UPDATE: Appel’s response ad is here.
For decades, Republicans have tried to win elections by painting Democrats–especially Democratic women–as soft on crime or weak on national defense. So no one should be surprised by the smear at the heart of the National Republican Congressional Committee’s latest attack on Staci Appel in Iowa’s third district. Taking out of context comments Appel made during her first debate with David Young, the NRCC is claiming Appel supports “passports for terrorists.”
Background and details are after the jump, along with the latest ads from both sides. Politico’s “Morning Score” reported on September 18 that David Young’s campaign has “gone dark”–not airing any television commercials–for the time being. It’s not clear whether the Young campaign is running short of funds or simply taking a break while the NRCC does the heavy lifting. Typically candidates will run positive ads while outside groups run attacks. The NRCC already has a positive spot running about Young as well as the misleading ad they’ve launched against Appel.
Bleeding Heartland covered the the September 11 debate between Appel and Young here. You can watch the video or read the full transcript on Iowa Public Television’s website. Here’s the relevant excerpt, the last of several questions about President Barack Obama’s approach to dealing with Islamic militants in the Middle East:
Borg: But what does that mean if you were elected to Congress, sitting there now what would you be urging?
Young: I’d be urging our State Department to revoke the passports of those that they suspect who have admitted that they are part of terrorist organizations. Our State Department has that authority. Right now they’re not doing it. They’re guising it under the gauge of religious freedom. That is absurd to me.
Borg: And Mrs. Appel, what would you be doing if you were sitting in Congress now?
Appel: Well, Congress has the role of oversight. They need to make sure that what we’re working on —
Borg: What would you be urging?
Appel: I would not be urging taking away their passports. I think we need to make sure that we work through the system and look through it on a very diligent basis.
While that’s not the most elegant answer, reading or watching that whole segment of the debate makes clear that Appel broadly supports the Obama administration’s approach, whereas Young asserts the State Department isn’t doing enough. In its write-up of the debate, the Omaha World-Herald summarized the exchange as follows:
Democrat Staci Appel and Republican David Young agreed that terrorism remains a concern 13 years after the attacks. Young said if elected he would push to take away the passports of people suspected of being part of a terrorist cell. Appel said she would not support new legislation but would use existing laws to remove passports from those associated with terrorist organizations. She said lawmakers need to address terrorism, especially by the Islamic State, “on a very diligent basis.”
Appel’s campaign recognized the potential for these comments to be misconstrued. Taking questions from journalists right after the debate, campaign manager Ben Miller said Appel “meant she supports the current legal regime for handling potential domestic terrorists.” That didn’t stop the NRCC from claiming in a press release the following day that Appel “would oppose revoking the passports of known American terrorists who admit to joining terrorist organizations like the Islamic State.”
This week, retiring Representative Tom Latham and Young’s campaign again claimed (without substantiation) that Appel is against revoking terrorists’ passports under any circumstances.
“The State Department has the authority to suspend passports. I also know that suspension, revocation of passports can be done on an expedited basis when the situation warrants in a matter of hours or days. It does not necessarily need to be a lengthy process,” Latham said.
GOP nominee David Young of Van Meter said in a statement Wednesday that protecting America from the threats of the Islamic State, also called ISIS or ISIL, should be a top priority of our government.
“In Congress, I will push the administration to use every tool available to keep Iowa families safe. One of those tools is revoking the passports of self-proclaimed terrorists,” he said.
Young said during a debate last week in Council Bluffs he commented that he would absolutely support revoking these passports.” I sat in shock when my opponent disagreed and said she would not,” he added.
Ben Miller, campaign manager for Staci Appel of Ackworth, the Democratic nominee, said Wednesday that Appel “certainly does support” the removal of passports of those associated with or found to be part of a terrorist organization, using the rule of law and existing procedures. He also said Appel is open to stronger measures as part of a comprehensive approach to ensuring national security.
When did Republicans ever let facts stop them from claiming a Democrat is weak on crime or national security? On September 17, the NRCC went up with “Passports for Terrorists”:
My transcript:
Female voice-over: In a dangerous world, judgment matters. [viewer sees several photos of Islamic militants]
David Young would be tough on terrorists [photo of David Young with words DAVID YOUNG TOUGH ON TERRORISTS]
Clip from Iowa Public TV debate of Young saying, “I’d be urging our State Department to revoke the passports of those that they suspect who have admitted that they are part of terrorist organizations.” [words on screen DAVID YOUNG: Revoke terrorists’ passports, Iowa Press, 9/11/14]
And Staci Appel?
Clip from debate showing Appel saying, “I would not be urging we, um, taking away their passports.” [words on screen APPEL: “I would not be urging we, um… taking away their passports.” Iowa Press, 9/11/14]
Tough on terrorists. Passports for terrorists. [top part of screen shows photo of Young next to DAVID YOUNG TOUGH ON TERRORISTS, bottom shows photo of Appel next to STACI APPEL PASSPORTS FOR TERRORISTS]
Staci Appel is dangerously wrong for Iowa. The National Republican Congressional Committee is responsible for the content of this advertising. [photo of Appel, words on screen STACI APPEL DANGEROUSLY WRONG FOR IOWA]
One would hope viewers would have enough skepticism not to believe that any sane person affirmatively supports “passports for terrorists,” but it wouldn’t be the first time a big lie hurt a candidate. Unfortunately, some people assume that television stations wouldn’t broadcast a false ad. In fact, courts have generally protected the right to lie in political advertising.
Appel’s campaign is now trying to put Young on the defensive over the NRCC’s “false and baseless” attack. From an Appel for Iowa press release today:
Boswell and Veteran Arnold Denounce Baseless Attacks on Appel
The Former Congressman Who Served in Vietnam Joined by Mother of Iraq Vet to Refute NRCC Lies and Half-Truths
DES MOINES – Former Iowa Congressman Leonard Boswell who served in Vietnam was joined today by Robin Arnold who served six years in the Iowa National guard and later in the Army Reserve as well as being the mother to an Iraq era veteran, to denounce the NRCC’s false and baseless television spot distorting statements made by Staci Appel (D-Ackworth) at the Iowa Public Television Debate in Council Bluffs and ignoring subsequent public statements by Appel and her campaign.
“It is disgusting that the NRCC would stoop so low in exploiting an international crisis to score petty political points for David Young and these type of Washington smear tactics don’t belong in Iowa,” said Boswell. He added, “It’s absurd and insulting that Republicans for David Young think Iowans would believe a mother of six and advocate for everyday folks wants terrorists to have passports.”
Today, Boswell and Arnold joined the chorus of calls for Young to ask stations to refuse to air the spot that falsely claims Appel wants to hand passports to terrorists which is squarely at odds with repeated public and published statements in the Omaha World-Herald, The Hill and The Des Moines Register.
“As a mother of an Iraq era veteran and a service member myself, I am offended that David Young and Republicans in Washington would prey on the fear of Iowans during an international crisis,” said Robin Arnold. She added. “I hope Mr. Young will join us in calling television stations not to air these lies about Staci Appel, because we deserve better from our leaders.”
We all know Young’s not going to admit there’s anything deceptive about the NRCC’s ad, much less ask stations to pull it. He must be feeling pressure with no tv ads of his own on the air at the moment, and the only recent poll of this race showing Appel ahead slightly outside the margin of error. Incidentally, I am skeptical about that Loras College poll, for reasons Bleeding Heartland discussed here and here. But that doesn’t mean Republicans should feel overly confident about this race. It could go either way.
Any comments about the IA-03 campaign are welcome in this thread.
P.S. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee’s latest salvo against Young places the Republican on the side of billionaires, against the interests of regular Iowans. I doubt Young is anywhere near as worried about this spot as Appel is about the passports smear.
Transcript:
Male voice-over: In Iowa, there’s one billionaire, and over 3 million people who aren’t. [Viewer sees aerial footage of country road, which serves as line between “1 BILLIONAIRE” on left side of screen and “3 MILLION PEOPLE” on right]
So why would David Young want to give more tax breaks to billionaires and raises taxes on middle-class Iowans? (Visual is footage from one of Young’s tv ads during the Republican primary, then shifts to view of average street with modest homes; words on screen DAVID YOUNG $200,000 TAX BREAKS for billionaires, AP, 4/11/14, CTJ, 4/02/14)
Young spent 20 years as a Washington insider, [View of Washington monument behind U.S. Capitol; words on screen DAVID YOUNG 20 YEARS IN WASHINGTON]
and now the bankers and CEOs are funding Young’s campaign. [aerial view of New York City skyline; words on screen DAVID YOUNG $300,000 RAISED FROM OUTSDE IOWA FEC, accessed 9/09/14]
They help him, he helps them. [more footage from Young’s GOP primary ad, doing magic trick]
And David Young will never work for Iowa. [footage of rural scene, words on screen DAVID YOUNG WILL NEVER WORK FOR IOWA]
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is responsible for the content of this advertising.
UPDATE: The Associated Press reported on September 19,
Young’s campaign cancelled airtime scheduled from Sept. 16 through Sept. 22 on WHO-TV and KCCI-TV, according to contracts the stations provided to the FCC. Young spokesman Tim Albrecht declined comment.
The National Republican Congressional Committee is spending heavily on advertising in the race. Spokesman Tyler Houlton said he didn’t know why the ads were cancelled but expressed confidence about the race.
“It definitely does not raise any questions about his abilities,” Houlton said, noting the NRCC is committed to spending $1.5 million between Sept. 2 and Election Day. “David is in a great spot.”
Isaac Baker, with the Democratic firm AKPD Message and Media, said this could be a red flag.
“It’s a very troubling sign for a candidate locked in a tight race this close to the election to pull down their television advertisements. It usually means their funds are drying up and they don’t have the resources to go on TV,” Baker said. […]
Appel Communications Director Nick Galbraith said in statement that Young’s cancelled TV airtime indicates “after 20 years in Washington, he can’t connect, doesn’t have the resources and is struggling to raise money from Iowans.”