Mitchell campaign claims new Schweikert ad violates FCC law

The campaign of U.S. Rep. Harry Mitchell (D-Tempe) is claiming that a new ad by Mitchell's 5th Congressional District opponent, Republican David Schweikert, violates Federal Communications Commission rules, and the consequences could be costly for the challenger.

Mitchell's campaign claimed in a press release that this latest ad by Schweikert violates the guidelines "outlined by the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, which is commonly referred to as the McCain-Feingold Campaign Reform Law," by failing to include Schweikert's image for at least four seconds at the end of the ad.

The FCC requires that broadcast stations provide qualified candidates, such as Mitchell and Schweikert, with the "lowest unit charge" available for advertising within 60 days of a general election, meaning that political candidates are entitled to pay as low a cost as any advertiser on a station as long as they follow certain guidelines.

Watch the ad here.

The release goes on to say, "Schweikert’s false and negative attack ad, which began airing Monday, is within 60 days of a general election and made a direct reference to Mitchell, does not display an image of Schweikert at any time during the last four seconds of the ad, and therefore does not meet the FCC’s 'stand by your ad' requirements."

The section of U.S. law the campaign is referencing states that a candidate "shall not make any direct reference to another candidate for the same office" in a campaign ad unless "at the end of such broadcast there appears simultaneously, for a period no less than 4 seconds... a clearly identifiable photographic or similar image of the candidate" who produced the ad, as well as an on-screen statement of who paid for the ad and the candidate's approval.

The Schweikert campaign disputes the Mitchell camp's take.

In an email to PolitickerAZ.com, Schweikert spokesman J.P. Twist said, "Our commercial is in complete compliance with all FEC [Federal Election Commission] regulations. Furthermore the Mitchell campaign refers to the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (McCain-Feingold Campaign Reform Act) in which their objections do not apply."

"Mitchell should consider losing his 'matchstick' lawyers and get back to things that matter, like securing our borders," Twist said. "This is nothing more than another desperate attempt by his campaign to deceive voters."

Mitchell campaign manager Seth Scott shot back, telling PolitickerAZ.com, "Their ad is in compliance with FEC regulations, just not FCC regulations. They committed a very egregious violation of FCC law."

Scott said Mitchell's legal team has contacted local television stations regarding their complaint, but so far have "not heard back" from them.

If Schweikert is found to be in violation of the FCC regulations, the consequences could be troublesome. Without the discounted broadcast advertising rates available to political candidates, his campaign might have to spend far more to keep his message on the air than his opponent.

According to Twist, though, there is no violation.

"The commercial in question is in compliance with the law," Twist said, disputing the underpinnings of the Mitchell campaign's claim.

"The title of Mitchells PR states 'Schweikert Violates McCain-Feingold Campaign Law,'" he said. "This is not true and as I have shown we are in complete compliance with the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act."

Twist provided text of the law related to identifying the funding source of the ad and the candidate's approval, but, according to another section of the part of McCain-Feingold Twist referenced:

"A candidate meets the requirements of this subparagraph if, in the case of a television broadcast, at the end of such broadcast there appears simultaneously, for a period no less than 4 seconds a clearly identifiable photographic or similar image of the candidate; and a clearly readable printed statement, identifying the candidate and stating that the candidate has approved the broadcast and that the candidate’s authorized committee paid for the broadcast."

The Schweikert ad does include text stating that his campaign paid for the ad and that he approved it, but no photographic image of Schweikert appears at the ad's end.