Supporters of Assembly candidate and community college trustee Richard Holober have launched a smear campaign against Democratic rival Millbrae Mayor Gina Papan.
The first in what is likely a series of mail pieces intended to engender negative impressions of Papan in favor of Holober was sent via what are termed “Independent Expenditure Committees.” Such committees are comprised of moneyed interest groups acting on behalf of a particular candidate or cause.
In Holober’s case, it is the so-called Consumer Attorneys acting on his behalf. Those same attorneys who work to create opportunities for lawsuits against any available deep pocket. The consumer attorneys are greatly responsible for increasing the costs of just about every consumer service and commodity as the deep pockets usually just pass along the legal costs to consumers.
But what is the greatest irony of the attack by the independent expenditure committee is that the consumer attorneys are blasting Papan for getting support from….independent expenditure committees.
For the confused, this concept will be repeated.
Papan, according to a recent article in the Daily News, has garnered significant support by interests disconnected from her campaign and, according to Papan, without her knowledge. Her opponents have criticized such support in the local press. Holober went so far as to say "That's not the kind of money I would ever accept.”
But then, Holober supporters, disconnected from his campaign and, perhaps without his knowledge, have launched an attack against Papan for receiving the same kind of support.
The popularity of campaigning through Independent Expenditure Committees exploded since the passage of Proposition 34 in 2000 which strictly capped the amount candidates for state office can receive directly from donors.
But this circumstance is just too bizarre. One independent expenditure committee attacking a candidate on behalf of another candidate over support from other independent expenditure committees.
What the hell kind of world is this?
The first in what is likely a series of mail pieces intended to engender negative impressions of Papan in favor of Holober was sent via what are termed “Independent Expenditure Committees.” Such committees are comprised of moneyed interest groups acting on behalf of a particular candidate or cause.
In Holober’s case, it is the so-called Consumer Attorneys acting on his behalf. Those same attorneys who work to create opportunities for lawsuits against any available deep pocket. The consumer attorneys are greatly responsible for increasing the costs of just about every consumer service and commodity as the deep pockets usually just pass along the legal costs to consumers.
But what is the greatest irony of the attack by the independent expenditure committee is that the consumer attorneys are blasting Papan for getting support from….independent expenditure committees.
For the confused, this concept will be repeated.
Papan, according to a recent article in the Daily News, has garnered significant support by interests disconnected from her campaign and, according to Papan, without her knowledge. Her opponents have criticized such support in the local press. Holober went so far as to say "That's not the kind of money I would ever accept.”
But then, Holober supporters, disconnected from his campaign and, perhaps without his knowledge, have launched an attack against Papan for receiving the same kind of support.
The popularity of campaigning through Independent Expenditure Committees exploded since the passage of Proposition 34 in 2000 which strictly capped the amount candidates for state office can receive directly from donors.
But this circumstance is just too bizarre. One independent expenditure committee attacking a candidate on behalf of another candidate over support from other independent expenditure committees.
What the hell kind of world is this?
Posts
