Every election cycle, I edge closer to advising this: Just ignore all those political ads. If they come by mail, trash ‘em. If they’re on the tube, mute the sound and go get something to eat. If they come in social media, scroll past.
Not all are dishonest or useless; some carry valid information, though that seems to be a diminishing portion. But in many cases one way to tell the bad from the good is to hunt around for any available evidence about who created or paid for the piece (especially a hit piece) - which often is not a candidate or an issue supporter, but some third party, often from far away. Independent groups, often styled as political action committees, have been dominating that paid-for conversation increasingly.
Idaho Republican Chair Dorothy Moon addressed this in a December 4 opinion piece, winding up with: “Take everything with a grain of salt. Do your own research, talk to candidates yourself, and vote for the one who most reflects your values and principles. Don’t take the word of some PAC from out of town—or even out of state.”
Agreed. But there was, as you might imagine, a little more to her argument. Moon’s column had a couple of particulars in mind, related to the recent and heated Idaho Falls mayoral race, and some of the support for eventual winner Lisa Burtenshaw: “Boise-based Idaho Liberty PAC, which has close connections to Governor Brad Little. In November alone, it spent nearly $30,000 in favor of one mayoral candidate. Stop and think about that: $30,000 flowing from Boise to Idaho Falls, trying to tell voters who they should choose for mayor.”
She also said a $20,000 expenditure came from a group called Defend and Protect Idaho which said it is a “coalition of members of law enforcement and the military, small business owners, faith leaders, farmers and ranchers, and more dedicated to combating political extremism in Idaho,” but gets significant money “from left-wing groups across the nation.”
All of which, assuming its accuracy, is worth knowing. But it’s just the part of the story Moon wants to tell, because her side of the fence, which backed defeated candidate Jeff Alldridge, is more than amply represented by similar groups.
The best comment on that came soon after the Moon column from Gregory Graf of the Political Potatoes Substack. First he went after her rationale: “Moon did not publish this piece because she uncovered a sudden concern about PAC transparency. Her op-ed came only days after a series of bruising political defeats for the far-right faction with whom she presents herself as the leader.”
Then he pointed out that her side of the Republican Party has been doing the same thing, in a big way, for years. One example is The Stop Idaho RINOS PAC, “operated by California transplant John Hedia, who entered Idaho politics during the COVID migration and quickly embedded himself in Republican primaries.” Another is the Citizens Alliance of Idaho PAC, “the Idaho arm of a national political operation run by Clint Maloney, the former president of Young Americans for Liberty.” A third is the Idaho Freedom Act, in effect the Boise-based PAC of the Idaho Freedom Foundation.
Graf noted that Moon mentioned none of them, and “All three omitted PACs attempt to have more influence in Idaho elections than the PACs Moon condemned. Their exclusion from her op-ed reveals her motive. Her article was an attempt to protect the machine she represents from scrutiny.”
Candidates will typically say, often with some justification, that they can’t control these outside groups, and in many cases that’s true. But a loud, and especially public, complaint about allied groups going too far could have some effect.
Meantime, before you absorb the content of paid political messages, be sure and check out the source. If it’s from the candidate, you know at least what you’re dealing with, for better or worse. If it’s from anywhere else, your best move probably is to send it and its message to File 86.
If enough people did that, one of the recurrent ugly symptoms of our politics could ease off considerably. And local elections might become a little more local again.