Now I'm pissed. Yesterday I put up a post about the Gerlach v Murphy Campaign wars. First there was all the typical De Lay hullabaloo [NOTE: De Lay is so last season]. THEN come the comments that my humble post wasn't front page worthy because someone was afraid of lawyers. So, me being the dutiful child, pulled the post, so as to avoid a headache.
I personally didn't care if the post went front page or not, I wrote it and liked it anyway. Now look, I'm usually pretty liberal with my politics. I don't live in the 6th district, but this particular race fascinates me because it is just so he said/she said. BUT in the essence of balance, I don't see what the big deal was.....all I see is he is now giving as good as he has been getting from her.
And today, what do I see? This topic ALL over the place, including in newspapers. My gut said this would hit the papers, and it has.
Don't believe me? Here's one that put the article up online and an excerpt:
Did Candidate Lois Murphy Plagiarize Her Ethics Plan?
By: Jim McCaffrey, The Evening Bulletin Staff Reporter
03/10/2006
"Philadelphia - Did Democratic House candidate Lois Murphy commit plagiarism in, of all things, an ethics plan? Her opponent, Republican U.S. Rep. Jim Gerlach, is making exactly that charge.
The plan in question is Murphy's "CLEAN House Pledge." CLEAN is an acronym that she uses to stand for "Congressional Lobbying and Ethics Agenda for the Nation."
Murphy has called the pledge and plan her own, but Gerlach's staff discovered that Murphy's proposal bears a remarkable resemblance to a "CLEAN Office Proposal" released in January by Democrat Francine Busby a former member of a San Diego area school board and now a candidate for a Congressional seat from San Diego. Busby's CLEAN acronym stands for Change Legislative Ethics and Attitudes Now.
....Murphy's CLEAN agenda matches Busby's nearly point for point....Murphy's proposal also contains a prohibition on midterm pay raises, which Rep. Gerlach points out are already forbidden by the Constitution.
"After her announcement at Ursinus in February the folks on my campaign staff did some research and they found her proposal to be eerily similar to Francine Busby's CLEAN act," Gerlach said in an interview with The Evening Bulletin. "Bullet point by bullet point, point-by-point, the plans were the same. They simply restructured the sentences a little bit."
Gerlach said he thought it ironic that the documents would violate student plagiarism policies at Ursinus where Murphy announced, and Temple University Beasley School of Law where she teaches.
"If a student had turned them in for a paper they would have been disciplined for plagiarism," Gerlach said. "This is an ethics proposal and she copied the ideas without attribution. If someone takes ideas from another person they should attribute those ideas. This shows the character and integrity of her campaign. If you put out a plan and call it your own when it really isn't your own that's lying. Lying, it seems to me, is an integrity issue." "
Full text: http://www.theeveningbulletin.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=16279387&BRD=2737&PAG=461&dept_id=576361&rfi=6
More Here: http://www.cqpolitics.com/2006/03/pa_6_clean_dispute_the_latest.html
Sources:
http://www.busbyforcongress.org/downloads/pressroom/20051121_pr_Clean-House.pdf
http://www.busbyforcongress.org/downloads/pressroom/20060111_pr_clean-office.pdf
http://www.francinebusby2006.org/
http://www.loismurphy.org/pledge/cleanplan.pdf
http://www.loismurphy.org/pledge/pledge.pdf
http://jimgerlachforcongress.com/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=13897
http://jimgerlachforcongress.com/UploadedFiles/Lois_Murphy_Plagiarizes_Ethics_Plan.zip
$2K to delay!
Let me bring it up again because even if you think so, it's not old news: DeLay gave Gerlach $30K. DeLay is on trail for ethics violations. Gerlach has given $2K to DeLay's legal defense fund. If Murphy did plagarize [I'm not saying she did or didn't, I really haven't read up on this at all] I wonder if Gerlach will support her campaign with a donation as well.
The Bulletin is a pretty right-leaning publication. No mention [after a quick read of the article] on if they asked to interview Murphy although they did contact her campaign staff.
If she did, tisk tisk. But she is espousing good progressive ideas in her reform plan. Where's Gerlach's plan?
Huh?
I know I was critical of both the veracity and news value of Gerlach's accusation (and I still am), but did someone actually demand you remove the post?
2 cents and tuppence
1st cent: who didn't give to delay? and at the risk of being repetitive, we are a VERY politically diverse bunch - right, left, everything in between and jim doesn't bug US..and he has been quite helpful
2nd cent: it is the new political season, and crikey this post is mild compared to some we have seen....
final tuppence on the topic - the reporter who wrote the bulletin article is one of our former local guys...would hardly describe him as conservative! heaven forbid! he is however, a credible and excellent writer/reporter and you have to give the evening bulletin some credit for trying to make a go of it as an INDEPENDENT newspaper. this area could use some more of that.
An interesting discussion
But let's be honest -- saying "who didn't give to Tom DeLay" suggests that nobody abstained. Lots of people in Congress had nothing to do with DeLay or his tainted funds. But that's not the true issue with this story, and I think to focus on DeLay in this discussion really just clouds the issue.
The angle that fascinated me on this story from the beginning, and the reason I doubt these charges are truly newsworthy is that in my reading of both referenced ethics plans (as well as several others), I don't see a whole lot of original thinking anywhere.
To warrant the charge of plagiarism, you kind of need an identifiable original source somewhere along the line. Most of the proposed ethics reform ideas have no clear origin; even if someone wrote up these ideas before Lois Murphy, is that person necessarily the origin of those thoughts? And if not that person, who?
At worst, I think Ms. Murphy is guilty of sensationalizing her plan, just as Mr. Gerlach is guilty of trying to start an ethical brushfire where no actual fuel exists.
But it might be worthwhile to read what others think of the situation and whether or not plagiarism is too strong a word for this or not. I think it is.
Bull
It is simple BS. Period. This is not an PHD English candidate's dissertatio. This is a policy to become law. What the hell difference does it make who came up with it?
This is the stupidest, and I mean stupidest Republican smear, I have seen in a while.
Yes, our Republican candidate has no ethics! But, hey, the Democrat got her policy proposal from another Democrat! Get rid of her!
If this is true - I am sad
I see both sides of this - and I'm pretty far left. Yes, true or false, the plaigarism talk is a smokescreen to avoid discussing the ideas.
But the thing (as an ex-teacher) that rubs me a little the wrong way is that NOONE would have seen anything wrong with LM saying "I've done some research and found a plan that intrigued me by FB. The more I read it and thought about the issues specific to our area, the more I've come to believe we should be on this course." She would have lost no points in anyone's eyes. It is just as respectable to me to find an answer by research and defend extended applicability than to have come up w/ it yourself. And as a teacher, she should KNOW this.
IF this is true, WORSE than the plaigarism itself is allowing what could be an excellent plan be buried now from discussion/ be a punchline and never see the light of debate due to the s**tstorm that she should have anticipated would come at it. COME ON - I know teachers frequent the papermill sites in case and I haven't taught for allmost 10 years - and it was MATH! This is a time when the ideas themself (themselves??) seem much more important than the credit. What she's done to her own credibility in this coming out should not have been worth risking for an idea being not-hers-instead of hers.
If I were the eligible voter, I'd still choose her over a candidate with repulsive ideas, but I'd hope I could have a candidate who could give me the whole package.
Very good points
I would also prefer a candidate not try to push an unoriginal idea as her own. Unfortunately, when you make even the slightest mis-step in politics, someone is usually going to be there to attack you for it.
It'd be nice if voters could just weed out the political junk and get straight to the valid issues, but how realistic is it?
Post new comment