As Attack Ads Take to the Airwaves, Both Sides Are Firing

Four years ago, running for reelection in the aftermath of the O.J. Simpson case, Dist. Atty. Gil Garcetti poured more than $1 million into radio and television ads attacking challenger John Lynch, who could barely afford to fight back.

Outspent on the air by more than 10-to-1, Lynch lost--but only by a whisker.

This year, Garcetti has launched another blistering ad campaign, this time against challenger Steve Cooley. Again, he has spent over $1 million, all concentrated on the tail end of his campaign.

But Cooley has proved to be a much more resourceful fund-raiser than Lynch. Although he hasn’t quite equaled Garcetti--who has raised roughly $1.75 million, including $200,000 of his own money--Cooley has come close with roughly $1.4 million. And so, when Garcetti began his ad campaign on major local television stations Friday, Cooley was able to strike back within hours with a campaign of his own.

In it, Cooley has shown that he, too, can go on the attack. While Garcetti cudgels him for being a soft-on-crime Republican, Cooley has hit back with a scathing commercial that paints Garcetti as untrustworthy and incompetent.

“No matter what Gil Garcetti’s negative campaign ads say, remember, it’s Gil Garcetti who’s saying it,” the Cooley commercial begins before attacking Garcetti’s record and praising Cooley as an honest, effective prosecutor.

Garcetti’s commercial attacks Cooley’s record as a prosecutor before concluding: “Republican Steve Cooley, the plea bargainer we can’t trust to be district attorney.”

Both sides have accused the other of hitting below the belt, but one Democratic political consultant said he thought the ads were within the bounds of political fair play--tough, but not irresponsible.

“They’re textbook reactions by each campaign,” Steven Afriat said.

Rick Taylor, the consultant who ran Lynch’s campaign four years ago, said he thought the Garcetti ad was weaker than the controversial--but effective--commercial that sank Lynch. Taylor joked that after watching the anti-Lynch ad, which used a psychedelic, X-ray image of the challenger, “Even I had to take a second look at John.”

In 1996, Taylor said he had $120,000 to spend on television campaigns for Lynch, compared with Garcetti’s estimated $1.4 million. The Cooley campaign expects to spend about $500,000, spokesman Joe Scott said.

Taylor said that should be “more than enough” to win the race for Cooley, who has led in every poll taken in the campaign.

Both Cooley’s and Garcetti’s ads have carried themes the candidates have returned to throughout the campaign.

Candidates Accused of Being Soft on Crime

Garcetti, a Democrat, has tried to play up the fact that his opponent is a Republican, even though the office they are seeking is officially nonpartisan. Only 28% of registered voters in Los Angeles County are Republicans.

At the same time, Garcetti has tried to show that Cooley is soft on crime--an unusual tactic against a Republican. Until now, this has primarily consisted of attacks on Cooley for being softer than Garcetti on the three-strikes law. But in the TV commercial, Garcetti has added the charge that Cooley, one of his top deputies, has allowed dangerous criminals to plea bargain for lower sentences.

Actually, most cases in Los Angeles County, including many murder cases, are settled through plea bargains. As district attorney, Garcetti has not crusaded against them. But they have never been politically popular, and Garcetti is hoping voters will see Cooley as someone who would allow even more plea bargains than are now used by the prosecutor’s office.

Cooley’s tactic throughout the campaign has been to aggressively attack Garcetti as a failed, unethical prosecutor, with particular emphasis on the Rampart police corruption scandal, for which he says Garcetti bears responsibility. He continued that in a recent mailer that concludes: “Garcetti could have prevented the worst police scandal in history.” And he returns to it in the television commercial, which charges that Garcetti “wouldn’t tell the truth about Rampart.”

It’s not clear from the ad what Cooley means by that charge. His campaign manager, John Shallman, said it refers to Garcetti’s early refusal to hand over information about Rampart to defense lawyers, and the D.A.’s refusal to accept blame for Rampart, among other things.

Scott, the Cooley campaign spokesman, said the challenger was determined to avoid Lynch’s fate by anticipating and responding in kind to Garcetti’s attacks.

“We have spent more in a single day than [Lynch] spent in his entire campaign,” Scott said. “He never fought back. That was the difference.”

This time around, he added, “You’ve got hand-to-hand combat.”