Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
By Anjeanette Damon (contact) 
Thursday, July 12, 2012 | 2 a.m.
U.S. Senate candidate Shelley Berkley today will deliver a vigorous defense to accusations she violated ethics rules, flooding Nevada airwaves with a new ad that portrays her as a crusader for protecting Medicare.
Berkley’s campaign will also launch a counterattack, pairing the defense ad with an second ad meant to dramatically amplify her existing message that her Republican opponent Dean Heller voted twice for a plan to “end Medicare.”
The two-pronged approach is aimed at diverting the campaign debate in the wake of the House Ethics Committee’s decision to begin a formal investigation into whether Berkley advocated policies to help her husband’s kidney care medical practice.
“How about the truth, Dean Heller,” Berkley’s first ad begins, before portraying the ethics complaint that helped spur the House investigation as a politically motivated attack.
“The complaint against Shelley Berkley was filed by the Republican Party,” the announcer continues.
The ad then argues Berkley fought to “stop cuts to Medicare coverage for hundreds of thousands of patients nationwide.”
At the heart of the ethics complaint against Berkley is that she lobbied to prevent cuts to the Medicare reimbursement rate for dialysis. Her husband, Dr. Larry Lehrner, is a Las Vegas nephrologist whose practice derives some of its business from Medicare patients.
Berkley also joined with the rest of Nevada’s delegation to fight the closure of the kidney transplant center at University Medical Center, where her husband’s practice had a contract to provide kidney care. The transplant center is the only one in the Las Vegas Valley. Its closure would have forced patients to travel out of state for surgery.
Further complicating the issue is the fact Lehrner is involved in a renal doctors political action committee, which has donated to Berkley’s campaigns.
Berkley has always contended her motivation was protecting patient care for her constituents and not her family’s financial interests.
After presenting Berkley’s defense, the ad then pivots into an attack on Heller.
“And Dean Heller? Heller voted twice to end Medicare as we know it,” the announcer said. “You decide who’s for you.”
That segues directly into one of the key issues that Berkley’s campaign argues the election will be fought on: Medicare.
To that end, Berkley’s campaign will begin to amplify the Medicare attack against Heller on two fronts: television and the Internet.
In a second ad released today, Berkley accuses Heller of voting twice to “end Medicare” and of bragging that he’s proud of those votes.
“He even says he’s proud to be the only person to vote twice to end Medicare,” the announcer says.
Heller indeed voted twice for a budget proposal put forward by Rep. Paul Ryan that would replace the existing Medicare program with a voucher program. The new program would apply to people younger than 55.
Democrats have long used the attack against Republicans who supported Ryan’s budget, despite the fact independent fact checkers have labeled the claim dubious. They contend the plan wouldn’t “end Medicare,” but concede that it would “end Medicare as we know it.”
Berkley’s campaign decided not to split those hairs.
“Dean Heller’s plan puts private insurance company bureaucrats in between seniors and their doctors while undermining guaranteed benefits by increasing premiums $6,000 a year on average,” a Berkley campaign spokesperson said. “Heller’s plan would be unrecognizable to the seniors who rely on the current Medicare system.”
Heller’s campaign has labeled a similar attack by the independent political organization Patriot Majority as an unfounded scare tactic.
“Shelley Berkley and Harry Reid just keep repeating the same ‘Lie of the Year,’ hoping they can keep misleading seniors all the way through November,” Heller’s spokeswoman Chandler Smith said of the Patriot Majority ad. “Shelley Berkley has always done whatever it takes to score political points, so her ‘Mediscare’ tactics really come as no surprise.”
The Berkley campaign’s decision to rely on the standard Medicare attack signals her insistence that the election will not be dominated by the ethics investigation. Instead, the campaign will continue to position Berkley as a “populist fighter” for middle-class issues.
“The message of this campaign doesn’t change,” a Democratic operative said.
Ads defending her crimes
That's the Reid way
Next Berkley will be attacking Heller of doing the same crime
So the message has dropped down from the gutter, skipped by the sewer completely, and is now coming directly from the cesspool?
That this person is portraying herself as all high and noble makes me want to puke.
Since Republicans and Berkley voted the same way, I'm having trouble seeing how Berkley voted in a way that served her personal interest. But, Berkley should have seen the appearance of impropriety and recused herself.
Here's a good rundown of what this whole Kidney/Berkley affair is about: http://factcheck.org/2012/06/outside-gro...
Obviously Berkley did what she did because of her husband. You know this since her only two real concerns for a decade have been Vets and Israel.
Berkley showed an incredible lack of judgement skills on this and THAT should be what opponents are attacking. How is she fit to decide matters which really count if she is this stupid?
Now she decides to run equally misleading counter-attack ads? Haven't we had enough of this BS from Politicians?
So:
1. Is keeping kidney transplantation going in Nevada is against the public interest? and
2. Is having dialysis facilities in Nevada is against the public interest?
If the answer to either question is "yes", then both Berkeley and Heller should be removed from office -- because they supported keeping kidney transplantation and dialysis in Nevada.
Most of us would agree that folks in Nevada are better off having dialysis and transplantation done locally rather than to have to go out of state for treatment. So thank you Ms. Berkeley and thank you Mr. Heller for being sensible servants of Nevada's interests before Silly Season set in and turning yourselves into gibbering chimpanzees and throwing political feces at one another in yet another demonstration of why political parties ought to be outlawed.
I don't care what your political interests are. In this instance, this entire matter should be a no-brainer. Dean Heller (R), Jon Porter (R) and Shelley Berkley ALL signed this bill. UMC at that time and may still be the only place for kidney transplants in this state. Until YOU need to have a kidney transplant and have to go out of state, I would keep my mouth shut about why she is trying to help Nevadans. My insurance would not pay for a kidney transplant Out of State. Dr. Lehrner is NOT on my health plan. There are other Nephrology groups here who didn't seem to want to get the contract at UMC. How many of us, who have kidney disease will be able get transplants here? Shame on all of you so called Patriots who damn Ms. Berkley who is trying to help her constituents. Until you have kidney disease as I do, thank your lucky stars you don't have to go thru this condition. My cousin died waiting for a kidney transplant for almost two years. It affects me, personally about this whole stupid story. I have contacted Dean Heller's office and they refuse to give me an answer regarding this.