Harper bringing the SuperPAC model to Canada

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,817
471
83
New pro-Conservative ‘PAC’ launches ad campaign blasting Justin Trudeau, aims to fight unions

Canadian voters, prepare for the PAC attack.

HarperPAC, a new, pro-Conservative political action committee, is launching an ad campaign leading up to the Oct. 19 federal election to promote Prime Minister Stephen Harper and take on third-party groups trying to take down the Tory government.

Organized by some longtime Harper supporters, HarperPAC says it “aims to defend the interests of everyday Canadians against the tide of cash from professional leftist agitators and big union bosses that has been earmarked to take down the Conservative government.”

Its first radio spot attacks Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau and says he is not ready to be prime minister.

“After months of mistakes, Justin Trudeau’s poll numbers are free-falling. Canadians from coast to coast now think he is unfit to be prime minister,” says the voiceover in the 29-second ad. “But who does Trudeau blame for his low poll numbers? He blames Canadian voters … Can we really trust him to make hard decisions as prime minister?”

Political action committees, or Super PACs as they’ve become known in the United States, are a popular American political tool whereby enormous sums of money are often collected to endorse or oppose specific candidates or pieces of legislation.

The HarperPAC advisory committee includes Conservative activist Stephen Taylor, former director of the National Citizens Coalition (he spurred the #BoycottTims campaign earlier this month when Tim Hortons decided to pull Enbridge ads from its Tims TV), as well as a number of longtime seniors staffers in the Harper government and former Alberta justice minister Jonathan Denis.

“Unions in Canada have amassed a war chest of millions and plan to relentlessly attack Stephen Harper’s Conservative government. We are levelling the playing field,” Taylor, spokesman for HarperPAC, said in a news release Monday.

“Justin Trudeau represents dangerous and unpredictable change, while Thomas Mulcair’s NDP is eager to implement the same disastrous economic formula that ruined provinces for whole generations.”

The political action committee says it will raise money from “concerned Canadians” across the country to push back against such attacks.

The group says it is purchasing advertising to “inform Canadians of the important choices they face on election day in October.”

The release says HarperPAC is a project of the “ConservativePAC Foundation.” In an email, Taylor said the ConservativePAC Foundation is a non-profit corporation registered with Industry Canada, of which he is the sole director.

Asked if ConservativePAC Foundation is planning other campaigns leading up to the election, Taylor said HarperPAC “is the only focus right now.”

Earlier this month, a group called Engage Canada, which is organized by some former Liberal and New Democratic political operatives and partially funded by unions, launched its own anti-Conservative ad campaign designed to help end the Harper government’s almost decade in power. The group calls itself “a broad based, grassroots organization.”

The latest Engage Canada ad, titled Neglect, says “inequality is skyrocketing” under the Conservative government, and that income for the wealthiest five per cent has increased 12 times faster than for the rest of Canadians.

“For too long, wealthy conservative Super PACs like Working Canadians and Conservative Voice have spent millions protecting wealthy conservative interests and monopolizing political discussion in Canada,” Engage Canada says on its website. “The middle class in Canada is struggling and the Harper Conservatives have only made things worse.”

Canadians can expect to see an orgy of advertising from political parties and third parties alike leading up to the official election campaign.

Elections Canada rules cap spending by third parties, such as union groups and political action committees, at $205,800 for a 37-day writ period, of which no more than $4,116 can be spent “to promote or oppose the election of one or more candidates in a particular electoral district.”

Those amounts increase on a pro-rated basis if the official campaign is longer than 37 days.

The HarperPAC advisory committee:

- Stephen Taylor, former director, National Citizens Coalition

- Kasra Nejatian, former director of strategic planning for then-immigration minister Jason Kenney

- Michele Austin, former chief of staff to ministers Rona Ambrose and Maxime Bernier

- Jonathan Denis, former Alberta justice minister

- Dan Mader, former chief of staff to associate minister of defence Julian Fantino

- Chris Froggatt, former chief of staff to longtime minister John Baird

- Zoe Addington, former director of policy for minister Tony Clement and past spokesperson for Canadian Natural Resources Limited

- Brad Tennant, former director of political operations for the Wildrose Party in Alberta

Posted in: News Tags: Canadian Politics, Canada, Stephen Harper

New pro-Conservative ‘PAC’ launches ad campaign blasting Justin Trudeau, aims to fight unions
 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
60,771
9,718
113
Washington DC
Free speech and property rights.

Free speech means you get to speak your mind any damn way you want. Property rights means you get to use what's yours as you see fit. Including buying airtime, newsprint, setting up websites, and suchlike.

Which of these principles do you object to?
 

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
28,657
8,187
113
B.C.
Free speech and property rights.

Free speech means you get to speak your mind any damn way you want. Property rights means you get to use what's yours as you see fit. Including buying airtime, newsprint, setting up websites, and suchlike.

Which of these principles do you object to?
Harper and conservatives .
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,817
471
83
Free speech and property rights.

Free speech means you get to speak your mind any damn way you want. Property rights means you get to use what's yours as you see fit. Including buying airtime, newsprint, setting up websites, and suchlike.

Which of these principles do you object to?

Neither.

The problem with many existing PACs is that we don't know where the funding is coming from.
 
Last edited:

IdRatherBeSkiing

Satelitte Radio Addict
May 28, 2007
15,306
2,917
113
Toronto, ON
I notice you are not complaining about all the 3rd party anti-Harper ads.

Its getting really hard to not take you for a hypocrite lately.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,817
471
83
Kinda like the eco-lobbies in Canada.

I notice that this doesn't bother you

Yes, you frequently notice things that don't exist.

There's medication for that.

I notice you are not complaining about all the 3rd party anti-Harper ads.

Its getting really hard to not take you for a hypocrite lately.

You need the same prescription as cap.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,817
471
83
Unless it's coming from somebody whose possession of it is illegal, it's none of your business.

Well that's exactly it you could have a politician illegally contributing before an election when they are allotted a set amount of campaign funds.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,817
471
83
The threat of the PAC mentality - The Globe and Mail
Home - The Globe and Mail

Michael Pal is an assistant professor in the University of Ottawa’s Faculty of Law.

----------

With the introduction of big-spending interest groups running negative ads, Canadian elections may start looking more like those in the United States.

This week, individuals with past links to the Conservative Party announced the creation of HarperPAC. The PAC stands for “political action committee” – groups formed to spend money on behalf of political candidates – and is taken straight from U.S. politics. HarperPAC’s mission is to persuade Canadians to re-elect Stephen Harper in October.

It follows closely on the heels of the leap into the political fray by Engage Canada, an interest group formed to defeat the Prime Minister, which is run by prominent New Democratic and Liberal partisans and partly union-funded. Both HarperPAC and Engage Canada have adopted the same tactic – pound the airwaves with ads.

Why are we seeing the proliferation of these groups, known under federal election law as third parties? Electoral rules try to establish a level playing field in politics by restricting how much money parties, candidates and third-party interest groups can spend. These limits come at a cost to the constitutionally-protected freedom of political expression. Yet the Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that the tradeoff is worth it. Permitting unlimited spending would allow those with resources to dominate the political conversation and drown out the voices of their fellow citizens.

But there is a huge loophole in these spending limits: They only apply during the election campaign. The Conservative Party recognized this and moved much of its advertising to the period before the writ is dropped, when it doesn’t count against the party’s spending limit.

HarperPAC and Engage Canada are following the same playbook, but for interest groups. The spending limits that interest groups face during campaigns are effectively meaningless. They can simply saturate television with advertising in the lead-up to the vote in October. Whether they have the funds to do so and the wherewithal to run effective ads is an open question, but current laws put no meaningful restrictions on them.

The United States provides a cautionary tale of unlimited interest group spending. Restrictions on spending by interest groups are either non-existent or unenforceable in U.S. politics. PACs and similar groups backed by the rich, as well as corporations and unions, spend billions. The wealthy dominate the conversation. Things have got so bad that the chairman of the U.S. Federal Election Commission, which oversees campaign financing, recently declared its total inability to regulate money in politics.

While not of the same magnitude as in the United States, the spending on ads by HarperPAC and Engage Canada lay bare the fact that there are flaws in the Canadian system. Interest groups face no limits on how much can be donated to them. Want to contribute $1-million to help get the Conservatives re-elected? The law won’t let you donate that much to the party, but you can do so to HarperPAC. While technically independent, HarperPAC can then simply use that money to run ads parroting the messages used by the party. As long as this happens before the writ is dropped, there is no violation of election laws. An interest group running ads directly advocating for or against a politician raises the possibility that it is being used as a vehicle to avoid donation limits faced by parties.

Canada must strike a new balance that respects freedom of political expression while also preserving the level playing field. We need to consider extending restrictions on spending by political parties and by interest groups to the period between elections. Advertising that is truly about issues is valuable in a democracy and could be exempted from the limits placed on advocacy for or against a candidate.

Limits on contributions to third parties should be on the table for discussion. Elections Canada will need new tools to ensure that interest groups are truly independent and not merely acting as proxies for political parties. At a minimum, enhanced rules on timely disclosure of donors to third parties are necessary, so voters will know who is trying to persuade them.

If we don’t close the loopholes exposed by HarperPAC and Engage Canada, we will lose the level playing field that has made Canadian elections fair.

The threat of the PAC mentality - The Globe and Mail
 

IdRatherBeSkiing

Satelitte Radio Addict
May 28, 2007
15,306
2,917
113
Toronto, ON
It follows closely on the heels of the leap into the political fray by Engage Canada, an interest group formed to defeat the Prime Minister, which is run by prominent New Democratic and Liberal partisans and partly union-funded. Both HarperPAC and Engage Canada have adopted the same tactic – pound the airwaves with ads.

These are the yahoos I have been hearing ads from which I was referring to before. Mrs. Wynn also had her friends use similar tactics against Hudak in the last provincial election. Question is should ALL third parties be banned from airing political ads? How would you define political ads? What should be the consequence? Do you have any answers or want to engage in some discussion or are you just going to tell me to take a pill?