Soft money dominates local political ads

Thursday, Sept. 28, 2000 | 11:15 a.m.

The nation's two major political parties have taken center stage in the television advertising war involving U.S. Senate candidates John Ensign and Ed Bernstein.

A new ad that began airing Wednesday attacking Democrat Bernstein's prescription drug plan for Medicare recipients signaled the entry of the National Republican Senatorial Committee into the race.

The national Republicans were preceded by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, which has poured $500,000 into commercials blasting former GOP Rep. Ensign's voting record on Medicare and Social Security and his anti-abortion position. The cost of the GOP ad was not immediately available.

But leaders of two Nevada groups who want to ban these soft money ads say they are not amused by the attacks financed by the national parties.

"In the whole polluted atmosphere of campaign financing soft money is the most toxic because there is so much of it, there are no limits on it, and there is no accountability," said Bob Fulkerson, executive director of the Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada in Reno. The group is a coalition of labor, women's organizations, environmentalists and trial lawyers.

Like Fulkerson, Nevada's Common Cause chairman, Jim Hulse of Reno, is a supporter of the failed McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform bill in Congress that aimed to restrict soft money.

"Soft money hurts the electoral process because most of it goes into negative advertising that doesn't go into a discussion of the issues," Hulse said.

Unlike hard money, which is raised by candidates and has maximum limits that can be donated by individuals and political action committees, soft money is virtually unregulated and can be given in unlimited amounts to political parties and special interest groups. Soft money donors also are difficult to trace.

The original intent of soft money was for it to finance get-out-the-vote activities. In recent years, special interest groups have used soft money to run issue-oriented ads that urged the TV audience to call their senator or congressman. But the national political parties are increasingly using soft money to attack opposition candidates.

Both Bob Seale, chairman of the Nevada Republican Party and Rory Reid, chairman of the Nevada State Democratic Party, said they would be willing to discuss a potential ban on such ads with each others' party. But Hulse is not holding his breath that a group such as Common Cause could serve as an intermediary.

"The candidates wouldn't listen to a small group like ours because soft money has so much clout," Hulse said.

Seale, a former state treasurer, said the parties have to help get out the word on candidates and how they contrast with their opponents. But he said a potential ban on soft money commercials would be difficult to pull off because the degree to which ads are considered negative is subject to interpretation.

"It's important that Ensign gets out there and develops workable plans, and he needs to respond to Bernstein and his allegations," Seale said. "To the extent that one side does it (negative advertising) the other side has to respond."

Reid, son of Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., said a compromise with the Republicans would depend on the conditions.

"It's hard to react to an offer that has never been made," Reid said. "But this is an indication of why we need campaign finance reform. This is also an indication that everyone regards this as a national race. The fact that both parties are paying attention to this race is John Ensign's worst nightmare."

The latest ad, which includes a shot of attorney Bernstein's law firm billboard, refers to the Democrat's drug plan as a "scheme" that would result in a $600 annual "tax" on seniors. The ad claims that "Bernstein's pushing a controversial plan to recycle drugs from foreign countries and sell them to unsuspecting seniors."

Ensign has a drug plan of his own that he said would be far less expensive for Medicare recipients. He also has financed ads that criticized a trip Bernstein took with seniors to Tijuana, Mexico, to highlight the lower cost of medicine south of the border.

Bernstein, who favors importation of foreign medicine to reduce costs to consumers, has responded that Ensign's plan is too risky for seniors because it gives too much control to pharmaceutical companies.

"Once again, John Ensign's drug company ties are rearing their ugly head," Bernstein said in a prepared statement on the latest ad. "This new GOP ad is by, for and of the drug companies that are spending millions to block re-importation, stop prescription drug reform and elect candidates like John Ensign to Congress."