Davis Twists The Truth To Score Political Point

In his latest campaign ad, U.S. Rep. David Davis accuses his Republican primary opponent Phil Roe of hypocritically seeking more than $1 million in federal earmarks. Worse, he implies that Roe is a closet Hillary Clinton supporter.

At best, the ad is misleading. In its lowest moments, it is an outright lie.

In the interest of voter education, we offer a point-by-point analysis.

* Claim No. 1: Roe asked for more than $1 million in federal earmarks. False.

It is true that Roe, in his capacity as Johnson City mayor, sought federal help for two ongoing road projects, one of which involves a federal agency. The request wasn’t for an earmark; it was for funding through the federal highway budget. This is an important distinction.

Earmarking is the practice of attaching pork projects to massive, unrelated legislation. This allows the pork to sail through Congress without adequate scrutiny. Lawmakers find that they cannot slice the fat without voting against crucial measures – like relief for hurricane victims or funding for the military, to cite just two recent examples.

Roe has taken a very public stand against earmarking. He views it as an affront to government accountability. We agree – particularly when the earmarks benefit big corporations, which shouldn’t be feeding unfettered at the government trough.

When Roe asked for help on the road projects, he was fulfilling his obligations to the people of Johnson City. One project would ease access to the Veterans Administration campus, benefiting veterans who seek medical care there. The other involves replacement of a one-lane railroad underpass on Knob Creek Road – an area of great growth in Johnson City. This is a matter of public safety.

Roe, along with Public Works Director Phil Pindzola, met with Davis’ Chief of Staff Brenda Otterson and asked for help in January. They received no such assurance. Similar meetings with staffers for Sens. Lamar Alexander and Bob Corker were more fruitful.

By twisting Roe’s fulfillment of his mayoral duties into something shameful, Davis just delivered his reply to Johnson City residents and to those who use the VA Medical Center. He would rather score political points than help.

* Claim No. 2: Roe gave money to Hillary Clinton’s campaign. False.

Federal Election Commission records indicate Roe has given $12,000 to Republican causes over the years – including a $2,300 donation to Fred Thompson’s presidential campaign. He’s given no money directly to Democratic candidates.

Roe made a $500 donation to the American Medical Association PAC in March. The PAC gives almost equally to Democratic and Republican candidates for Congress. Their only criterion is that the candidates be “friendly” to the practice of medicine. At any rate, federal records don’t show any contributions by the AMA PAC to any presidential candidates.

Roe explains the AMA donation this way. He attended a non-partisan “school” for political candidates put on by the medical association. At the end of the session, participants were asked to make a donation to help others attend the school in the future. Roe believed the school was valuable, so he wrote a check.

Curiously, a different Phil Roe – this one a health system executive in the Nashville metro area – contributed to a different health care PAC that gave money to the Clinton campaign. Perhaps the Davis’ camp made an innocent mistake. Deliberate error is the other possibility.

* Claim No. 3: Roe hired a lobbyist. This one is a mixture of truth and half-truth.

Roe concedes that Johnson City paid $500 toward the cost of a lobbyist hired by the city of Maryville. That lobbyist represented the interests of 18 Tennessee municipalities that were opposed to a bill that would have allowed collective bargaining by police and firefighters. Davis supported that bill, which eventually stalled out in the Senate.

Again, Roe was acting in his official capacity as Johnson City mayor. To say that he “hired a lobbyist” is a stretch.

* Claim No. 4: Roe is lying when he claims that Davis “pocketed money” from big oil. False.

The facts are on Roe’s side. Federal records show that the Davis’ campaign accepted a $2,000 donation from ExxonMobil during this election cycle.

Davis contends that his challenger is implying that he took the money himself or used it for personal benefit – something akin to a stack of bills changing hands. Obviously, that’s not how it happened, and Roe’s ad doesn’t imply that Davis took the money himself.

The fact remains that Davis has raised more than half of his campaign cash from PACs – many of them tied to big corporations that want favors from Congress. He is casting aspersions on Roe because he cannot defend his own behavior.

Davis is playing fast and loose with the truth. Sadly, voters who derive most of their information from quick-hit television advertisements might be fooled by these vile tactics.

Roe – a common-sense conservative – has run a clean campaign. He deserves to be elected, not vilified.