Campaigns can’t gripe when they play dirty, too

OK, I get it.

Political campaigns and their surrogates run negative campaigns because they work.

And the so-called independent expenditure campaigns have a free-speech right to raise as much money as they can and say anything they can think of to defeat the other candidate.

But could they at least spare us the phony indignation when they’re criticized for it?

Independent expenditure campaigns are set up for two reasons: They aren’t subject to the contribution limits that candidates are, so they can raise money in bigger chunks. And they are free to say stuff so mean that the candidates don’t want to say it themselves.

It’s a rough game played with few standards other than winning. And if you play hardball, you should expect to get some fastballs thrown behind your head. So stop whining about it.

This week we got to watch the surrogates in the governor’s race complain that the other side isn’t playing fair, is trying to buy the election, will do anything to win.

And they said this knowing that they aren’t playing fair, that they are trying to buy the election and that they will do anything to win.

The Building Industry Association of Washington and like-minded conservative and Republican groups have collected an additional $4.1 million to attack Democratic Gov. Chris Gregoire. ChangePAC has now raised $7.25 million and has most of it left.

Said state Democratic Party Chairman Dwight Pelz: “Since day one, (Dino) Rossi and his allies have run the sleaziest, most despicable campaign in Washington state history.”

Meanwhile, an outfit called Evergreen Progress raised $5.1 million from unions, tribes and national Democratic Party organizations and has about $3 million left to attack Rossi.

“After experiencing the viciousness of the attacks designed to silence BIAW, we felt compelled to do everything we could to give a voice to small business,” said BIAW spokeswoman Erin Shannon.

I might get weepy if both groups weren’t sitting in production studios dreaming up more ads that play to the fears and emotions of voters and that stretch the truth like saltwater taffy.

I get it. It’s how the game is played. But don’t ask us to feel sorry for you.

Also, be careful about believing what “independent” expenditure campaigns say. Two months ago I wrote about a new group called Citizens for Washington. It had $200,000 from the Service Employees International Union to attack state schools chief Terry Bergeson and promote challenger Randy Dorn.

Why was the SEIU so interested in this race? Dorn runs an affiliate of the union called the Public School Employees Association. And the growing union wanted to help him out.

The creators of CFW said they formed the group to help Gregoire, not Dorn. Since they didn’t expect to become active in the governor’s race until after the primary, they agreed to take SEIU’s money and help Dorn in the meantime. “They are on their own after the primary,” consultant and lobbyist Scott Nelson said at the time.

I checked the state Public Disclosure Commission filings this week and there was another $200,000 from SEIU. Who is that for?

“Dorn, baby,” replied CFW treasurer Michael Moran.

So that whole bit about Dorn being on his own?

“Circumstances changed,” Nelson said. Apparently the groups that might have funded CFW put their money into Evergreen Progress. With no one to bash, the group was going to shut down until SEIU came in to order up more anti-Bergeson advertising.

Can SEIU be legally independent from Dorn’s campaign when it employs Dorn, employs his campaign manager and has spent far more than either candidate?

Sure, say the founders of Citizens for Washington.

To which I say: Yeah, sure.

Peter Callaghan: 253-597-8657

peter.callaghan@thenewstribune.com

blogs.thenewstribune.com/politics