Skip to main content

Anti-Ethical Electioneering

It's Election Day 2009, so what better topic than a particularly slimy
instance of negative campaigning that attacks a candidate for seeking
an advisory opinion from the local ethics board, and actually following
it.<br>
<br>
According to <a href="http://www.kcrg.com/news/local/68388382.html&quot; target="”_blank”">an
article</a> on kcrg.com this Sunday, a candidate's flier said that his
incumbent Cedar Rapids city council opponent “had been accused of
ethics violations and appeared before the city ethics board ... TWICE!"
In fact, he had appeared to get an <a href="http://www.cedar-rapids.org/ethics/documents/ETHICS_BOARD_LETTER.pdf&qu…; target="”_blank”">advisory
opinion</a> on one occasion, and on the other occasion it appears from <a href="http://gazetteonline.com/breaking-news/2009/08/10/board-decides-cedar-r…; target="”_blank”">an
article in the <i>Gazette</i></a> that a  complaint had been filed, but
that the council member had recused himself and this was deemed proper
by the ethics board.<br>
<br>
Distortion of facts is sadly a common feature of political races, but
making it look like an opponent had ethics problems when he had acted
responsibly is an especially ugly sort of distortion.