You can't judge a book by its cover, or rely on whose paying for a political ad by the "paid for by whom" part -- U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Part II

In a 9-13-04 post entitled "Cathy, did our firm join the Georgia Chamber of Commerce this year did it? Whew. Thanks," I highlighted a 9-13-04 article in the L.A. Times discussing how the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is co-sponsoring a $10-million advertising campaign to attacking anyone with anything to do with trial lawyers.

Trial lawyers, it seems, have replaced "union bosses" as the group that corporate America identifies as its key public enemy. And this year, more than ever before, the war of words between corporate leaders and trial lawyers echoes in the battle for the White House.

As I said in my prior post, our firm has represented the Douglas-Coffee County Chamber of Commerce for many years. I say this again to emphasize that I am a big supporter of our local Chamber as anyone in Douglas and Coffee County will attest.

But this new activism on the national level by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is somewhat new. I think I am right in saying that the Chamber has never endorsed candidates before this 2004 election season.

Regardless, today I learn that just because I know the U.S. Chamber is spending big bucks this election cycle does not mean that we voters will be able to tell when it is making such expenditures.

The 9-16-04 wsj reports that in about 25 states, this business-advocacy group is targeting candidates for attorney general and supreme-court justice who are seen as opposed to legal overhaul or other business interests.

This is not news. The news -- the Chamber has been trying to keep its role secret.

In a recent election in Washington state that the U.S. Chamber spent $1.5 million on an unsuccessful campaign against a candidate the Chamber considered antibusiness, a state-election watchdog, the Public Disclosure Commission, forced it into the open with a ruling that the ads were political advocacy and that the Chamber funding must be reported.

In Washington state the Chamber funneled its spending through a local affiliate called the Voters Education Committee.

According to the wsj article:

"The Chamber defends its right to run what it calls voter-education advertising without disclosing its involvement. Its political arm, the Institute for Legal Reform, is considering a role in state races for supreme-court justices and attorneys general in at least two dozen states reaching from Pennsylvania and West Virginia to Mississippi and Texas.

The Chamber is also funding efforts that target the U.S. Senate Democratic leader, Tom Daschle, who is locked in a tight race in South Dakota. In the presidential election, the Chamber is backing the November Fund, an independent political-advocacy group, that plans to run ads in "battleground" states, targeting former trial lawyer and Democratic vice-presidential candidate Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina.

[The U.S. Chamber's chief legal officer] acknowledges that the Chamber's legal-overhaul effort targets mostly Democrats. But he says he spent a day in Arkansas recently campaigning alongside Sen. Blanche Lincoln, one of a handful of Democrats who voted in favor of Chamber-backed legal-overhaul legislation that fell short in Congress earlier this year. 'It's not about whether they're Republican or Democrat, but whether they are supporting us on legal reform,' [such legal officer] said. 'She was with us.'"