OCR Text |
Show j Hatch's ties to RUFF-PAC raises questions against me." But by admitting the close working relationship between Hatch's campaign and RUFF-PAC, RUFF-PAC, Hatch has tied himself to one of the most blatant examples of negative campaigning cam-paigning that has been seen in the current election year. When RUFF-PAC's infamous in-famous ad attacking Nielson as a liberal ran in the Daily Herald and the Central Utah Journal, Hatch's Washington campaign office and RUFF-PAC RUFF-PAC were sharing an office. Surely that close relationship could have been a means to head off the kind of campaigning that Hatch now deplores publicly. But it didn't. Of course, since the primary Nielson and Hatch have demonstrated all the signs of fellowship that are required of candidates of the claimed he was in no position to get involved in the controversy con-troversy while at the same time denouncing any efforts to slow down construction of the CUP. Now we don't expect anyone to take any responsibility for anything negative especially during an election year. But if Hatch's campaign and RUFF-PAC are as closely associated as Mr. Ruff claims they are, and if the Hatch campaign can't benefit directly from the association, then the groups must be working towards some common political goals. The question is, was one of the goals the defeat of Howard Neilson? The Nielson-Beckham ad was a drastic measure prompted by strong feelings r and devised to swing the election in Beckham's favor. It didn't work. Throughout the campaign, Sen. Hatch was careful to not publicly endorse either candidate, waiting, as he should have, for the members of his party to indicate the man they preferred in the primary election. But RUFF-PAC didn't wait. And it now appears that the ad had the approval of Hatch's campaign people. It is guilt by association, but the association is there. The members of Utah's Third Congressional District repudiated RUFF-PAC in the primary. There's no reason why they might not do the same to Sen. Hatch if they decide he is involved in the same kind of campaign tactics. I together, if the Hatch campaign cam-paign can't benefit either from direct contributions or from indirect contributions in the form of campaigning as a result of the close relationship? relation-ship? The only logical answer is that the Hatch campaign and RUFF-PAC are working for the same political goals outside the Hatch campaign, since there can be no gains directly for the Senator's campaign, as Mr. Ruff acknowledged. And why is a political action committee so closely related to the Hatch campaign getting involved directly in Utah politics outside the Hatch campaign, as RUFF-PAC did with the Howard Nielson-Ray Beckham primary election race? Hatch has aimed a good deal of his political rhetoric lately at what he calls "the negative campaign the Democrats are running 1 Two weeks ago former Gov. Calvin Rampton, who is working on Ted Wilson's ampaign to unseat Sen. Orrin rjatch, announced that the It Wilson Election Committee w0uld file a complaint with the Federal Election Com- mission claiming that Hatch's l, campaign machine and i Howard Ruff's political action committee, known as RUFF-i RUFF-i PAC, were tied too closely ft together in a union that ! violates federal election laws. l The usual cries of denial that follows any accusation of this type against another candidate were followed by a 'I simple explanation. H Yes, it was true that, as photographs the Democrats had showed, the Hatch campaign's Washington Office had shared an office with RUFF-PAC. And the two 4 used the same political consultants and the same direct-mail advertising firm. i Last week, Howard Ruff 4 called the Deseret News to restate that his RUFF-PAC was "far too closely tied to the Hatch campaign to even consider running an independent indepen-dent campaign. An independent indepen-dent campaign 'would be illegal; ille-gal; it's not even being considered,' con-sidered,' Ruff said." At least that's the report by News staff writer Bob Bernick Jr. So the Hatch people were saying that the Democrat's charge won't stick because RUFF-PAC hasn't and won't campaign for Hatch. That's fine with the Democrats. They filed the suit to make sure that RUFF-PAC didn't get involved in the campaign during the final weeks of the election. And it won't. But the close working relationship between Hatch's campaign and RUFF-PAC raise some other serious questions. Why are the two groups working closely same party from the same state. The only real issue the two differed on during the election was the controversy surrounding the Central Utah Project and the plans to run two aqueducts through the northern part of the county. Nielson strongly supported local mayors and city councils in their efforts to have that water combined and transported tran-sported through an improved, and preferably covered, Murdock Canal. Hatch, on the other hand, |