When I signed the petition for a better chance at a more ethically drawn district map – I sure didn’t sign my name so that a Senate Candidate in a tight race could use it to solicit my support. Talk about an ironic misstep just days before the state convention.
Here’s what I got in my email box –
to JM Bell < xxxxxxxxx@gmail.com >
from Steve Pierce < steve@voteforgranato.com >
Attention, Fair Boundaries supporters! Volunteers Needed for Sam Granato!
My name is Steve Pierce and I’m currently coordinating volunteers for Sam Granato’s U.S. Senate campaign. As many of you know, the State Democratic Convention is coming up next week — and we need all the help we can get to make sure Sam gets the nomination!
We at the Granato campaign were impressed with the dedication and commitment you showed in your volunteer work on behalf of Fair Boundaries over the past year. Oftentimes, we worked together, side by side, to collect signatures to try and help put that important initiative on the ballot — and now we’d love to join forces again for another great purpose: to elect Sam Granato as our next Senator and give Utahns a real voice for common sense in Washington!
Common sense? Where is the common sense in misappropriating and misusing someone else’s list to send SPAM out to innocent people’s email boxes? I guess it’s only Senatorial behavior if you model your campaign after Orrin Hatch.
Anyone know how they got the list? Anyone want to explain how no one told them about CAN-SPAM?
I think it is totally unwise to use the contacts list of Fair Boundaries for a partisan campaign for a number of reasons, chief among them – it will hurt the chances of a future initiative campaign being able to generate bi-partisan support. When concerned voters and citizen are already facing a nearly un-winnable challenge to make change in Utah – what sense does it make to give Republicans in the Legislature even more ammunition to fight against the voter?
Bell, all you need to do is unsubscribe. I also think it is lame to pretend this is a tight race. It is obvious thatb you are desperate. It is also obvious that Fair Boundaries appreciated Granato’s help in this matter and gave the campaign the list.
The only foul thing here is your foul accusations.
“I think it is totally unwise to use the contacts list of Fair Boundaries for a partisan campaign for a number of reasons, chief among them – it will hurt the chances of a future initiative campaign being able to generate bi-partisan support.”
i think it is great that Fair Boundaries group respects the work Granato put into their campaign. I hear he was very helpful with the Ethics Initiative too.
Fair Boundaries support for Granato is a great step forward. It means more coming from a non-parisan entity. For you to try to discredit that action as a negative is juvenile. Didn’t you listen to the news today? Peter Corroon announced he was working with Sheryl Allen, a Republican. A non-partisan group helped a senate candidate. A county party endorsed an Independent candidate.
You say, “When concerned voters and citizen are already facing a nearly un-winnable challenge to make change in Utah – what sense does it make to give Republicans in the Legislature even more ammunition to fight against the voter?”
When you ran for chair you said it was winnable, why now with the defeatist attitude? What a sissy boy.
But what about, “Carry the battle to them. Don’t let them bring it to you. Put them on the defensive and don’t ever apologize for anything.””
H.S. Truman
You say, “I sure didn’t sign my name so that a Senate Candidate in a tight race could use it to solicit my support”
TIGHT? That’s stretching it a bit. Granato has done the work, has the endorsements and the hearts of the delegates. Tight? I guess if you write it someone might believe you. And what if that candidate had been Stout? You would have grabbed the list in a heartbeat.
Really, all you need to do is unsubscribe. But when you’re desperate, you’ll say anything.
Josh – A couple of things –
1. – There was no functional Opt-Out. That’s a violation of CAN-SPAM. A Federal candidate that doesn’t know a federal law – that’s a pretty big deal, isn’t it? That’s where you want to start?
2. – Fair Boundaries is a bi-partisan effort. Using it to support partisan candidates of any party WILL give the Republicans yet another argument to waffle stomp citizen’s movement’s in the future.
3 – What is it about a healthy and vigorous democratic process that so pisses people off? I don’t get it. Challenged races are good for the party. It’s the process of debate. There’s no polling, so, it’s all word of mouth at this point. Sounds close from here.
4. – it’s tacky. A lot of folks made an effort for Fair Boundaries and aren’t using it as an excuse to be tacky.
Look, I’m not calling this the end of the world – I’m calling it a giant mistake that will have several repercussions in the future.
Ah, anonymous. Very brave to pop in and ass around. I’m taking the fight where I take it, and I sign my name to it.
As to the NEARLY un-winnable bit … did you not follow what happened to Fair Boundaries? There are new laws that were invented to make sure that it failed. How is that NOT nearly unwinnable?
Lastly – see #3 above.
The CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 does not apply to political speech — only to commercial speech. Even so, we do encourage candidates to meet the three compliance standards: unsubscribe, content and sending behavior compliance.
The Granato use of the Fair Boundaries list may or may not be tacky, a misstep, unwise. It may or may not be good for the future of citizens’ initiatives. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But the decision about the use of the list is that of the people who collected the data. And, at any rate, because of the political exemption, the use was certainly not illegal.
What was Fair Boundaries privacy policy? Did you have a reasonable expectation to keep data you gave to them private? I know that http://www.utahpetitions.org where people could sign online intentionally did not contain a privacy policy because the data was intended to be used by other political entities. There was much debate and a collective decision made by the users of that system.
I think it would have been better if Fair Boundaries had sent the endorsement message themselves. Giving their list to a candidate seems like a weak endorsement, maybe even just someone that worked on both campaigns.