reputation for cracking down on drunk drivers is certainly one of his many strengths. In fact, Goodman introduced the DUI legislation at issue at the request of the Washington State Patrol (a fact the pro-Hussey ad omits). And House Republicans voted for the bill (another fact the ad omits).
Plus, Goodman was named Legislator of the Year by Mothers Against Drunk Driving for his work combating drunk drivers. Goodman is also endorsed by many groups with a vested interest in reducing drunk driving incidents, including the Washington State Troopers Association, the Washington Council of Police and Sheriffs, the Washington State Council of Fire Fighters, and the Fraternal Order of Police — Washington State Lodge. Tom Pillow, the Executive Director for the Washington State Troopers Association even responded to the pro-Hussey ad by explaining that the “attacks are deplorable and utterly false.”
The daily news cycle is littered with untruths, falsities, falsehoods and lies that originate with the Republican Party. Mitt Romney and the Republican Party nationally have made it their practice to simply make up facts. Indeed, during the first Presidential Debate last week, Romney, on several issues, did what can only be described as pants-on-fire, lying-through-his-teeth politics. (It’s easy to win a debate when you simply lie your way through policy arguments.)
The Republican Party is not much concerned these days with its credibility. Today, the Party seems bent on simply creating a fictional reality that does not exist and then offering policies that just don’t work. And here, Hussey supporters joined that effort to create a fiction that includes a character named Roger Goodman who – in stark contrast to his actual, real life counterpart – is soft on drunk drivers. The latest pro-Hussey ad is just another example of what is quickly becoming the Republican Party’s tradition of dishonesty.
________________________________________
Trent Latta is an attorney and Kirkland resident. He can be contacted at TrentLatta@gmail.com
Trent
Frankly, your incessant negativity is repulsive to me. Regardless of party or affiliation. Please, take your hostile posts elsewhere.
I found your article to be very informative and THANK YOU whole-heartedly for it, and for helping to spread the truth, which is hard to find in political ads, unfortunately.
Trent
The daily news cycle is littered with untruths, falsities, falsehoods and lies that originate with the Democratic Party.
Trent
Thank you for the comment. But Roger’s comments during and after last night’s forum do not really relate to Joel Hussey’s dishonest attack ad. Did anyone bring up that issue with Hussey during last night’s forum? Regarding the separate spending question you posed to Roger, though his answer may have been more complicated during his discussion with you than it was during the forum, did you ultimately get your question answered? If not, I am sure I can try and track down a concrete answer for you. Trent
I've managed some fairly large budgets in the private sector and when we were faced with the need to cut the budget, everyone knew what that meant. If I had presented a budget that spent more and I tried to explain it with language that Goodman used, my guess is that it would be my last budget presentation. "Only in Washington".... now, either Washington. Let's vote Joel Hussey into office... I hear he's much better at math.
Your comment has nothing to do with this blog post. Trent
http://www.seattlemet.com/news-and-profiles/publicola/articles/dui-law-costs-state-nearly-12-million-a-year
After reading a few articles about the Goodman legislation (from liberal sources) it appeared that the law was a tightening of DUI rules. But wait, here's an article that describes the details. In short, Goodman's legislation actually let's convicted DUI drivers behind the wheel if they have a device that tests for presence of alcohol on their breath. Two things wrong with this... first, losing your driving privilege for a DUI conviction is part of the punishment, so why reduce that punishment? Secondly, drivers with interlock devices have found ways to circumvent those systems. Given Goodman's other pet project, decriminalizing marijuana, I don't think he should also be in the business of reducing punishment for DUI; it's a bad combo. The spokesman for the state Department of Transportation said: "We are currently out of compliance with the federal ignition interlock guidelines/law, which results in a reduction in three of our federal highway programs..." http://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Licenses-for-DUI-drivers-1264836.php
What part of the article was deemed false, and by whom? If the whole basis for your article is that the ad is "lying" because the article was deemed false, don't you think that you should detail the basis for that claim? Was the claim by the Department of Transportation also false when they said: "We are currently out of compliance with the federal ignition interlock guidelines/law, which results in a reduction in three of our federal highway programs (Interstate Maintenance, National Highway System, and Surface Transportation System). The total reduction is just over $11 million per year ($11.4 million in 2012)." I would expect that a lawyer would understand the value of irrefutable evidence to support his claim and that he would produce that if he had it. You said: "The daily news cycle is littered with untruths, falsities, falsehoods and lies..." Ain't that the truth!
Nobody brought it up during the debate because the questions are general for all candidates, not specific to one. Rep. Goodman had the chance to bring up whatever he wanted during closing statements and he choose to point out that a mailer from Mr. Hussey said Mr. Hussey was a local school board member and Rep. Goodman pointed out that it was a private school, not a public school. That lead to a lot of head scratching by the audience wondering the point of him bringing it up. Regarding my question, it was not so much a question but rather me pointing out that what he said, that the state is spending 2.5 billion less now than in the past, was in fact not true. I pointed out that the state did in fact spend more just as it has year after year after year. His point was they are not spending as much in WA state taxpayer money. As if the money from the federal government should not count. He then talked about per capita spending and other side issues. Multiple times I asked if the state spent more in the current budget than the previous and he simply would not acknowledge that fact even though its clearly stated on the WA gov website. And as I said, that is why people are turned off by politics. If he had said the same thing to the entire audience as he did to me, he would have lost votes, and deservedly so.
“Governor Romney’s argument is ‘we’re not fixed, so fire him and put me in,’” Clinton said. “It is true, we’re not fixed.” Clinton went on to say that he thought Obama was going to cry during the second Presidential debate, because “he knows that it’s not fixed.”
Trent Latta 2:58 pm on Thursday, October 18, 2012 MITT ROMNEY is quick to condemn taxes. So much so that he is willing to disintegrate our nation’s social safety net in the name of principle. But he forgets that his LDS Church essentially employs the same tax system as our country. http://kirkland.patch.com/blog_posts/heaven-taxes-mitt-romneys-mormon-riddle
Trent Latta 2:57 pm on Thursday, October 18, 2012 MITT ROMNEY is quick to condemn taxes. So much so that he is willing to disintegrate our nation’s social safety net in the name of principle. But he forgets that his LDS Church essentially employs the same tax system as our country. http://kirkland.patch.com/blog_posts/heaven-taxes-mitt-romneys-mormon-riddle
Trent Latta 2:56 pm on Thursday, October 18, 2012 MITT ROMNEY is quick to condemn taxes. So much so that he is willing to disintegrate our nation’s social safety net in the name of principle. But he forgets that his LDS Church essentially employs the same tax system as our country. http://kirkland.patch.com/blog_posts/heaven-taxes-mitt-romneys-mormon-riddle
Beth Norquist 4:33 pm on Wednesday, October 17, 2012 Why didn’t Mitt Romney support the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act to seek equal pay for women? Because Romney must think that women don’t deserve equal pay. Shameful! Don't understand how ANY WOMAN could vote for such a man. http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_CAMPAIGN_WOMEN_VOTERS?
10:44 am on Thursday, October 18, 2012 Romney is such a LIAR -- as proven with his binders comment, and by his telling the most lies at both debates. Why on earth would any woman vote for Romney -- he is so anti-women? Romney opposed the equal pay for equal work act (Lily Ledbetter Act) for women. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/oct/16/barack-obama/obama-mitt-romney-refused-say-whether-he-supports-/ Romney favors the Blunt Amendment that would deny contraception coverage for women. http://bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2012/10/17/president-obama-tries-capitalize-women-issues-after-second-debate-with-mitt-romney/BYFJOuHtDdcaNeGIWVajcN/story.html Romney favors a “personhood” constitutional amendment that would define “life” as beginning at contraception, and could make abortion illegal. When asked to clarify his support, he answered, “Absolutely.” http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/03/democrats-target-romney-on-reproductive-rights/ As I mentioned, he falsely said at the second debate that he sought "binders of women" profiles to find women to hire as governor, but, in reality, he was forced to use binders and pledge to use them. http://hosted2.ap.org/MANOR/4e06196a1f11442a96197ec8174afd24/Article_2012-10-17-Romney-Binders/id-8a8f6924b6e643c9875aa4a319f4e643 Romney would be COMPLETELY WRONG for Wisconsin women!
11:34 am on Thursday, October 18, 2012 How could any Florida woman -- in her right mind -- vote for Mitt Romney? Romney opposed the equal pay for equal work act (Lily Ledbetter Act) for women. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/oct/16/barack-obama/obama-mitt-romney-refused-say-whether-he-supports-/ Romney favors the Blunt Amendment that would deny contraception coverage for women. http://bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2012/10/17/president-obama-tries-capitalize-women-issues-after-second-debate-with-mitt-romney/BYFJOuHtDdcaNeGIWVajcN/story.html Romney favors a “personhood” constitutional amendment that would define “life” as beginning at contraception, and could make abortion illegal. When asked to clarify his support, he answered, “Absolutely.” http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/03/democrats-target-romney-on-reproductive-rights/ He falsely said at the second debate that he sought "binders of women" profiles to find women to hire as governor, but, actually, he was forced to use binders and signed a promise to use them. http://hosted2.ap.org/MANOR/4e06196a1f11442a96197ec8174afd24/Article_2012-10-17-Romney-Binders/id-8a8f6924b6e643c9875aa4a319f4e643 Romney would be terribly wrong for Florida! Obama's position on each of these issues is completely opposite of Romney and Obama is PRO-WOMEN. No surprise that most Massachusetts women, those women that know Romney BEST, are
11:30 am on Thursday, October 18, 2012 How could any Florida woman -- in her right mind -- vote for Mitt Romney? Romney opposed the equal pay for equal work act (Lily Ledbetter Act) for women. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/oct/16/barack-obama/obama-mitt-romney-refused-say-whether-he-supports-/ Romney favors the Blunt Amendment that would deny contraception coverage for women. http://bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2012/10/17/president-obama-tries-capitalize-women-issues-after-second-debate-with-mitt-romney/BYFJOuHtDdcaNeGIWVajcN/story.html Romney favors a “personhood” constitutional amendment that would define “life” as beginning at contraception, and could make abortion illegal. When asked to clarify his support, he answered, “Absolutely.” http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/03/democrats-target-romney-on-reproductive-rights/ He falsely said at the second debate that he sought "binders of women" profiles to find women to hire as governor, but, actually, he was forced to use binders and signed a promise to use them. http://hosted2.ap.org/MANOR/4e06196a1f11442a96197ec8174afd24/Article_2012-10-17-Romney-Binders/id-8a8f6924b6e643c9875aa4a319f4e643 Romney would be terribly wrong for Florida women! Obama's position on each of these issues is completely opposite of Romney and Obama is PRO-WOMEN. No surprise that most Massachusetts women, those women that know Romney BEST, are
4:34 pm on Wednesday, October 17, 2012 Obama definitely won the debate, as most polls and media also say. Romney was rude, broke debate rules, and lied a lot! Why didn’t Mitt Romney support the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act to seek equal pay for women? Because Romney must think that women don’t deserve equal pay. Shameful! Don't understand how ANY WOMAN could vote for such a man. http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_CAMPAIGN_WOMEN_VOTERS?
4:33 pm on Wednesday, October 17, 2012 Why didn’t Mitt Romney support the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act to seek equal pay for women? Because Romney must think that women don’t deserve equal pay. Shameful! Don't understand how ANY WOMAN could vote for such a man. http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_CAMPAIGN_WOMEN_VOTERS?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OeBCWLGoJb0