Is it OK to run negative ads if we accepted public financing?

Going negative often backfires in multi-candidate races or if the message is unfair, hypocritical or a cheap shot. The risks are greater when a candidate has accepted public financing, since voters start with mixed feelings, at best, about tax dollars going into campaign ads.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

In Massachusetts in 2002, for example, a "Clean Elections" candidate took public financing, then poured hundreds of thousands of dollars into negative ads targeting three primary opponents. Nothing in state law prohibited this use of public funds, but the slash-and-trash media undercut voters' perceptions, as The Boston Globe put it, "that the new system would change not only the funding of elections, but the tone of them." The publicly-funded, negative candidate finished fourth--behind all three primary opponents.

Should we be concerned that our opponents will use photo software to create pictures that show our candidate doing things that he should not or shown with people who are unpopular in our district?

Yes. Recent photo frauds "have fooled even trained eyes," according to USA Today, and similar counterfeit reality should soon be expected in video frauds that are posted on the Internet--e.g., days before an election, a video "depicting a candidate in a compromising position with a woman who is not his wife."

In any case, undertake three lines of defense: One, quantify any previous pattern of dirty tricks (of any kind) by your opponent; two, locate original photos that may have been used to make the fake composite (this is how the 2004 image of John Kerry with Jane Fonda at a 1970s anti-war rally was eventually debunked); and three, pre-educate reporters about doctored photographs and videos (for background on image tampering, review the work of Dartmouth Professor Hany Farid, http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/farid/research/tampering.html, who has developed software to authenticate audio recordings, images and videos).

We are interested in using the Internet to raise money, but how do we go about this without having a good e-mail list to start with?

According to online fundraisers Larry Huynh and Brent Blackaby of Blackrock Associates (www.blackrockonline.com), you should first build a relationship with online supporters and potential contributors--i.e., compile your e-mail list--and then ask for donations.

To build this e-mail list, Huynh and Blackaby recommend that you start with dedicated supporters: "Make sure you start collecting e-mail addresses at every campaign touchpoint--in every direct mail piece, in every phone call, and at every event with your candidate. Also consider taking your donor database to a consumer data warehouse vendor like Acxiom, and do an e-mail append to the names in your core supporter list."

From there, "reach out to officeholders and organizations that support you and ask them, where permissible, to send an e-mail to their own supporters, encouraging people to opt-in to your email list. Combine this outreach with an online advocacy campaign where your candidate stakes out an important position on a compelling issue, since people are much more likely to submit their e-mail addresses when they agree with you on a hot topic than if you send a standard invitation without an issues component. These initial supporters will be the base upon which you build the rest of your list. They will pass your online petitions around, send tell-a-friend messages to their friends and family, and be your first online donors."

I work for a city councilmember gearing up for reelection. We obviously don't use her office for campaign meetings, but is it okay to help organizations in our district who want to use city facilities for their own meetings?

Sure, but only if the event is appropriate and adheres to official rules--i.e., the groups pay required rent, have appropriate insurance coverage, obey fire marshalls, etc.

Just beware of helping groups with whom you are unfamiliar or who have unsavory messages. In 2004, a United States senator arranged for a Senate office building to be used in a seemingly innocuous ceremony in which peace awards were given to Americans from all 50 states. In attendance were senators, Members of Congress, Democrats and Republicans--most of whom were shocked when the main honoree declared that he had been sent to Earth to "save the world's six billion people" and that his good works had already helped Adolph Hitler and Joseph Stalin be "reborn as new persons." According to news reports, the elected officials "felt misled" and went into "full-blown backpedaling mode" as they tried to distance themselves from the Rev. Sun Myung Moon's statements.

Craig Varoga is CEO of the public affairs firm Varoga & Rice (http://VRstrategies.com.) E-mail questions to cvaroga@VRstrategies.com or fax to 713-522-0040.

ADVICE BY CRAIG VAROGA

COPYRIGHT 2005 Campaigns & Elections, Inc.
COPYRIGHT 2005 Gale Group