AFSCME's Hillary Leaflet -- Brought To You By "Your Union"

[Omaha Steve]

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/05/_we_just_distrib_to.php

By Greg Sargent - May 5, 2008, 2:12PM

This is interesting. Here's a leaflet that I've just obtained that is being distributed in Indiana by AFSCME on behalf of Hillary.

The leaflet, which touts her "leadership" and "experience," doesn't appear to have the name "AFSCME" on it anywhere. At the bottom, it says: "This message brought to you by your union."





So could this piece end up in the hands of a non-AFSCME member who would then see the "your union" line and think it was from his or her union -- even one supporting Obama?

It's possible, but that's not the intent, says Dave Warrick, the director of AFSCME council 62, which covers Indiana and Kentucky.

Warrick confirmed that the leaflet was AFSCME's, and allowed that the name AFSCME didn't appear. But he said that the union wasn't obliged to include the disclaimer, because the piece wasn't sent out as a mass mailing.

Rather, he said, it is being distributed in person, door-to-door, to AFSCME members in places like Gary, Indianopolis, and Bloomington.

I asked Warrick if it could end up going to non-members. "There's always that possibility. Our data base is not always 100 percent correct," Warrick said. "That happens sometimes. But that's not the intent."

[BlooInBloo]

1. That's a surprise. Deceit from Clinton.

[Captain Angry]

2. It should be illegal to distribute political material without citing the source

There should be contact information on it, etc.

[NewHampshireDem]

3. Oh boy ...

You should take a look at what's happening here in New Zealand, where I am currently.

They recently passed a law saying that any political publications--they are working out exactly what is covered and what isn't--have to disclose the author of the document. Technically, if I have a blog that doesn't have my name and address on it and I post something critical of the government, I could be in violation of the Act. (Or maybe not ... no one really knows yet.) If I make a sign and carry it around with me, I have to put my name and address on it. (Or maybe not ...) If my local mountain biking club wants to put up fliers encouraging people to be become better informed about forestry policy, we could be referred to the police if a memeber's name and address (or maybe all members' names and addresses) are not on it, if someone thinks that somehow is being critical of the government or supporting another political party. If I wear a T-shirt ... you get the idea.

It is an absolute mess.

Just google New Zealand "Electoral Finance Act" and you'll see the many, many ways in which this kind of thing can be a bad idea.

Here's the wikipedia entry:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_Finance_Act

And this exchange from Parliament recently:

Hon Bill English: Why is it Government policy that every billboard, newspaper ad, TV ad, T-shirt, and balloon that is put out by any political party or third-party campaigner in election year has to include the home address of an individual New Zealander—the place where his or her partner and children live—and why did the Government believe that that is the best way to frame our election law, to put individual New Zealanders at risk by identifying their place of residence for everybody?

Hon ANNETTE KING: Yes, I am very, very sorry but I will sound like a cracked record. This Parliament decided that that is what the Act would be.

I'm not saying the idea behind it is rubbish, but it is just so difficult to enforce and really creates problems when it comes time to figure out what, exactly, is political speech.

[Juche]

4. The issues listed are pro-union though

It talks about alt. energy, pro-worker legislation, universal healthcare, EFCA. Virtually every union supports those issues.