Lunsford campaign launches full-fledged assault on Fischer's attack ad

The campaign of Democratic Senate candidate Bruce Lunsford has launched major defensive maneuvers to counteract the attack ad launched against their candidate late last week by opponent Greg Fischer.

A letter from the Washington, D.C.-based law firm Sandler, Reiff, and Young written on behalf of "Friends of Bruce Lunsford" was fired off to every television station airing Fischer's 30-second attack ad today.

In the letter, Attorney Neil Reiff charges that the disclaimer in Fischer's ad does not meet the federal standards stipulated in the "Stand by your ad" provision of the Bipartian Campaign Act of 2002, and therefore disqualifies the Fischer campaign from getting "lowest unit cost" advertising rates.

Reiff argues the photo of Fischer at the close of the ad should cover at least 80 percent of the vertical screen height - the figure Reiff says is called for bv federal regulations. Reiff says the image of Fischer reaches only 10 to 15 percent of the screen height.Still image - including disclaimer - from Greg Fischer's attack ad on Bruce Lunsford

Reiff also takes issue with the specific disclaimer included with the ad, which reads "Paid for and approved by Fischer for U.S. Senate." Reiff claims federal statutes require the disclaimer "must state that it is paid for by the candidate's commitee and approved by the candidate himself."

Fischer's committee is officially called "Fischer for U.S. Senate." The candidate says "I'm Greg Fischer and I approve this message" in a voice-over at the close of the advertisement.

The legal letter from the Lunsford camp says these issues with this disclaimer could disqualify Fischer from receiving the "lowest unit cost" (LUC) advertising rate from television stations.

"Failure to adhere to these requirements negates any entitlement that the candidate has to the LUC," said Reiff's letter. "The station must pursue a fee from the Fischer campaign for the difference of its usual and normal charge for such an advertisement and the amount charged to the Fischer campaign if the station offered the Fischer campaign the LUC."

Reiff goes on to argue that the advertisement must be modified to meet the regulations he stipulated in order for the Fischer campaign to be eligible for the LUC.

In an added jab to the Fischer camp, Reiff also writes "the failure of the Fischer campaign is not a failure of form but a blatant attempt by Mr. Fischer to escape personal responsibility for a scurrilous advertisement that seeks unfairly to impugn the character of Mr. Lunsford."

Representatives from local television stations airing the Fischer ad could not be reached for comment.

Charge of "Unfairness"

The supposed "unfairness" of the charges in the Fischer ad were also addressed in multiple venues today by the Lunsford camp. Earlier, the Lunsford campaign circulated a letter from former Governor John Y. Brown criticizing the Fischer ad that was dispatched to newspaper editors statewide.

This afternoon, the Lunsford campaign posted a point-by-point refutation of the charges levelled against Lunsford on its campaign website.

Using what the Lunsford campaign characterizes as "solid evidence," each of the charges floated in Fischer's ad are challenged by citations to a series of newspaper articles.

The web-based release then categorizes each Fischer charge as "false," "misleading," or both, using these citations.

The Lunsford campaign also offers their explanation as to why such labelling is appropriate.

The Fischer ad in question features a series of quotations concerning the Vencor controversy, superimposed over an image of Lunsford and accompanied by video of an elderly woman speaking about Lunsford's history. The charges all relate to the $104.5 million settlement with the Federal Government agreed to by Lunsford's nursing home company, Vencor. A Department of Justice memo notes that 2001 settlement was in-part based on "failure of care claims" and "over-billing."

The Lunsford camp's response to the Fischer ad is careful to say the settlement with the government occurred "without any acknowledgement of wrongdoing" on the part of Lunsford's interests. Language highlighting that sentiment appears several times in the release.

The release then tries to contextualize and defang each charge of Fischer's.

With regard to the "headline" in the Fischer ad saying a Vencor nursing home resident was found "lying in a ravine," the Lunsford campaign cites a December 24, 1998 Wall Street Journal article to characterize the charge as "misleading."

The Lunsford release argues that "this is a reference to an elderly patient who had wandered just off the facility grounds and was found behind the home."

The actual text in question from the article cited refers to 1998 citations against a Wisconsin facility operated by Vencor. The passage in question is as follows:

"Among the citations: Failure to watch over disoriented residents likely to wander off. One was found lying in a ravine behind the home, and another pushing her wheelchair along the on-ramp to an interstate highway."

The incident is not discussed further in the article.

The Lunsford release also claims Fischer's use of the term "Largest 'Failure of Care' settlement to date" is "misleading."

The Lunsford release attempts to clarify the circumstances of that settlement, arguing the claims behind it were from shortly after Vencor acquired another company.

"The claims occurred during Vencor's multimillion dollar improvement of facilities it acquired after a purchase of another large company," read the Lunsford release. "Bruce was unsatisfied with the condition of the facilities and the claims noted were based on instances that occurred during this transition while Vencor was improving the facilities and level of care. The claims were settled for pennies on the dollar with no wrongdoing acknowledged."

Language in the actual DOJ memo discussing the settlement notes it was "the largest settlement under the civil False Claims Act ."

The Lunsford release also defends the candidate's business record, arguing "Bruce's business ethics are without reproach and he has been named to the Kentuckiana Business Hall of Fame. In 35 years of business, running a Fortune 500 company and helping start and grow dozens of other Kentucky companies, Bruce has never had a legal judgment against him."