Friday, July 28, 2006

Chabot Admits $10m Pro-Chabot Commercial Campaign is False

From Forbes:

Chabot Given Credit for Vote He Opposed

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce began running ads Thursday praising Republican Rep. Steve Chabot for voting for the newly implemented Medicare prescription drug coverage.

One problem: Chabot voted against it when the plan passed in 2003.

The Cincinnati-area congressman is in a close re-election race with Democrat John Cranley, and the Chamber of Commerce's $10 million television and radio campaign thanks mostly Republican lawmakers across the country, including Sen. Mike DeWine.

The ads say 1.5 million Ohioans have saved an average of $1,100 on their annual prescription drug costs because of the new benefit, which took full effect this year. The ads for Chabot are running on Cincinnati-area broadcast networks.

Chabot's office said the business group was acting independently and the congressman has asked the ads to stop, even though they were meant to help him. When told that Chabot voted against the bill the chamber was praising him for supporting, spokesman David Felipe said he would have to check on the details.

The chamber did not immediately call back with comment.

Chabot's chief of staff, Gary Lindgren, said the same false claim about how Chabot voted was used by an independent labor group, Working America, to attack the congressman in automated phone calls to his district in March.

Chabot resisted pressure, including a late-night phone call from President Bush, to be one of the few Republicans to oppose the 2003 Medicare overhaul.


At 4:03 AM EDT, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It is easy to see how the Chamber of Commerce and the labor organization that attacked Chabot for his vote could be confused, as he voted FOR the original version of the bill in the House (which passed by ONE VOTE-- arguably his), then he subsequently voted against the conference committee version of the bill which became law.

Cut and paste the following to see the roll call listing at the site of the clerk of the House for each vote:

(Chabot: Aye)

(Chabot: Nay)

If he were John Kerry, he would be pilloried for this as a "flip-flopper," having voted for and against the "same" bill.

In the Looking Glass world of Politics, one can take both the Chamber's and the Working America group to be partially correct, since, had the bill not squeaked by in the first instance when he voted for it, there would have been no House version to be reconciled and it might have failed to come up for that second vote: the vote in which he changed his position for reasons unexplained by himself or his chief of staff.

Of course, in praising the Law, the Chamber fails to note how while saving some lucky seniors some money it provides a wonderful full retail price windfall for drug and insurance companies. Thanks to Republican Deficit spending, the seniors grandchildren and great grandchildren will get stuck with the check for this benefit.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home