Sept. 16, 2014 SIGN IN | REGISTER
Which Campaign Should We Cover From the Ground Next? You Decide!

Cantwell Looks for Reversal of Fortunes

“It seems that Cantwell is going down a check list of things one does when worried about losing,” Nick said. “Give money and jobs to critics and potential primary opponents? Check. Look for random financial loopholes? Check.”

Cantwell recently hired a former primary opponent onto her campaign at a salary of $8,000 a month, while another vocal Democrat who had criticized her for her stance on the Iraq war agreed to serve as co-chairman of her campaign.

“It’s also ironic that Cantwell spent $10 million on her last race and now she is raising the issue,” Nick said.

Meehan noted that Cantwell, who saw her net worth plummet when the technology boom went bust, thereby preventing her from again being a free-spender, voted for BCRA.

The questions she raises do not indicate she fears McGavick, but they are a matter of practicality, Meehan said, adding: “It’s more to interpret what the rules are for the campaign in ’06.”

McGavick has been on radio and television consistently since January. While he has mostly focused on introducing himself to voters, he has run a spot contrasting his views on immigration with that of Cantwell.

“We intend to stay advertising full time on radio and TV consistently until the election,” Bundy said. “We plan on continuing to contrast their positions on issues.”

On the question of Cantwell seeking to benefit from the Millionaires’ Amendment, Bundy added: “The crux of this is whether or not this will create the appearance of some sort of hypocrisy. Them raising this issue really demonstrates the lengths that they will go to, despite their own history.”

Cantwell’s inquiries come on the heels of a lawsuit filed by Democrat Jack Davis, a millionaire who is challenging National Republican Congressional Committee Chairman Tom Reynolds (R-N.Y.), to eliminate the Millionaires’ Amendment.

He is not alone in his desire to do in the clunky provision, which was added to the bill late.

“There are some anomalies with respect to the Millionaires’ Amendment that I don’t know how they get around ... why don’t they just abolish it?” asked Cleta Mitchell, a GOP election lawyer.

Mitchell said the fact that the amendment’s regulations are still only interim some four years after BCRA was passed is further proof that the provision is too onerous.

comments powered by Disqus

SIGN IN




OR

SUBSCRIBE

Want Roll Call on your doorstep?