(KXAN has covered this story now as well. There are so many layers to this but Fred presents new angle that hasn't really been talked about. - promoted by Karl-Thomas Musselman)
I, as most political folks know, am a strong proponent of enforcing Texas' campaign finance laws. But I don't think legally there is anything to Terry Keel's criminal complaint filed against Kelly Fero. The complaint is about politics, in my view.
Fero's comment about Keel in the Austin Political Report--whether true or false-- doesn't constitute "political advertising" under Texas Election Code Section 255. Political advertising must contain express advocacy or electioneering, which I interpret broadly.
Fero's statements aren't electioneering under any defintion. Fero wrote that Keel stated his highest priority is electing Montford, and not his sister-in-law, and then Fero made a tepid joke about in-laws being a pain. His e-blurb may be false (I have no idea), but it clearly isn't directly or indirectly supporting or opposing a candidate. The criminal complaint is nothing but a giant distraction.
Even if the statute applied, I don't think the source of the comment is misrepresented. The organizational source is clearly stated as the Austin Political Report; the statute doesn't require that the person who wrote the statement for the organization be revealed. And there is no evidence Lehmberg's campaign authorized Fero's statement. In short, Fero may have been playing political games--and you may wish to criticize him for that-- but his conduct isn't criminal.
This is a very little tempest in a teapot. The real issue--which I do think is important-- is Montford's close ties to the Capitol lobby crowd and her receipt of 60 contributions from lobbyists. That does raise serious issues for me about her independence. But the voters will decide that for themselves.
|
