DENNIS MYERS Against the Grain Advertisement

In Washington there are a couple of private political action committees formed by members of the U.S. House political party caucuses. They're called the National Republican Congressional Committee and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

The committees recruit candidates to run for the House in districts around the nation, teach those candidates how to raise money and organize campaigns, put them in touch with professional campaign consultants, and so on. Jill Derby of Nevada, for instance, was a DCCC project in 2006.

These little known entities are the embodiment of everything the public hates about politics. They manipulate the campaign laws with a vengeance (the DCCC files papers to change its legal status shortly before each election so that it can act as an independent committee under the law). They freeze some good candidates out. They use campaign techniques that treat voters like dunces (the NRCC once used anonymous robot telephone calls). They tend to target and pick off those in the opposing party with whom their members are most likely to agree on issues and be able to work with. For instance, the Democratic committee tries to defeat moderate Republicans because they're easier to beat, thus making the House more polarized and less likely to get anything done.

The chairs of the committees are rotated, usually among House members with safe seats. During the current election cycle, Chris Van Hollen of Maryland chairs DCCC. In 2006, Van Hollen was assigned by the DCCC to be a coach for Derby, and he also contributed $1,000 of his own to Derby's campaign. That may be why DCCC since January has taken such a vigorous interest in Dean Heller, who defeated Derby and is now the new Republican House member from Nevada. The DCCC's epistles on the subject of Heller, sent to Nevada journalists, are typical of the deceitful ways these committees operate. Not surprisingly, instead of containing quotes from Van Hollen, their statements are issued in the name of a committee staff flack, Jennifer Crider. (Crider is well known among political bloggers for an "accusation" she once made against House Republicans when she was spokesperson for Nancy Pelosi: "What they're trying to do is distract. They're choosing to pass legislation that is bipartisan.")

In May DCCC put out a release claiming that "Heller voted against the bipartisan Hate Crimes Prevention Act to outlaw violent crimes committed against someone because of their race, religion, nationality, or have a disability" (sic). Crider proclaimed that Heller's motive for his "no" vote was that he opposed "giving state and local law enforcement the tools they need to prevent and prosecute hate crimes."

Could it be that he had another motive? This bill was, after all, opposed by some religious leaders, civil libertarians, and family groups who believe that its language will make it possible to prosecute opinion. And if the measure's support was bipartisan (13 percent of Republicans supported it), then so was its opposition (7 percent of Democrats opposed it).

Last month DCCC issued a news release saying that Heller had voted to deny children "better schools and the best possible teachers." What Heller actually did was oppose House Resolution 3043, one of those Christmas tree bills heavily laden with spending. Every cent in it may have been worthwhile and wise, but the DCCC never made that case. Instead it called Heller a grinch.

These intellectually dishonest news releases have no current political life since few media entities would be caught dead publishing or broadcasting them. But once they are turned by DCCC into campaign material for whoever it recruits to run against Heller, they will get a new life that will be more difficult to disregard - reporters can't very well ignore statements by candidates.

Keep it in mind next year when you read that Heller "opposes tax cuts for middle class families," "opposes better teachers for America's children," "votes to cut funding to fight methamphetamine," "votes against America's small businesses" or that his "vote against Israel threatens their security and our own" - all charges that have been made by DCCC in the last six months.

Keep in mind, also, that the National Republican Congressional Committee does the same thing.