Campaign Consultants from The Center for Public Integrity

The rise of 'revolving-door' consultants

2011-09-16T15:14:34-04:00

It happens every day: Lobbyists open the right doors, make the right arguments and push their clients' narrow interests to the front of the line.

The results vary. A Native American chief gets a West Wing meeting to fight for tribal status. Forty-story condominium buildings that will transform the San Francisco skyline are approved. Congress earmarks $239 million for a new bridge over the Mississippi. Copper mining representatives meet White House staffers to discuss acquisition of national forest land.

But the lobbyists fronting these causes all have one important advantage in common: They helped the public official they lobbied get elected. They were political consultants who traveled with the candidate or gave strategic advice on media campaigns, fundraising or get-out-the vote efforts.

Top advisors get to know candidates and can become privy to closely guarded secrets. Relationships are forged in the war-like, us-against-them, sleep-deprived atmosphere of a campaign. Consultants who also lobby then have a unique opportunity to trade on this personal capital when pushing the interests of their other clients for new laws, government approvals or funding.

An investigation by the Center for Public Integrity found that increasingly campaign consultants are turning to lobbying once elections are over. And unlike federal legislators and their staff members, who are required to wait a year before lobbying former colleagues, consultants are not bound by rules slowing down the so-called "revolving door" between doing campaign work and lobbying.

A Center computer analysis found 22 firms that do both political consulting and lobbying. This was determined by matching Federal Election Commission reports filed on campaign consultants hired in 2003 and 2004 with federal lobbyist registrations for 2003 through 2006.

Chellie Pingree, president of the citizens' group Common Cause, sees the emergence of this breed of well-connected lobbyists as further evidence that ethics reform is urgently needed.

"It's another part of a very unhealthy system," Pingree said. "We've already called for the ban of lobbyists serving as campaign treasurers and lobbyists hosting fundraisers. It would seem to me that lobbyists working on campaigns is just another thing that should come under that ban."

Rep. Joel Hefley, R-Colo., the former House Ethics Committee chairman who retired this month, said lawmakers should rebuff lobbying entreaties from their campaign workers and consultants.

"Not that there is evil there, but there might be the appearance of evil," Hefley told the Center.

A lucrative sideline business

It may not be "evil," but it pays well.

John Whitehurst, a partner in a Democratic campaign consulting lobbying firm in San Francisco, urges fellow consultants to emulate his firm's "lucrative" business model, with lobbying clients providing a steady stream of income during non-campaign years.

"It evened out my finances, because I would go and be buying dinner for everybody in October of the even year and then begging a McDonald's coupon in the off-year," Whitehurst said to appreciative laughter during a March 2006 panel discussion at the American Association of Political Consultants (AAPC) annual conference in Napa Valley, Calif.

He told the gathering that his firm, Barnes Mosher Whitehurst Lauter, works on campaigns not simply to make money, but to build relationships with elected officials.

"I mean, I have lost significant sums of money on their candidate races. [But] that stuff comes back in volumes — that John Whitehurst helped elect these guys to office," he said.

Through the years, Democratic consultant Joseph Cerrell has found that campaign relationships give him an edge over other lobbyists when approaching an elected official.

"I'm the one who knows him intimately," said the founder of Cerrell Associates, a 40-year-old Los Angeles political consulting firm. "All things being equal … I'll win every time. I'm the guy who just finished running the campaign."

'I think it's wrong'

Some veteran political consultants find the practice appalling.

"I think it's wrong," said Raymond Strother, a Washington-based consultant to national Democratic candidates and former AAPC president. He said he feels uneasy exploiting close relationships developed during campaigns and unqualified to influence the legislative process.

"I don't know about markups. I don't know anything about government. All I know is about getting elected. So why should I make policy? I shouldn't," he said.

Strother recalls the time he walked away from $1 million the founder of a Ft. Lauderdale, Fla., steamship company offered him to lobby a Senate committee chairman for whom he had consulted. Strother declined to name the senator.

In the late 1980s, Strother said Hvide Marine Inc. founder Hans J. Hvide, now deceased, wanted a pending bill rewritten to change the definition of a ship bottom. Strother wrote in his memoir, Falling Up, How a Redneck Helped Invent Political Consulting, it could have been accomplished by changing one word.

"I was tempted. And I called a friend of mine who was a staff member and said, 'Would that be possible?' He said, 'Yeah, it wouldn't be that big a deal. We could do it. Why? Do you want to do it?'" Strother told the Center. "I said, 'I don't know.' And I decided not to."

The ramifications that the one-word change would have had remain a mystery to the consultant. "See, that's way beyond me," Strother said, underscoring his lack of legislative expertise.

Sarah Dufendach, a lobbyist for Common Cause, which promotes an ethics agenda on Capitol Hill, is offended that people who are not schooled in the process of getting legislation passed would take on lobbying clients.

"You also have to know the process. You have to know the timing. It comes from experience," Dufendach said. "You could maybe get somebody an appointment with a congressman, but that's the bare minimum."

"As a lobbyist, I am outraged. This is a dumbing down of the profession. I'm really ticked off. And you can quote me," she said.

Republican consultant Thomas Edmonds raises another objection to the practice of consultants lobbying: He feels it violates the loyalty owed to the candidate.

As a campaign consultant for Alaska Republicans Sen. Ted Stevens and Rep. Don Young, Edmonds said he has been approached by companies with interests in that state's energy and natural resource issues. Feeling conflicted, he did not take them on as lobbying clients.

"I could find myself at cross purposes with the congressman or the senator," if also lobbying for an oil firm, he said.

"Let's say, that that oil firm has an agenda and that congressman or senator stands for re-election, and I'm working with them too and getting paid by them too. I might end up saying, 'Well no, let's not talk about that issue. … Let's talk about natural gas, not oil,' because if we talk about oil it might end up bringing something up that could cost me money. So then I have a conflict of interest."

'Ethical dilemma' of the consultant-lobbyist

James Thurber, director of American University's Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies, has studied what he calls the "ethical dilemma" of political consultants who lobby, and believes more consultants are turning to lobbying to build up a year-round business.

In his chapter of the book, Shades of Gray: Perspectives on Campaign Ethics, Thurber writes that "hundreds and even thousands of people involved in campaigns later lobby politicians." His estimate includes individuals who are primarily lobbyists, but who dip in and out of campaign activity as fundraisers, treasurers, volunteers and advisors to candidates or political parties.

The tight relationship between legislators and lobbyists who serve as campaign treasurers was documented by the Center for Public Integrity in a 2005 report. The Center found that lobbyists had acted as treasurers for the campaign committees or leadership PACs of 79 members of Congress since 1998. Critics fear this sort of affiliation with a candidacy is at times rewarded with special access to the lawmaker.

Some of the 22 firms identified in the Center's analysis downplayed any connection between their consulting and lobbying work. A few said they were bit players in political campaigns, not major advisors who got close to candidates; others said they lobbied only on occasion.

One firm, Westhill Partners, said its employees registered as lobbyists only at the request of an overly cautious client, even though they contacted the news media to promote the client's position, not congressional offices.

High-rises by the 'Frisco Bay

The practice of consultants turning around and lobbying the people they helped to elect is also rampant in state capitols and city halls across the country. A vivid example comes from San Francisco.

Whitehurst, the consultant speaking at the Napa Valley conference, described how his firm traded on its campaign connections to lobby for changes in California law and city zoning, paving the way for high-rises that will dramatically alter the San Francisco skyline along the eastern waterfront.

"And they're breaking ground now," Whitehurst told the audience.

Developers Tishman Speyer and Union Property Capital Inc. wanted to build two 40-story condominium buildings near the San Francisco Bay Bridge in the Rincon Hill district, which had been zoned for less dense residential buildings and low-rise commercial structures, such as warehouses.

They pushed for city zoning approvals and a change in state law that would allow developers to sell condo units before building them — and lower their finance charges.

"We asked one of the people who we got elected to the legislature to carry the bill to allow the presale of condo units … which passed," Whitehurst said.

The 2003 bill's author was Assemblyman Mark Leno. His 2002 campaign was managed by the Whitehurst firm for $113,036 in fees, state disclosure filings show. Soon after taking office, Leno presented the bill. It passed both houses unanimously and became law that year.

No one from Whitehurst's firm registered to lobby state officials regarding the bill. His partner, Sam Lauter, said they didn't register because they didn't actually lobby anyone to vote for the bill; rather, another partner in the firm advised Leno on the bill at the assemblyman's request.

"My partner engaged in helping him put all the stuff in the blender until they came out with something that made good policy," Lauter told the Center. According to its Web site, the Barnes Mosher Whitehurst Lauter firm "crafted" the legislation.

Leno said that he asked the consulting firm to review the language of the bill, but that he came up with the idea himself after a developer complained that California was unusual in banning presale of condo units.

"And I am told by developers that this is helping. …It has produced more housing and it has produced more affordable housing. So it was a win-win-win," he said.

But the consultants did register to lobby city government. For their work advocating city zoning changes from June 2003 through June 2005, Barnes Mosher Whitehurst Lauter charged the two developers $325,000, according to city records. The fee was almost three times greater than the fee to run Leno's campaign — illustrating Whitehurst's point that lobbying can pay better than campaign work.

In pushing for the zoning change, Lauter said he talked with members of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors and with city planning commissioners. One member of the Board of Supervisors whom the firm lobbied was Gavin Newsom, then running for mayor on a platform that included curbing aggressive panhandling. The panhandling issue had a ballot measure campaign of its own, which was run by Lauter's firm.

"We were not involved in the Newsom for mayor campaign. But there was a ballot measure that Newsom was in charge of. We ran a campaign that put his face and name out there. We were very open about doing it. Everyone knew we were doing it. It could be argued and I would not dispute the argument that it helped him in his election," said Lauter.

In November 2003, Newsom and others on the Board of Supervisors voted to approve a favorable environmental review of the high-rises, a step that propelled the project forward.

Then, in February 2004, after Newsom became mayor, the Board of Supervisors voted to lift the maximum heights for the developers' properties from 200 feet to 400 feet, allowing construction of 40-story condominium buildings.

City planners estimated rezoning would increase the properties' value by $98 million. Condo units are selling for a minimum of $700,000 and on the high end, $5 million for two top-story apartments that will be built as one unit, according to Carl D. Shannon, regional managing director for Tishman Speyer.

Land use attorney Tim Tosta, hired by developer Union Property Capital, said the consultants' familiarity with the politicians helped him tailor his presentations.

"A lot of politics is about the right metaphor," said Tosta, who is with the law firm of Steefel, Levitt and Weiss.

With an official who's a devout Christian, Tosta said he may refer to God, "but if you're a good old politically correct Californian, you'll talk about Buddha or your spirituality."

Campaign consultants "sometimes perform miracles," he said.

According to Sue Hestor, attorney for the neighbors who opposed the rezoning, the Rincon Hill neighborhood will become "a very, very tall forest of housing towers," blocking views of the Bay Bridge, "which is one of the iconic things you look for in the city."

When San Franciscans see the results, "they're going to be apoplectic," she said.

The week after condominium towers were approved in 2004, the city passed a law requiring campaign consultants to wait four years before lobbying their consulting clients.

High-level lobbying in D.C.

Federal lobbyists are not required to specify on disclosure forms which lawmaker they seek to influence, and they rarely do so voluntarily. But the Center's investigation found that consultants have been hired to influence the officials they helped to elect.

In 2003 and 2004, a St. Louis business group hired Republican political consultant Tony Feather to lobby for an earmark for construction of a new bridge over the Mississippi River. While an additional river crossing would relieve traffic congestion in the St. Louis area, the estimated cost was $1.6 billion, so local business and government leaders wanted federal assistance.

Feather, whose firm who had helped re-elect Sen. Christopher "Kit" Bond, R-Mo., was involved in at least one meeting with Bond while lobbying for bridge funding, according to a source with knowledge of the meeting. As chairman of the subcommittee that wrote the transportation funding bill, Bond was a key player.

Feather's forte is not one-on-one lobbying on Capitol Hill, but "grassroots" lobbying — the practice of finding constituents who agree with their clients' positions and getting them to support the cause by contacting their congressmen or representatives.

The bill stalled for two years, but when it finally passed in 2005, Bond (who did not respond to requests for an interview for this article) secured a $75 million portion of the earmark for the Mississippi River bridge, according to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. Two senators and a congressman from Illinois, the state at the eastern end of the bridge, claimed credit for the remainder of the $239 million earmark.

The St. Louis Regional Chamber and Growth Association paid DCI Group about $200,000 for its efforts over the two years. The Web site of Feather's political telemarketing firm, now called FLS Connect, lists Bond's campaign as one of 11 U.S. Senate campaigns it has worked for in recent years.

Ironically, the Mississippi River project may be another federally earmarked bridge that goes nowhere. Construction can't move forward because Missouri and Illinois can't agree on how to finance the balance.

Feather's firm was one of the 22 the Center identified that blend consulting and lobbying.

Feather wears many hats. He is a name partner in the phone bank consulting firm Feather Hodges Larson Synhorst — later renamed FLS-DCI, then FLS Connect. The company boasts an endorsement from George W. Bush adviser Karl Rove on its Web site: "I know these guys well. They become partners with the campaigns they work with."

In 2000, Feather acted as political director of the Bush-Cheney campaign. For the 2004 elections, FLS-DCI was paid $26.9 million by Republican candidates and party committees for telemarketing and get-out-the-vote phone calls, including $7.6 million for its work on the 2004 Bush campaign, federal filings show. Feather also co-founded Progress for America, a group that produced some of the most effective television advertisements during the Bush re-election campaign.

Feather also worked as a contract lobbyist for DCI Group. Many of his clients sought access to the White House.

Phones, fuel cells and federal recognition

From 2001 through early 2006, Feather reported lobbying the White House for 13 clients, who paid a collective $3.9 million to DCI Group for work by Feather and other lobbyists, according to Center analysis of federal filings. His clients ranged from corporate giants such as AT&T and General Motors to an Indian tribe seeking federal recognition.

During the first Bush administration, phone giant AT&T was fighting for its corporate life, looking for help from federal regulators. At issue were the rates a phone company could charge competing carriers for access to its lines. Ultimately, President Bush took a position contrary to AT&T's wishes, declining to get the Justice Department involved in the appeal of an unfavorable court ruling.

DCI charged AT&T $1.26 million in lobbying fees through 2006, according to the filings. The phone company's public affairs office did not respond to Center inquiries about its lobbying activities.

Over three years, General Motors paid DCI Group $360,000 to successfully lobby the White House, Congress and executive branch agencies for fuel cell research and development funds and for approval of the sale of its interest in the DirecTV satellite television business.

"It makes perfect sense that we would hire consultants who have the depth and breadth of knowledge in this town," said Greg Martin, GM director of policy and Washington communications.

Another client that wanted White House access was the Nipmuc Nation of Massachusetts. After Bush took office, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) had reversed a Clinton administration decision to recognize the group as a tribe. Within months, the Nipmucs hired DCI Group, paying them $160,000 to lobby Congress, the BIA, and the White House. Feather registered as one of the tribe's lobbyists.

Tribal recognition would have allowed the Nipmucs to open a casino, backed by a $6 million investment by Minnesota-based casino resort developer-manager Lakes Gaming Inc.

The Nipmuc chief, Walter Vickers doesn't remember meeting Feather, who is based in Jefferson City, Mo. Vickers said that another DCI lobbyist ushered him into two West Wing meetings with White House staff.

In June 2004, the Bureau of Indian Affairs rejected tribal recognition for the Nipmucs. Their chief was disappointed with DCI Group's inability to get meaningful results.

"I was always questioning what they've done and what they were going to do. And I guess they did open some doors," Vickers said.

Repeated calls to DCI Group seeking comment for this article were not returned.

Opening the right doors

Another man who can open doors in Washington, D.C., is Gordon C. James, a Phoenix-based consultant.

James was an advance man for George W. Bush's presidential campaigns, giving advice that was more technical than political. His company set up lights, sound, and staging for campaign debates, rallies and Bush's election night celebrations. While working on the younger Bush's campaigns and for the George H.W. Bush White House, he developed enduring friendships with the family.

Once the current President Bush took office, James tried his hand at lobbying.

"We can help people navigate the process," he said in a phone interview.

"We have a lot of friends in the federal government," he said, that he calls on behalf of clients. "So would you. … It's all about friends and relationships and trust."

James' fees are modest as lobbyists' go, the largest being less than $30,000 for any six-month period, according to filings. His firm does better financially as a government contractor. For example, it won a $1.5 million job handling the logistics for 55 pandemic flu summits around the country from January through August 2006.

Since 2001, James has registered to lobby for eight clients, including a federal contractor pushing for open bidding on Department of Energy laboratory management contract, a Scottsdale, Ariz., employee assessment firm trying to make a sale to the Department of Education, and a copper mining concern.

Andy Wiessner, a lobbyist who specializes in public land exchanges, worked with James to lobby the White House on behalf of Resolution Copper Co., which seeks to trade private land it owns to acquire a piece of the Tonto National Forest in Arizona.

The proposed swap — 3,025 acres of federal land for 5,539 acres of private property — would give RCC unfettered access to extract copper ore now situated below a campground and recreational rock climbing terrain. According to RCC spokesman Troy Corder, the exchange would include a substitute rock climbing area about 25 miles away.

Some environmentalists say even though the copper company would give up more acreage, the deal would be lopsided.

"This exchange would be the largest loss of [rock] climbing ever," said Steve Matous, executive director of the Access Fund.

Lobbyists Wiessner and James met with White House staffers twice. Wiessner said they were "courtesy calls," but vital because these staffers would later pass judgment on prepared Forest Service testimony for congressional hearings on the bill. By covering all the bases, he said, "there are no surprises."

James also said he'd been in touch with the White House on behalf of the mining company. "We had to keep them informed of what was going on," he said.

Hearings on the land-swap bill were held in May, but no vote was taken before the Congress adjourned this month.

From the outside looking in

James claims the president knows him well enough to chat on the phone — such as, the day after Easter this year, when he says the president called to thank him for organizing the White House egg roll.

Asked whether he's taken up a lobbying issue with the president, he replied, "I'm not sure I want to go into that amount of detail. It's getting very intimate."

Proponents of lobbying reform — expected to be reintroduced in the new Congress — have not addressed the issue of consultants who lobby. Professor Thurber of American University, for one, worries that the undue influence this group of insiders enjoy could undermine the public trust.

"I think in a democracy you need trust in the way decisions are made. You need transparency," Thurber said.

"But it's not transparent and it makes it look like a fixed game to people on the outside."

Additional reporting for this report was done by Chris Landers, Erika Kaneko, Elspeth Reeve and Sarah Laskow. Agustín Armendariz and John Perry served as database editors.

New Media Communications

Ohio,United States — 2011-09-16T15:32:33-04:00

Since starting New Media Communications in his Ohio basement in January 1995, Mike Connell has built his firm into one of the leading Web designers for conservative causes and Republican politicians. That GOP business also has led to significant government accounts for GovTech Solutions, a separate online services company owned by his wife Heather.

The road to New Media's success hasn't always been smooth. But after enduring a slow start and some lean years, business has taken off. Now during the busy campaign season, Connell can fly to visit clients in Washington and around the Midwest on the six seat Piper airplane he owns.

The Internet has taken Connell on a wild ride.

In 1995, the online frontier was largely unconquered by the political set. In March of the previous year, according to the Cleveland Plain Dealer, U.S. Rep. Martin Hoke trumpeted his status as the first Ohio congressman with an e-mail address, which he said offered "a new way for the 10th District computer techies to take a ride on the information highway right into their congressional office in Washington." If reporters called Hoke's office then, they could have connected with his 30-year-old press secretary, Mike Connell.

Connell was an early promoter of political technology. He had made a name for himself in Republican circles by designing software for the George H. W. Bush campaign in 1988. At the end of 1994, he left Hoke's office and moved to Ohio to start New Media, with start-up funds from a Small Business Administration loan.

Selling the Internet as a political tool was tough work in the beginning. Before politicians would pay to be on it, they had to know what it was. In a July 1996 article for Campaigns & Elections magazine, Connell praised "the boldest new medium since the invention of the Gutenberg press," but conceded that "you'll be lucky if it touches as many people between now and November as a single TV or newspaper ad."

The Clinton-Dole debates that October proved him wrong, though: when Dole announced his Web address on the air, it received more than 2 million hits the next day.

New Media was still taking "baby steps" in 1996, says Connell. Revenues were lean. "It was a "rude awakening," he says. "It took a couple years for the business to take off."

But Connell got on track with a high-profile client: New Media designed the www.jeb.org site that made Jeb Bush the first candidate online in the 1998 Florida gubernatorial race.

The year 1999 was big for politics on the Net, with election-related Web sites appearing and disappearing as entrepreneurs struggled to find a business model that worked. New Media partnered with the lobbying firm DCI Group to form DCI/New Media, creating the lobbyists' Tech Central Station (tcsdaily.com) and other sites.

Other Republican campaigns and committees soon followed as clients, and New Media scored another Bush account — the 2000 presidential campaign of Jeb's older brother, George W.

In 2000, Connell told Inside Business magazine that his company dealt "in a very niche market." But the family business found a new niche when his wife Heather formed GovTech Solutions to pursue government accounts rather than political business.

Heather Connell is majority stockholder in GovTech Solutions, and until September 2001, the DCI Group was a minority stockholder. While it is identified as a woman-owned business in the federal procurement database, Connell says his wife's company never sought formal certification as such, nor has it received set-aside government contracts.

Mike Connell says he and his wife formed two companies because the two markets are different: New Media helps to advocate political positions, while GovTech's work provides a nonpartisan way for an office to communicate with all constituents.

When political clients ask New Media to work on their government Web site, Connell says he refers them to his wife's company. Though Heather Connell is the majority owner, the business' day-to-day operations are managed by its president, Randy Cole.

In some cases, New Media and GovTech Solutions have had contracts with the same clients. New Media might design a campaign Web site for a candidate who, once elected, would contract with GovTech to design a federally funded official site. At least four of the seven New Media clients who won House races in 2004 also used GovTech as the designer for their congressional sites.

That year, New Media provided Web design services for the re-election campaign of George W. Bush, three senators and seven House members, in addition to the Republican National Committee. In all, the company took in $1.2 million for its work on the 2004 campaigns.

By 2004, GovTech had served as Web designer for the official, federally funded Web pages of 37 members of Congress. And the following year, according to House financial statements, GovTech received more than $144,000 in business from 21 Republican House members and Republican-led committees.

In 2002 and 2004, GovTech received authorization from the General Services Administration that allowed federal agencies to purchase services directly from the company without going through the full bidding process. A news release from the company said, "As a GSA-approved vendor, GovTech can contract directly with agencies to streamline the procurement process."

Between October 2002 and the first half of this year, the General Services Administration reported more than $800,000 paid to GovTech by federal agencies. The company has designed Web sites for the White House, Department of Energy, and the 2004 meeting of the Group of 8 in the former Soviet republic of Georgia, among others.

The GSA Schedule contracts from the federal government can serve as a stamp of approval for state and local government purchasers.

In Ohio, Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell's office paid about $465,000 to GovTech, which redesigned the Web site and worked with the office to present Election Night results in 2004. In 1999, when Blackwell co-chaired the congressional Census Monitoring Board, New Media had won a contract to redesign a bilingual Web site for the board.

New Media went international under the auspices of the International Republican Institute, for which Connell consults. The company created Web sites and sent cell phone text messages to voters in the 2000 Slovenian general elections. Connell also consulted in Macedonian parliamentary elections for USAID.

In 2004, Connell joined with another Republican Internet consultant, R. Rebecca Donatelli of Campaign Solutions to form Connell Donatelli, which creates online advertising campaigns.

For the 2006 elections, New Media Communications has redesigned more than two dozen state GOP sites and worked on Blackwell's campaign for governor of Ohio.

Consultant profile

2011-11-17T17:02:46-05:00

The room is packed at a Washington, D.C., conference for political consultants. They've assembled for a panel discussion entitled "Understanding the Internet In Campaigns." The speaker at the microphone begins as latecomers stand or drag chairs into the crowded room.

"My name is Bill Hillsman," he announces in a reedy voice that cuts through the chatter. "I was sent with a message for you all.

"I was sent here by the voters and I was sent here by the non-voters. And what they're here to say is that if you screw up the Internet the same way that you've screwed up television advertising, radio advertising, direct mail, those stupid phones calls — 'Hey Mom, Ted Kennedy is on the phone, he wants to talk to ya!' — they're all going to stay home. They're sick of it."

Hillsman, it seems, always has a message. The president of North Woods Advertising, he is one of the few political consultants who doesn't associate himself with a particular party. He shows an open disdain for what he calls "Election Industry Inc." — the network of parties and consultants who make their livings from campaigns.

The group he founded, Independent Voters of America, raised money on the Internet for a 2004 anti-Bush ad aimed at "independent and undecided voters in battleground states." The title of his 2004 book neatly sums up his philosophy: Run the Other Way: Fixing the Two-Party System One Campaign at a Time.

Hillsman's ad campaigns have turned heads and raised eyebrows since a series of ads helped get an unknown college professor — the late Paul Wellstone of Minnesota — elected to the U.S. Senate in 1990. One of them, "Looking for Rudy," used the hand-held camera style of director Michael Moore's documentary Roger & Me to follow Wellstone as he walked into then-Sen. Rudy Boschwitz's campaign office to challenge him to a debate (he wasn't there, or in any of the other places Wellstone looked).

The spot won accolades: the New York American Marketing Association named the Wellstone ad campaign the most effective of the year — a first for political advertising. It proved effective — after just one airing, according to Hillsman, the ad generated enough media coverage to get the senator to debate Wellstone.

Another Hillsman client was Jesse "The Body" Ventura. In one Hillsman ad, the wrestler turned gubernatorial candidate poses as Rodin's thinker in an attempt to sell "The Body" as "The Mind." In another, two boys play with a Ventura action figure capable of defeating special interest groups with a knockout punch.

In 2000, Hillsman produced an ad for Ralph Nader spoofing the MasterCard "priceless" commercials that ran a few times and was widely replayed on nightly news programs. The spot sparked a lawsuit by MasterCard, which drew even more coverage.

Hillsman had no federal candidates in 2004, but this year he has a couple of high-profile irons in the fire, including the campaign of Connecticut Democrat Ned Lamont and the independent Texas gubernatorial bid of country singer and mystery-writer Kinky Friedman.

It's an ad for Friedman's campaign that Hillsman wants to show the conference, as an example of how not to screw it up. The Web-only animated ad is something Hillsman calls a "KinkyToon" — an irreverent and bawdy musical commercial fit for a man who once fronted the band Kinky Friedman and the Texas Jewboys: "Why should he be Governor? Well, why the hell not?" This toon, one of several, deals with the petition Friedman needs to file to get on the ballot. The ending takes a shot at politicians who need to check with consultants before making a decision.

The crowd loves it.

"Now I submit to you that that gets the information across that we need to get across about a very, very complicated situation," Hillsman said. "That's the type of thing that I think we really need to be doing on the Internet."

In contrast, Hillsman's Lamont ad campaign was fairly conventional. In one spot, the candidate, sitting on his couch, addresses the camera directly, criticizing George W. Bush and playing up his stance on health care. The Hillsman twist becomes evident as a crowd gathers outside the window behind him, eventually bursting into the room to help out (in a nod to the pro-Lamont movement on the Internet, the crowd is led by Markos Moulitsas, better known as the blogger behind the "Daily Kos").

In his book and elsewhere, Hillsman argues that campaigns fail when they target likely voters. The unlikely voter is his target, and a record turnout in the Connecticut primary backs him up.

Hillsman's detractors say that his style may work for outsider candidates like Lamont and Ventura, but that even Wellstone switched to a more conventional strategy for his re-election bid. Hillsman acknowledges that different campaigns require different styles.

"When you're running a top-down campaign with a lot of money, you want everything to be very, very, very controlled. So if you're trying to get out your base, maybe it's good to have Tom Daschle record a call and talk to a Democrat on Election Day," he said.

"I work a lot for challengers, not for incumbents," Hillsman said. "So the more chaotic a race gets, the more comfortable I get."

Campaign Consultants methodology

2011-09-16T15:42:35-04:00

To measure the impact of political consultants in presidential and congressional campaigns, the Center for Public Integrity analyzed 2003-2004 expenditures of the organizations that spend money on political campaigns.

These organizations, termed “committees” by the Federal Election Commission, exist for House, Senate and presidential candidates, as well as for political party and “527” organizations. Because they fall under Internal Revenue Service regulations, 527 groups file contribution and expenditure reports with the IRS. The others file reports with the FEC.

House, presidential, and party reports are filed electronically; their data tables were downloaded from the FEC Web site. House candidates who expect to raise or spend less than $50,000 for the whole cycle can choose not to file electronically and those paper filings were not included in the database.

Senate campaign and Senate party committees file reports on paper, so the information from these reports was typed into the database by Secure Paper Solutions of Fredericksburg, Va., an outside vendor.

In the 2004 election cycle, 527 committees had the choice of filing on paper or electronically. These filings were included in the database.

The Center targeted House and Senate candidates from the two major parties who participated in the general election. However, one filing from an Independent candidate was included because he won the election.

All reports are from the 2003-2004 election cycle (Jan. 1, 2003 through Dec. 31, 2004), the latest full cycle for which records were available. From these reports, the Center compiled a database of campaign expenditures.

Center researchers then began the process of identifying expenditures for consultants.

This identification proceeded in two, interrelated steps:

Standardizing names and their variations, as well as trivial address variations for the same recipient
Identifying which recipients are consultants.

The Center did not examine every expenditure. Instead, researchers began by identifying the largest aggregated amounts for each recipient and examining those that received aggregated amounts of $50,000 or more. Researchers examined each expenditure in this first selection to determine if it was a consulting expenditure. If the recipient could be identified as an entity offering consulting services, then all expenditures involving that recipient were coded as consulting expenditures.

To determine which recipients should be coded as consultants for the purposes of this study, the Center coded a recipient as a political consultant if research showed that the recipient provides strategic or creative political services. Researchers excluded all employees on the committee payroll and recipients that supplied non-creative, non-strategic or politically neutral services (common examples were recipients who provided services to help get out campaign messages, such as Web hosting or the production of a mailing, but did not appear to have any influence on the content, placement or timing of the messages).

Researchers consulted many sources to support the coding decision, including the contents of the federal filings’ expenditure purpose fields, state business records, the recipients’ Web sites, business directories (such as Hoovers) and political trade publications.

Variations in punctuation, spelling, spacing and abbreviation are normal occurrences in data entry. Some recipient names had as many as 50 distinct variations in the data. As the coding proceeded, researchers used multiple techniques and made every effort to catch and fix these trivial, but sometimes elusive, variations in recipient names and to standardize them. Each time the standardized names were applied, smaller and smaller expenditures were coded. If the Center was unable to make sure that two variant names and/or addresses were the same, the recipients’ totals were kept separate.

Throughout the process, data and results were checked against other sources, including FEC election results data and Campaigns & Elections magazine’s 2004 “Winner and Losers” issue. These external checks sometimes led to identification of some recipients as consultants that Center researchers had not yet found.

The Center made an effort to assign a specialty to each recipient identified as a campaign consultant. The specialty was either taken from the Campaigns & Elections magazine issue or determined by additional research, which included examining the purpose of the transactions between the consultant and the committee as described by the committee in its filings. In some cases, a specialty couldn’t be determined for a consultant.

To get a more understandable picture of what the money was spent on, the Center created a category scheme for the expenditures with six categories: direct mail, fundraising, generic consulting, media, other and phones. The categories were applied by an automated procedure that looked at the purpose description field of the expenditure, checked an example table created by Center researchers, then applied a commonly used algorithm know as naïve-Bayesian classification. The results were evaluated by researchers, who tweaked the example table and ran the procedure again. Each iteration of this process produced better results. Itemization of a consultant’s commissions or profits is not required by the FEC. It should be noted that payments made to media consultants generally include funds that pass through that firm and are paid to television and radio stations for advertising airtime. Similarly, payments to direct mail firms may include the costs for postage.

Consultant profile: Stevens Reed Curcio & Potholm

2011-09-16T15:43:09-04:00

One of the most influential advertising campaigns of the 2004 election came not from a candidate, but from a group of Vietnam veterans who mounted an anti-John Kerry offensive with the help of a small set of Republican political consultants.

The group, originally named Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, held a news conference in May 2004, but it was sparsely attended.

Rick Reed, of the firm Stevens Reed Curcio & Potholm, later told University of Rhode Island communications studies professor Patrick Devlin that he went to the conference only to see his uncle Adrian Lonsdale, who was one of the veterans critical of Kerry.

For an article for the journal American Behavioral Scientist, Reed told Devlin that he was surprised that there wasn't more of a response after the news conference. "The thing that struck me was that [the Swift Boat Veterans] were not political people. … They probably had no idea that this would really shake up the political process," Reed said.

Reed began producing television ads for the group, the first of which aired in early August. Stevens Reed Curcio & Potholm already had some experience in making Democratic candidates look bad. Partner Greg Stevens was responsible for a 1988 ad featuring presidential candidate Michael Dukakis wearing an ill-fitting helmet while riding a tank. The first Swift Boat ad was edited together from interviews of the veterans criticizing Kerry, who had played up his military career at the Democratic convention only days before.

The ad was blunt, beginning with Kerry's running mate, John Edwards challenging that "if you have any question about what John Kerry is made of, just spend three minutes with the men who served with him 30 years ago," followed by a montage of veterans accusing Kerry of "lying about his record" and saying he "betrayed the men and women he served with."

In nine ads aired over the course of a little more than two months, the Swift Boat Veterans hammered away at Kerry's service record during the war and the anti-war stance he took after returning from Vietnam. Media reports called into question some accounts in the ads, citing statements given earlier by some Swift Boat Veterans members in support of Kerry, as well as accusations from some group members that seemingly contradicted the official record of events. Lonsdale, for example, who now said Kerry "lacks the capacity to lead" had, in 1996 praised his "bravado and courage," calling him "among the finest of those Swift Boat drivers."

Stevens Reed Curcio & Potholm was paid less than $300,000 for the Swift Boat ads, a fraction of the more than $56 million they took in from the 2004 election, according to the Center for Public Integrity's analysis of 2003 and 2004 campaign filings. In comparison, South Dakota Republican Larry Diedrich paid the firm more than $1.6 million for its work in his close but ultimately unsuccessful bid for a seat in the House of Representatives.

Though cheap by the standards of political advertising, the ads generated a flood of media attention. Firm partner Erik Potholm told Campaigns & Elections magazine that "initially, the Swift Boat Veterans television buy was limited. But thanks to the enormous national media coverage of the spots, millions of people across the country saw them." A Gallup poll found that within three weeks after the first ad hit the airwaves, more than 80 percent of the country had seen or heard about it.

At a conference sponsored by the University of Virginia Center for Politics held the month after the November election, Kerry advisor Mike McCurry called the Swift Boat ads "one of the most dishonorable things I've ever seen happen in politics."

The Swift Boat ads were controversial — and influential — enough that when Stevens produced ads in 2005 for Doug Forester's New Jersey gubernatorial campaign, opponent Jon Corzine mentioned Stevens in his ads, saying that he was hired by Forester "despite his role in orchestrating the Swift Vets smear campaign on behalf of Bush."

Stevens, founder and president of Stevens and Co. (the firm that would become Stevens Reed Curcio & Potholm), was a newspaper reporter in New Jersey before becoming chief of staff to Republican Gov. Thomas Kean. He directed advertising for the 2000 presidential campaign of Arizona Sen. John McCain. Reed joined the firm in 1993, leaving a post as political editor for the White House Bulletin, a daily newsletter published in Virginia.

Curcio went from selling mouthwash as an executive for a New York advertising firm to directing advertising for the National Republican Senatorial Committee in 1984, then became the NRSC's political director for the 1992 and 1994 election cycles. In 1997, he and Reed became partners in the firm, which changed its name to Stevens Reed Curcio and Co. Erik Potholm's name was added to the marquee in 2003 after he served as the firm's vice president.

In July 2006, the firm's advertisement produced for Republican Sen. Mike DeWine's Ohio re-election campaign drew fire for drawing smoke. The ad criticizing his Democratic opponent Rep. Sherrod Brown's voting record on national security used a pre-Sept.11 image of the World Trade Center that had been digitally edited to add billowing smoke. The fakery was uncovered by U.S. News and World Report, and the campaign changed the ad when alerted by the magazine, replacing the footage with an unretouched still photo.

In an editorial calling the ad a "$470,000 embarrassment," The (Cleveland) Plain Dealer wrote "if DeWine and his campaign continue to make such inexcusable mistakes, DeWine will probably soon be referred to as a former senator."

For his part, DeWine told U.S. News & World Report he would continue to employ the firm, but he "had some very choice words for them that you can't print in a family magazine when I found out."

FLS-DCI

2011-09-16T15:25:46-04:00

With roots in Republican politics and corporate public relations, FLS-DCI and its sister companies have become a one-stop political shop. They have handled phone calls for the Bush campaign, lobbied the White House for corporate clients, and, through the separate-but-affiliated group Progress for America, lobbied the public on behalf of the White House.

During the 2004 election cycle, FLS-DCI served as telemarketers for the Bush campaign, House and Senate candidates in 23 states, taking in more than $26.9 million, according to a Center study of federal filings.[correction] In the political off-season, however, the affiliated DCI Group lobbies for corporations looking to influence politicians and the public.

The partners have a long history in politics.

Tony Feather served as executive director of the Missouri Republican Party from 1987 until 1990, when he left to manage the unsuccessful gubernatorial campaign of the state's then-Attorney General William L. Webster. The candidacy was marred by word of a federal investigation that ultimately resulted in Webster serving a two-year prison term for using state employees and equipment for his campaign. Feather went on to become Midwest Regional Coordinator for the Republican National Committee, in 1993.

Thomas J. Synhorst's background includes working on campaigns for Sen. Charles Grassley and serving as senior advisor to Sen. Bob Dole through 1996. In 1999, Feather joined Synhorst, Jeffrey T. Larson and a fourth partner, Chris Hodges, to form Feather Hodges Larson & Synhorst, later known as FLS-DCI.

Feather served as political director to the Bush-Cheney campaign for the presidential race in 2000. Today, to comply with the McCain-Feingold Act, the partners have created two divisions. Larson runs the state and national party division in Minnesota, while Feather heads up FLS' federal candidate division from Missouri (he currently is working with the Republican National Committee on congressional campaigns, according to The Washington Post).

The DCI Group, formed in 1997, is primarily a lobbying firm. Synhorst is its chairman. Feather worked as a lobbyist for the firm from 2001 through 2005.

Feather also founded the group Progress for America in 2001 with James K. Glassman, former part-owner and editor of Roll Call, serving as its national chair. According to information posted on the group's Web site in 2001, it was formed as a "grassroots organization dedicated to supporting Pres. George Bush's agenda for America." Feather reportedly left the group before the 2004 election, and Glassman says he headed the group "very briefly, but I haven't had anything to do with it in years."

By 2004, Progress for America had become a Republican issue-ad powerhouse, including among its officers and directors a series of DCI lobbyists — Chris LaCivita (who also consulted for the anti-John Kerry 527 committee Swift Boat Veterans for Truth), Brian Kennedy and the group's current president Brian S. McCabe. In 2004, Progress for America paid DCI Group more than $800,000 for consulting services.

Synhorst also reportedly consulted for Progress for America, and two companies of which he is a principal — FYI Messaging and TSE Enterprises — brought in $2.8 million from the group for direct mail, phone contact, e-mail, and Web site services.

The two companies received about $370,000 for services to Republican candidates and party committees.

Progress for America turned out some of the most influential ads of the Bush campaign, including "Ashley's Story," featuring a 16-year-old girl who had lost her mother in the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. The group also produced ads touting each of Bush's Supreme Court nominees; in the case of Harriet Miers' 24 day candidacy, it led the public relations effort, launching a Web site, www.justicemiers.com, and offering to set up interviews with friends of Miers on the day of her nomination.

The New York Times reported that Progress for America members attended strategy meetings with Bush administration officials regarding the president's Social Security plan, and the group has run ads this year supporting the Iraq war. In the first three months of this year, Progress for America paid DCI about $560,000 for consulting services, according to information filed with the Internal Revenue Service.

In recent years, the DCI Group and its Tech Central Station division have become more famous for public relations campaigns that appeared to come from somewhere else. In 2003, Washington Monthly writer Nicholas Confessore described the pieces posted on Tech Central Station's Web site as lobbying disguised as news, coining the term "journo-lobbying."

One sponsor of the site — McDonald's — has found itself the beneficiary of an ongoing Tech Central Station campaign to debunk the Morgan Spurlock documentary about fast food called Supersize Me.

The campaign included opinion pieces penned by Glassman, the Web site's founder and "host," that were published in major newspapers. One of them, St. Louis' Post-Dispatch, took issue with Glassman for not disclosing that McDonald's was a TCS sponsor. Glassman told the Post-Dispatch that he had never been paid by McDonald's and that writing about the movie was not a conflict of interest. In a telephone interview for this report, Glassman told the Center that neither DCI Group nor the Web site's sponsors had influenced his writing.

At least one client, Avue Technologies Corp., has agreed with Confessore's assessment. In a February lawsuit over a contract disagreement, Avue's lawyer described the goal of the company's sponsorship of Tech Central Station as "to generate favorable publicity about Avue's products and services and to fund the creation of positive 'news' stories that purported to be the work of independent journalists." To clear up any doubt, the brief continues, "This type of 'news' creation is sometimes referred to as 'journo-lobbying.'"

Court filings by each company indicate that Avue had paid DCI $150,000 to sponsor Tech Central Station from December 2003 through August 2004.

Glassman said he was unaware of the lawsuit against DCI, because "my relationship is only with TCS, not DCI."

"But that is not the way TCS does business," he said. "TCS is a very transparent organization as far as our support is concerned. … We list our sponsors and advertisers online and make sure people can see it."

As for FLS-DCI, it has undergone another name change, to FLS-Connect. The company and its affiliates are providing fundraising, mail, and phone bank services in state and national elections this year, making at least $14 million so far from state and national Republican party committees, according to PoliticalMoneyLine, a subscription service offering campaign finance data.

Correction: Since publishing the database of spending on campaign consultants Sept. 26, 2006, the Center identified additional payments to Feather Larson Synhorst, increasing its total from $21 million to $26.9 million.

Frequently asked questions

2011-09-16T15:46:02-04:00

These are some frequently asked questions regarding campaign consultants:

What is a consultant?

A hired professional or firm that provides inherently political services, including creative or strategic advice.

Why do candidates hire consultants?

Political consultants are hired for their expertise and experience in specialized areas needed to run a campaign, such as fundraising or advertising.

What are some of the main consulting specialties?

Media consultants create advertisements, and buy airtime from stations and networks.
Direct mail firms design and produce mailings to promote the candidate and solicit money.
Polling firms survey voters on their attitudes toward issues and candidates, and run focus groups.
Political technology firms offer services such as Web site design, online advertising, online fundraising and voter targeting services.

Why is there concern over the rising costs of running campaigns and hiring consultants?

These expenses have consequences on the political system, forcing candidates to raise money, a time consuming process that potentially makes them beholden to their donors. Since incumbents generally have an advantage raising money, potential challengers can be shut out of the system, leaving constituents limited choices.

Are political consultants hired by anyone other than candidates and their own campaign committees?

Yes. Political party committees and “527” groups also hire consultants to create campaigns opposing or supporting candidates or issues.

Who keeps track of the amount spent by the candidates, party committees and 527 groups?

Under the law, candidates and political party committees must disclose campaign expenditures to the Federal Election Commission. Groups organized under section “527” of the IRS code disclose the information to the Internal Revenue Service.

Is that information public?

Yes. The information on campaign spending is available on the Web sites of the FEC and the IRS.

How are disclosure filings of Senate candidate expenditures different from those of other candidates?

Under U.S. Senate rules, candidates are not required to file electronically. Instead, paper records are delivered to the FEC. While those records are made available to the public on the FEC Web site, they are posted in an unsearchable PDF format.

On which political consulting specialty has the most money been spent?

Media, because the cost of television is greater than any single cost. Also, the consultants typically buy the airtime, so their payments include their commissions, and the funds they in turn pay to the broadcast television, cable, or radio outlets.

How much of the money spent on media consulting is revenue for the firm?

Up to 15 percent, but subject to negotiation with the candidate or committee. That revenue is not publicly disclosed, as the FEC and IRS do not require it.

Consultant profiles

2011-09-16T15:26:52-04:00

Below are links to profiles of selected consultants who have been prominent or cutting edge in their fields, including media, direct mail, and polling.

Bill Hillsman (North Woods Advertising)	Mark Mellman (The Mellman Group)
Bob Shrum (Shrum, Devine & Donilon)	New Media Communications
FLS-DCI	Olsen & Shuvalov
Hal Malchow (MSHC Partners)	Public Opinion Strategies
Mark McKinnon (Maverick Media)	Stevens Reed Curcio & Potholm

Mark McKinnon (Maverick Media)

2011-09-16T15:29:03-04:00

Maverick Media, formed in 1998 as a political consulting super-group of sorts composed of top consultants, was created for the single purpose of electing George W. Bush as president. In the 2004 election cycle it took in more than $177 million from the Bush campaign and the Republican National Committee, according to Federal Election Commission data analyzed by the Center for Public Integrity.

The leader of the group is Mark McKinnon, a former Democratic consultant who previously worked with late Texas Gov. Ann Richards and presidential hopeful Michael Dukakis, former governor of Massachusetts.

In 1996, McKinnon, who worked for the Austin-based public affairs firm Public Strategies Inc., announced his retirement from politics in a Texas Monthly article titled "The Spin Doctor is Out." In it, he described his once and future profession as one of "incredible highs, devastating lows, sometimes feeling bulletproof, sometimes feeling that all the blood had been drained out of my body. I had no idea of the toll it had taken on me mentally and spiritually until I quit."

McKinnon recounts his early history in politics, beginning with covering it for the student newspaper at the University of Texas at Austin — and how he got elected its editor: he said he won by leaking damaging information about one of his opponents to another, then "I sat back, watched them cut each other up, and coasted to victory."

He also "spent several years in Nashville working as a song-writer with Kris Kristofferson. And was wildly unsuccessful," according to his bio for Public Strategies, the Austin-based public affairs firm for which he of which he is vice-chairman.

In 1984, he joined fellow UT alumnus Paul Begala (who later authored Is Our Children Learning?: The Case Against George W. Bush) working in the press office of Senate candidate Lloyd Doggett. The Democrat "got creamed," McKinnon said in the Texas Monthly article, but it was his introduction to another future consulting star, James Carville. He said Carville "looked like a prehistoric reptile and acted like a hyperactive twelve-year-old. But if you spent enough time around him and got over the initial shock, you could see that he was a flat-out political genius."

McKinnon worked as the press secretary for Texas Gov. Mark White during the campaign that saw his 1986 defeat, then headed for Louisiana — a state known for colorful politicians — for his "Ph.D." in politics, working for Buddy Roemer. A Democratic congressman running for governor, Roemer defeated Edwin Edwards, who had been in office since 1972, by portraying himself as an outsider ready to clean up Louisiana politics.

After working on the 1988 Dukakis campaign, which he describes as unfocused and "futile," McKinnon returned to Texas to help Richards win her 1990 gubernatorial race. He was not with her four years later when she lost to Bush. At the time, McKinnon told the Houston Chronicle that "Bush ran a pretty error-free campaign."

McKinnon's 1996 retirement was, of course, premature; late in 1997, Texas newspapers began reporting that he was "in talks" with the Bush campaign, and in the spring of 1998 it became official.

In a 2005 interview with PBS' FRONTLINE, McKinnon described warming to the Republican governor who would become his boss: "… [B]ecause I'd been drinking the Democratic Kool-Aid for years working in those trenches, my predisposition was not to like him. And I tried very hard not to like him because he was a Republican … [but] he was talking about issues that had typically been Democratic issues … this was so completely different than the old-style, Newt Gingrich politics that I had associated with the Republican Party, which was 'Burn government down!'"

Ultimately, McKinnon said, it was Bush's character that won him over. He told FRONTLINE "as it is so often in the president's world, the fundamental ingredients of our relationship were really based upon friendship and loyalty [rather] than about money or consulting or professional engagement."

After Bush's gubernatorial re-election, McKinnon stayed with him for his first presidential bid, then returned to Public Strategies.

Maverick Media, with McKinnon as its president, was the 2000 Bush campaign's media strategist, scripting and producing campaign commercials. Maverick brought together a number of political and advertising heavyweights, including Stuart Stevens and Russ Schriefer of the Republican advertising firm The Stevens and Schriefer Group, Public Strategies co-founder Matthew Dowd (also once a Democratic consultant) as director of polling and media planning, and Hispanic advertising guru Lionel Sosa.

In The Big Enchilda, his book about the 2000 campaign, Stevens described McKinnon's devotion to Bush: "[W]hile I still reveled in the sheer combat of campaigns, the smell of napalm in the morning and all that, Mark had gotten back in the game for one reason — to help Bush."

After the successful election, the team disbanded. But in 2004 its members reunited for Bush's re-election campaign. "There was never really a discussion," McKinnon told FRONTLINE. "It was just [that] this has always been a team, and we never stopped working and trying to help the president. … It's a very close, tight-knit group that's worked together for years, and the president just kept the team together."

One of the more successful ads the group produced in 2004 was "Wolves," featuring a pack of the animals as a metaphor for terrorism. McKinnon told FRONTLINE that he and Maverick had been testing metaphors for months before hitting on the idea: "People got it right away. It was like, 'Oh yeah, wolves, terrorists — scary. Got it.'"

Another Maverick ad used grainy footage of Democratic opponent John Kerry windsurfing to illustrate what the Bush campaign described as his shifting messages on the Iraq war as he tacked back and forth off the coast of Nantucket.

A third commercial, which McKinnon told PBS "had the most impact" quoted Kerry on funding for the Iraq war: "I actually did vote for the $87 billion, before I voted against it." In an interview with ABC News' Diane Sawyer, Kerry later called the remark an "inarticulate" statement. Maverick featured the quote in several ads and it became a major talking point for the campaign.

After the 2004 election, McKinnon returned again to his post as vice-chairman of Public Strategies. In 2005, he was nominated to fill a Democratic slot on the Broadcasting Board of Governors, which oversees American broadcasting abroad including Voice of America. After protests from Democratic senators reported by The Washington Post, the nomination was withdrawn and resubmitted to fill a Republican slot.

The Post and other papers have reported that McKinnon has pledged to help Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., in the 2008 presidential election, barring a run by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice or Florida Gov. Jeb Bush.

This year, McKinnon and a bipartisan group of political and advertising consultants announced a new project, Hotsoup.com, a Web site to be launched in October. According to a news release, Hotsoup will offer readers "smart debate over the real issues, not the irrelevant and partisan discourse they're getting now."

Consultant profile: Bob Shrum (Shrum, Devine & Donilon)

2011-11-29T09:47:18-05:00

For nearly four decades, political consultant Bob Shrum has been one the most influential voices of the Democratic Party and a populist icon for his campaigns that stressed a "people vs. the powerful" message.

"I believe that the essence of being a Democrat is about standing up for the people," Shrum told the Boston Globe in April 2004. "You can come up with any variation of words to convey it, but from the beginning, that is what the Democratic Party is fundamentally about."

Shrum, who retired from consulting in early 2005, has worked with practically every major Democratic figure — from George McGovern to Al Gore, from Ted Kennedy to John Kerry. But, despite crafting successful media campaigns for dozens of U.S. senators, governors and big-city mayors, he has failed to help elevate a candidate to the Oval Office.

Shrum has been a speechwriter or principal media advisor on several presidential campaigns, his last being John Kerry's unsuccessful 2004 run. His firm, Shrum, Devine & Donilon, worked on the campaign's media and advertising strategy, receiving payments worth almost $2.5 million according to the Center for Public Integrity's analysis of 2003 and 2004 Federal Election Commission records.

Shrum and another Kerry media adviser, Jim Margolis of the political consulting firm GMMB, were also involved in the formation of a consortium they named Riverfront Media, created exclusively for the campaign to produce most of Kerry's television ads and to make the media buys. Riverfront received more than $150 million in payments from the Kerry campaign and the Democratic National Committee, the Center found.

In the spring of 2004, Shrum and his partners had a dispute with Margolis regarding how they would be paid by the Kerry campaign, according to Joe Klein's book, Politics Lost. There had been a handshake agreement to split the profits evenly. But, when the Kerry campaign reduced the 9 percent commission the consultants would receive from television buys, there was trouble. Shrum and his partners reportedly wanted more than half of the final cut. According to media accounts, Margolis wouldn't agree to that, and in the end, his firm ceased its involvement in creating Kerry's ads, but continued to purchase media time.

Such behind-the-scenes drama involving Shrum — communications director Chris Lehane, speechwriter Andrei Cherny and campaign manager Jim Jordan reportedly also left the Kerry campaign after feuding with the consultant — has been a running storyline in his career.

Shrum graduated from Harvard Law School, but never took the bar exam or practiced law. Instead he took a job writing speeches for New York City Mayor John Lindsay and worked on his 1972 presidential campaign. In that same primary season, he later worked as a speechwriter for Maine Sen. Edmund Muskie's presidential campaign. But, when Muskie dropped out of the race, Shrum signed on with his opponent, Democratic nominee George McGovern, composing the South Dakota senator's famous "Come Home, America" acceptance speech.

Four years later, Shrum joined Jimmy Carter's presidential campaign. But he quit less than two weeks later, resigning in a tersely worded letter to the future 39th President recounted in Jules Witcover's book, Marathon: The Pursuit of the Presidency 1972-1976: "I am not sure what you believe in, other than yourself," Shrum wrote.

His next presidential defeat, in 1980, led to the signature moment of Shrum's career, penning client Edward Kennedy's concession speech for the Democratic Convention in New York City. The memorable speech concludes, "For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die." He went on to work as the senator's speechwriter and press secretary for the next few years.

In 1985, Shrum formed his first media consulting firm with Patrick Caddell and David Doak. The group split less than a year later, though, when Caddell alleged that his partners had kept money they owed him. Doak and Shrum worked together for another decade, helping get Barbara Mikulski of Maryland and Alan Cranston of California elected to the Senate and David Dinkins as mayor of New York City.

However, the "Shrum Curse," as it's become known, continued unabated. Shrum worked on the failed presidential campaigns of Richard Gephardt and Michael Dukakis in 1988, Bob Kerrey in 1992, and Al Gore in 2000.

Shrum's firm was responsible for one of the more infamous presidential ads — a Kerrey campaign spot that depicted the Nebraska senator as a hockey goalie denouncing foreign imports. The ad closely mirrored a spot Doak and Shrum had produced for Gephardt's presidential campaign, both in its message and its tag line. More problematic, though, was that the ad seemed to conflict with Kerrey's earlier support for free trade. Kerrey later called the ad "lousy" during a debate with his Democratic rivals and told the Wall Street Journal in July 2004 that he faulted himself for approving it.

Shrum's ads have occasionally taken on a negative tone. While working on the failed Texas gubernatorial campaign of Jim Mattox, his firm created a commercial that questioned whether Mattox's opponent, Ann Richards, had ever used cocaine. "What illegal drugs did Richards use as a 47-year-old officeholder?" the ad asked. "Did she use marijuana? Or something worse, like cocaine? Not as a college kid, but as a 47-year-old elected official sworn to uphold the law."

Another controversial Shrum-produced ad aired during Maryland Gov. Paris Glendening's 1998 successful re-election campaign. It criticized his Republican opponent Ellen Sauerbrey's record on civil rights, citing her vote against a 1992 bill that died in the Democrat-controlled Maryland General Assembly. Though Sauerbrey claimed the ad misrepresented her record, Shrum told the Baltimore Sun in March 2000 that he stood by his work on the Glendening campaign. Campaigns & Elections magazine cited the ad as the "most brutally effective attack spot of 1998."

Doak, Shrum, and Associates Inc. broke up in 1995, and Shrum continued his consulting business with Tad Devine; Mike Donilon joined the firm later that year. Shrum had a wealth of success with the Senate campaigns of John Edwards of North Carolina, Jon Corzine of New Jersey and Herb Kohl of Wisconsin, along with the re-election campaigns of Washington, D.C., Mayor Tony Williams and Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley.

But one of Shrum's biggest non-presidential disappointments was the 1998 California gubernatorial primary loss of Alfred Checchi. The former Northwest Airlines co-chairman spent roughly $40 million of his own money on the campaign — then a record — but won only 13 percent of the vote. The Washington Post reported that Shrum's firm was paid "as much as $2 million," not including expenses, although Shrum has disputed the figure.

Shrum did eventually help lead a candidate to the California governor's mansion, assisting on the 2003 campaign of Arnold Schwarzenegger. A 2004 report in Ireland's Sunday Business Post speculated that the Republican turning to Shrum was likely a reflection of his close relationship with the Kennedy family.

And, although he was not involved in either of Bill Clinton's presidential campaigns, Shrum helped draft several of his State of the Union addresses. However, the most famous speech Shrum ever wrote for Clinton was never used. Shortly after the Monica Lewinsky affair was exposed, Shrum was asked to compose an apology to the American public. The speech, which was abandoned in favor of a more defiant text, began, "No one who is not in my position can understand the remorse I feel today. I have fallen short of what you should expect from a president."

Shrum, Devine & Donilon also has had an international impact. The firm has helped candidates win elections in Ireland, Great Britain, Bolivia and Colombia, and has done consulting work for former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and former German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder.

The firm also dabbled in the corporate sector, working with MCI on a campaign that called for opening local telephone service to greater competition and with Pizza Hut to create two spots that targeted rival pizza chain, Papa John's. Shrum once also reportedly participated in a strategy session for New Coke.

Following Kerry's defeat in 2004 Shrum left his consulting business, although his firm did work on Jon Corzine's successful race for New Jersey governor in 2005. The firm has been renamed D&D Media.

In February 2005, Shrum joined New York University as a senior fellow and professor. The longtime strategist is also involved with Democracy Corps, a nonprofit political advocacy organization he founded with consultants James Carville and Stanley Greenberg, and is a frequent guest on MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews.