The Daily Orange is a nonprofit newsroom that receives no funding from Syracuse University. Consider donating today to support our mission.

If you’ve spent any time watching local television or YouTube videos in the Syracuse area, you’ve likely found yourself bombarded with attack ads targeted at Dana Balter.

Balter, a former political science professor at Syracuse University, is currently running against incumbent Rep. John Katko (R-Camillus) to represent New York’s 24th District in Congress. Ads from the National Republican Congressional Committee, however, seek to keep her from winning that race.

The NRCC is not directly affiliated with Katko but strongly supports his campaign. To date, the committee has released six preposterous ads against Balter, along with many other similar attack ads on Democrats across the country. These are merely symptoms of a larger problem: right-wing politics are no longer about policy. Now more than ever, they are about fear and disgust.

What strikes me about a number of these ads is that, if you were to take everything they say seriously, you would end up with a very negative view of Balter. The ads don’t present the full picture. While nothing they say is strictly false, lies of omission open the door for manipulation. While no one is surprised to find manipulation in modern political ads, it must be kept in check.

In these ads, stories that are ultimately inconsequential end up being blown out of proportion. For an undecided voter, that could be the tipping point toward the other candidate. This is ironic if you consider the caricature that is typically attributed to Democrats. The media on the political right continually uses phrases such as “snowflakes” and “cancel culture” to accentuate the left’s participation in making mountains out of mole hills. Yet, with Republican politicians, when it really matters, we are presented with just that.

One ad claims that Balter was “fined for not paying her taxes,” when talking about her support for expanding health care access. While the claim is true on the surface, it’s misleading. Balter did miss a payment on her sales taxes in 2013 for her business, Dana Balter Designs. Upon being notified of the upstanding fine, Balter then paid it back in full, including the additional fees for the late payment.

Yes, Balter didn’t pay her taxes. Yes, this isn’t a good thing. But no, it isn’t a scandal. This sort of thing happens all of the time and does not reflect poorly on her character whatsoever.

The ad also claims that Balter was “caught violating federal election law paying herself from her campaign.” Again, this is misleading. Balter did violate federal election law only by taking a salary from her campaign too early. Using her campaign account as a salary would be permitted by federal election law, since the campaign trail takes up the time she would be spending to work a full-time job. The only reason she was violating federal election law is that she took out this payment before she was eligible. So, again, she did break a rule, but not in a corrupt fashion.

Two ads call attention to Balter’s proposed policies for prison reform. Specifically, her elimination of expensive bail for those who are charged with minor crimes. One ad states, “Dana Balter supports the new cashless bail law that puts criminals back on our streets, making us and our families less safe. A judge called the law dangerous, saying it would free killers. Yet, Balter supported it.”

In another ad of a similar tone, the NRCC reaffirms, “Balter is supporting a law that turns our justice system into a revolving door, with some criminals committing vicious crimes once they’re set free.”

These ads claim that Balter’s prison reform policies release people incarcerated for violent crimes. However, there’s no evidence that her elimination of cash bail for minor crimes would lead to that. She has expressed clearly that she aims to end cash bail for nonviolent felonies and misdemeanors, which would include public intoxication, driving under the influence, petty theft, burglary, counterfeiting and cheating in gambling.

These ads are a problem. If you were to look at the NRCC’s YouTube account, you would find over 100 attack ads just like them, all using the same tactics. To me, this is deeply disappointing. It isn’t fair to candidates or voters. Candidates should aim to be better than their opponents because of their platform, not because they’ve misrepresented the other’s character.

But what disappoints me even more is that these ads are normal. We know that attack ads will play dirty, and we accept that. We, as residents of a democratic nation, should be able to make a sound decision on policy alone. Sadly, we can’t. In recent decades, the attack ad has grown in popularity, to the point that organizations such as the NRCC ground their entire online presence in it. The election of an aggressive candidate such as Donald Trump only made this worse, but let us not kid ourselves — attack ads did not start with him, and they will not end with him.

This is an entire generation of Republican politicians’ way of surviving. They lie. They bite. They throw whatever they have because, at the end of the day, they have nothing else to go on.

Charley Walton is a freshman television, radio and film major. His column appears bi-weekly. He can be reached at gcwalton@syr.edu.

Published on October 13, 2020 at 10:57 pm