Mike Levin: “this list, compiled by Public Citizen, illustrates in the words of the group, ``. . . the use of the `issue ad' loophole…”

“this list, compiled by Public Citizen, illustrates in the words of the group, ``. . . the use of the `issue ad' loophole to engage in flat-out electioneering.'' I want to just use one of these ads as an example. This is a 1996 ad, paid for by the League of Conservation Voters. It refers to a House Member, Greg Ganske, a Republican Congressman from Iowa. The transcript of the ad reads as follows: It's our land; our water. America's environment must be protected. But in just 18 months, Congressman Ganske has voted 12 out of 12 times to weaken environmental protections. Congressman Ganske even voted to let corporations continue releasing cancer-causing pollutants into our air. Congressman Ganske voted for the big corporations who lobbied these bills and gave him thousands of dollars in contributions. The next line is: Call Congressman Ganske. Tell him to protect America's environment. For our families. For our future. This ad is treated by its sponsors as an issue ad which can be paid for out of unlimited, undisclosed funds. But if one word is changed-- just one word--instead of saying ``call'' Congressman Ganske, the ad says ``defeat'' Congressman Ganske--which the ad says in every single other way but doesn't use the word ``defeat.'' If they had explicitly use the word ``defeat,'' then that ad would have to be paid for out of funds which are restricted by law, because the word ``defeat'' is one of those magic seven words.…”