Missouri Democratic Party releases Blunt answers to Chris Wallace questions

The lawsuit filed by Fox News and anchor Chris Wallace over the Robin Carnahan campaign's use of a clip featuring Chris Wallace grilling Roy Blunt includes a reference to the Carnahan ad only showing Wallace's question and not Blunt's answer.

The Carnahan campaign may have been doing Blunt a favor by not using his answer. What he said is included in a news release issued today by the Missouri Democratic Party:

Today, the Missouri Democratic Party released the facts behind Congressman Blunt’s answers from his now-famous interview with Fox News’ Chris Wallace. The fact-check comes after Fox News’ frivolous lawsuit against the Robin Carnahan campaign for trying to tell Missourians the truth about Blunt’s record. The motives behind the lawsuit, which has already been called a “dramatic step” and criticized by copyright experts, have come in questions as Fox News’ parent company, News Corp, has donated nearly $10,000 to Blunt’s campaign.

See the Truth Behind Congressman Blunt’s “Answers” About the Fox News Interview

(False) Rhetoric:

Blunt: “Well, I'm pretty sure that last figure is absolutely not accurate.”

[NOTE: Cong Blunt is Referring to the Fox News graphic that shows his campaign paid $485,000 to a firm linked to Jack Abramoff]
Reality:

Blunt’s committees paid Alexander Strategy Group $470,485 from 1999 to 2002 for fundraising and consulting services. [Public Citizen, January 2006]

NOTE: The report originally stated that Blunt’s committees had paid $485,485 to Alexander Strategy Group. The figure was overstated because two payments, for $10,000 and $5,000, were incorrectly included twice in the FEC data provided to Public Citizen.” The amended version corrects this.

Arrangement Raised “Serious Questions About the Influence Lobbyists Exert on Lawmakers: Long before ASG was implicated in the Abramoff corruption scandal, Gannett reported that, “Groups that track the role of money in politics say the relationship between the lobbying firm and Blunt…raises serious questions about the influence lobbyists exert on lawmakers…Campaign watchdog groups commented that “it’s a rare example of a member of Congress hiring a firm whose clients have a stake in issues pending before Congress.” [Gannet News Service, 10/19/02]

(False) Rhetoric:

Blunt: “But in terms of cleaning up the House, you know, the fact is that I have set or met the highest standards in the history of the Congress on that wall of separation between people who are in your family and the work they do.”
Reality:

Blunt Named One of 13 Most Corrupt Members of Congress. In 2005, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), named Blunt one of the 13 most corrupt members of Congress. CREW included Blunt because of his alleged “misuse of his position for the benefit of his family.” The report cited Blunt’s involvement in pushing legislation that it says benefited Philip Morris and United Parcel Service. Blunt's wife, Abigail Perlman, is a lobbyist for the Altria Group, which owns Philip Morris, and a son, Andrew Blunt, lobbies for UPS in the Missouri Statehouse. [Joplin Globe, 9/27/05]

Missouri Citizens Deserve Certainty That Blunt Family Business, Private Business And Public Business Are Kept Separate. The Post Dispatch detailed the overlapping political interests of the Blunt family, citing Rep. Roy Blunt’s behind-the-scenes promotion of provisions beneficial to clients of his lobbyist wife and lobbyist son as evidence of “the family’s tin ear on conflict-of-interest issues.” [St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Editorial, 11/28/04]

When Lawmaking and Lobbying Are All in the Family. “Perhaps it was inevitable in a city where passion and power live side by side: people who start as colleagues or contemporaries often wind up cohabitating. Journalists marry spokespeople. Government workers marry activists. Lawmakers marry lobbyists. It's the last category that often leads government watchdogs to grind their teeth.” [New York Times, Op-Ed, 10/9/05]

(False) Rhetoric:

Blunt: “My wife works for Philip Morris. She really works for Kraft Foods, which is part of that company now. She doesn't lobby anybody in the House of Representatives. That's about as strict a standard as you can get. It's the strictest that's ever been set by anybody.”
Reality:

Abigail Perlman’s “Strong Ties To Republican Leadership” Made Her Successful Tobacco Lobbyist. As reported by Roll Call, “Though [Abigail] Perlman is not the head of the [Altria tobacco] office - that position is filled by John Scruggs - Perlman was a central part of the company's lobbying efforts in the House. Her strong ties to the Republican leadership help make her one of the most successful tobacco industry lobbyists in town.” [Roll Call, 9/8/03]

Abigail Perlman Blunt Actually Did Lobby the House…Including After Congressman Blunt’s Proclamation that She Didn’t. According to Altria Corporate Services’ mid-year 2007 lobbying disclosure forms, Abigail Blunt lobbied the House and Senate on a number of issues in the first half of 2007, including budget/appropriations, and food and agriculture issues that included a origin of labeling bill favored by Congressman Blunt. [Altria Mid-Year 2007 Filing, House Lobbying Disclosure Database, Accessed 6/17/09]

(False) Rhetoric:

Blunt: “In terms of that legislation that you mentioned in whatever year it was, that's since been passed by both houses of the Congress. It was good legislation. I wasn't trying to slip anything in. The New York Times is the only paper that's ever actually got that story right when they pointed out a letter from the majority leader at the time, Dick Armey, who said the leaders were working on this and we all worked together.”

Reality:

Speaker of the House Spokesman: Provision Removed Because It Had Not Been Vetted Or Approved By Committee. Explaining why Blunt’s last-minute tobacco provision had been removed before the floor vote, House Speaker Dennis Hastert’s spokesman John Feehery said, "It had not been fully vetted and there was no sign-off from the Judiciary Committee, and that's why it didn't go in the homeland security bill." [Washington Post, 6/12/03]

Center for Responsive Politics: Blunt Recklessly Disregarded Legislative Process. The Center for Responsive Politics spokesman Steven Weiss called Blunt’s actions “a reckless disregard for the way the legislative process works. He flouted the interest of voters and his leadership.” [Gannett News Service, 6/12/03]

(False) Rhetoric:

Blunt: “This was not something I was trying to do on my own. It was good legislation, since been passed by both Houses. It was the right thing to do. We decided collectively it wasn't the right moment to do it. The sinister part about that story was somehow I was trying to slip that in. It just was not true. Look at The New York Times. They got the story right. The Washington Post got the story wrong.”
Reality:

The New York Times article cites the same charges: “Representative Blunt's ethics drew greater scrutiny in 2003 when he was named House Republican whip. The Washington Post reported that in the final hours before a vote on a domestic security measure Mr. Blunt had tried unsuccessfully to insert a provision blocking the sale of tobacco over the Internet. Mr. Blunt, who had divorced the previous year, was dating Abigail Perlman, a lobbyist for Philip Morris, the tobacco division of the conglomerate Altria, which considered the measure vital. Mr. Blunt's son Andrew B. Blunt worked as a lobbyist for Philip Morris in Missouri as well. (Mr. Blunt's daughter, Amy Blunt, also works as a lobbyist.)” [New York Times, 9/30/05]

Blunt Did Not Cosponsor Related House Bills to Enact Same Policy. Despite Blunt’s claim that his last-minute efforts to insert the cigarette provision was an effort to pass “good policy,” Blunt never cosponsored the related House bills that would have enacted the tobacco policy through normal House procedures. [Thomas.loc.gov]