Working on details, but it is related to this.
Details: The problem started on October 20, 2004 when a pro-abortion group called Physicians for the Positive Choice (PPC) placed a full page ad in the Winchester Sun newspaper advocating for the candidacy of Democrat Rep. Don Pasley. Under only the smallest amount of scrutiny (the group is not registered with the Kentucky Registry of Election Finance so we don't even know who they are or what other left wing issues they may support), PPC claims to be able to hide behind the smokescreen that they did not "expressly advocate" for Pasley or against his opponent, Dr. Ralph Alvarado, a Republican. This is confusing, then, because according to his own testimony, Rep. Pasley liked the ad so much that he went down to the newspaper office on October 25 and made arrangements to run substantially the same ad (one-half page and with the "paid for" line indicating that he in fact paid for the second ad).
Several of the people listed in the PPC ad had already made the maximum contribution to Pasley's campaign, so the likelihood that they contributed further to design and place the October 20 ad (and that Pasley didn't report the contribution) would clearly be against campaign finance laws. PPC has refused to provide information about who actually paid for the ad in question.
This matter is presently before the Kentucky Registry of Election Finance and it bears watching. If an unregistered pro-choice group is allowed to produce ads that are so effective for a Democrat candidate that he duplicates the ad and runs it himself and they all get away with it, Republican candidates would do well to set up multiple off-the-books "groups" to advocate for themselves in 2006. Or are only liberals able to get away with this?
