Unions Launch Misleading Attacks on Tim Walberg

Two national unions are sponsoring attack ads on Tim Walberg, the Republican candidate for Michigan's 7th Congressional district.  The ads, which address Tim's voting record during his 2006-2008 Congressional stint, are misleading at best. Some might even call them outright lies.

The American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees' (AFSCME) ads are so outrageous that they even drew the attention of Factcheck.org, an arguably left-leaning "public policy" organization.  Their analysis, found here, starts off with this:

Let’s start with the middle-class tax cuts. The ad, which cost $750,000, says: "Rather than cut taxes for the middle class, Walberg sided with big oil and hedge funds — gave them tax loopholes." That’s not exactly true. He did vote for the middle-class tax cut in question in 2007, and when the tax cut bill came up again in 2008, it went unresolved before he left Congress.

The article goes on to say,

The ad also charges that Walberg "skipped out on a vote" to save auto industry jobs. He was in the hospital, recovering from surgery, when the House voted on, and easily passed, the automakers bailout bill."

Even though Factcheck.org issued their release on Sept. 1, 2010, SEIU launched an almost identical ad on Sept. 18, 2010.  They are so proud of their effort, they issue a press release here.  According to their release, the ad, which cost $250,000,

highlights Tim Walberg's history of siding with Big Oil and Wall Street hedge fund managers instead of Michigan's middle class families the last time he was in Congress.

I find the whole issue to be just wrong on so many levels.

First of course is the degree of deception and blatant hypocrisy at the core of the ads themselves.  The ads' sponsors are obviously willing to twist the truth to manipulate public opinion and malign the reputation of a good man.  The entire approach smells of desperation and fear.

Second, I am bothered by the fact that theses unions are together spending $1 million on advertising in support of Mark Schauer. Yet, because it is spent on behalf of Schauer, and no money is donated directly to Schauer's campaign, there is no problem with the campaign finance laws.  Why is that acceptable?  It is just one more example of special interests exerting undue influence over the elective process.

Third and most importantly, I have to ask -- why are these unions running these ads at all?  Michigan's 7th district doesn't have a major city or a significant government seat.  Why are they spending so much money to support the campaign of a freshman Congressman from Michigan?  And why do the union members allow their money to be spent in this way?  What do they think they get out of this?

This situation is the epitome of what people who sympathize with the Tea Party are angry about.  We are tired of pay-for-play politics where special interests have more influence than the voters.  We are tired of the deception, tired of the negative campaigning and tired of partisan politics.

It's time for a positive message.  Time for solutions.  Time for candidates who listen to We the People.  I hope the people of Michigan's 7th District see through this con game and vote for Tim Walberg.