Q&A with Rowley Staffer David Bailey

Within a matter of one month, Coleen Rowley’s congressional campaign staffer David Bailey has quickly become one of the most publicized staffer in local politics.  From “Double-Agent,” to “Dirty Trickster,” Bailey has now been on the receiving end of numerous John Kline campaign mailers and press releases, all of them focusing on events that happened before Bailey even joined the Rowley staff.

Is this a new low in politics, and does this mean nothing is off-limits?  Bailey answers our questions below the fold.

more insideQ: We’ve seen you referred to in various mailings from the Kline campaign as “senior staff,” “Research and Communications Director” and “top issues advisor.” What exactly is your role for the Coleen Rowley campaign?

I’m on the org chart as ‘Director of Earned Media’.  So ironically, Kline’s recent attacks have made my job much easier.  In reality, I’m mostly just a writer.  I write and edit copy to be released, and I’m the principal author on the campaign’s weblog, The Blotter.

Q: Earlier in July, a member of John Kline’s campaign staff was accused of anonymously posting to pro-Rowely campaign sites, precipitating the Kline campaign’s argument that Rowley was the first to begin attacking staff as a leg of the campaign itself. Are those accusations valid, and if not, how do these instances differ?

Actually, on August 1, the Rowley campaign delivered a letter to John Kline’s office calling out three instances of questionable behavior by Kline’s staff.  One was the instance of anonymously commenting on DumpJohnKline to which you refer, and the other two were instances in which John Kline’s staff had written what we felt were excessively hostile letters to the editor.

But to my knowledge, the first instance of explicitly calling out a staff member came in mid-July, when Ms. Bratlie publicly accused me of having written a letter to ThisWeek Eagan without identifying myself as a member of Rowley’s staff.  Her accusation was false; I had written the letter before joining Rowley for Congress, but it was published after I joined.

Putting aside the question of ‘who started it’, I think the difference is pretty clear.  Rowley for Congress called attention to public statements members of John Kline’s staff had made about the campaign.  But they’re attacking me based on things I said and did months or even years before joining Rowley for Congress.  So the difference is that we’re calling attention to public statements they’ve made about the campaign, while they’re publicizing things that were never part of the campaign.

Q: Does the Rowley campaign have a stance as to what issues/people are and are not ‘fair game’ in her run for office? Where is the line between campaign issues and mudslinging?

There’s no set policy.  Everyone on Rowley for Congress understands that we’re campaigning against John Kline based on his record over the past four years: his support for the occupation of Iraq, for privatizing Social Security, for Medicare Part D.  Anyone who looks at the campaign web site or blog, or who’s met Coleen knows that’s where our focus is.  It has honestly never occurred to me to raise an issue about anything Kline’s staff may have done in his or her personal life, and I’m pretty sure it’s never occurred to anyone else on the Rowley for Congress staff.

The clear delineation is based on the issues.  The posts I write on The Blotter are fair game.  Coleen’s public statements are fair game.  Discussing John Kline’s record for the past four years in Congress is fair game.  Mailing out fliers containing wild-eyed distortions based on things I said or did months and years before I joined the campaign is not fair game.  I’m fairly certain John Kline and his staff understand this distinction; they’re just ignoring it.

Q: Has the increased media attention recently had any effects on the Rowley campaign?

Well, of course the political season is heating up and so there’s increased interest in the race anyway.  Nevertheless, I’m told that there’s been an increase in volunteer signups, requests for lawn signs, and web traffic.  The prevailing view on our side is that Kline’s attacks have backfired and demonstrated to everyone Coleen Rowley’s resolve and unwillingness to back down, which obviously helps us.

Q: Rather than sending out press releases on campaign staff workers, what issues would the campaign prefer to be focusing on?

A: Coleen’s priorities are comprehensive ethics reform, responsible redeployment from Iraq, and universal health care.  If you search around for recent statements from Kline on any of these issues, it immediately becomes clear that he doesn’t want to discuss them.  No doubt this is the reason he’s spent the last few weeks focusing on me.