On the October 25 broadcast of his 630 KHOW-AM show, Peter Boyles supported a claim by U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo's (R-CO) chief of staff, Mac Zimmerman, that an October 25 Denver Post article “omit[ted]...a passage in the [House] ethics rules” in order to give the impression that Tancredo had committed a violation with regard to the posting of material on his official House website and on his Republican presidential campaign website. Zimmerman went on to state that “we were pretty surprised ... because our spokesman actually talked at some length about that part of the ethics rules that deals with the press releases with the reporter yesterday, and for some reason it wasn't included in the story.” In fact, the Post quoted Tancredo congressional spokesman T.Q. Houlton addressing the issue that Zimmerman falsely claimed “for some reason ... wasn't included.”

The Post article, “Tancredo's Web postings challenged,” concerned an October 23 press release, “Tancredo Introduces 'No-Match' Letter Legislation,” which appeared the same day on Tancredo's official House and presidential campaign websites. According to the Post, “Presidential hopeful Tom Tancredo on Tuesday published the same news release on his U.S. House and campaign websites, despite ethics rules prohibiting 'campaign or political activity from taking place in a congressional office.' ” The Post noted, “The House rule book on campaign activity says members' campaigns must wait a few days after a news release is issued before reproducing its contents.”

From the October 25 broadcast of 630 KHOW-AM's The Peter Boyles Show:

BOYLES: This is Mac Zimmerman, who is the chief of staff for Tancredo, and we can't get -- there's a nasty piece appearing in your Denver Post, which, of course, I'm not shocked. Anything that Tancredo does is not good, according to the Post. But hey, Mac, good morning, man. Thanks for doing this.

ZIMMERMAN: Hey, how you doing, Peter?

BOYLES: Are you in town, or are you in D.C.?

ZIMMERMAN: I'm stuck in D.C.

BOYLES: Take a look at this story in the Post this morning by Susan Greene. What the hell is this about?

ZIMMERMAN: It is something else. I was, I read it this morning and was sort of surprised, because it includes, you know, some quotes from the Common Cause folks, and then some references to different things in the ethics rule. But what it omits is a passage in the ethics rules that deals specifically with the press release issue. Which, I got to tell you, we were pretty surprised about, because our spokesman actually talked at some length about that part of the ethics rules that deals with the press releases with the reporter yesterday, and for some reason it wasn't included in the story.

BOYLES: Yeah. It got excluded, really?

ZIMMERMAN: It did. Imagine that.

BOYLES: C'mon! The Denver Post did that?

ZIMMERMAN: Yeah.

BOYLES: Get out of here!

ZIMMERMAN: Yeah, they did.

BOYLES: You're makin' this up.

Contrary to Zimmerman's suggestion that the Post omitted Tancredo's position on the House ethics rule calling for a delay before posting a release on a campaign website, the article in fact quoted Tancredo's congressional spokesman arguing that the rule is “outdated” because of “today's digital media and e-mails”:

Tancredo's House office said there's no wrongdoing.

“As far as I know, anytime something becomes public information, the campaign can use it,” said T.Q. Houlton, congressional spokesman for the Littleton Republican. “We're not in any sort of violation on this stuff.”

Tancredo's presidential campaign did not return inquiries.

At issue are two identical news releases dated Oct. 23 entitled “Tancredo Introduces 'No- Match' Letter Legislation.” Posted on the immigration reformer's campaign website and his taxpayer-funded U.S. House website, they decry a federal court decision blocking the Department of Homeland Security from sending letters to employers seeking to verify workers' immigration status.

These were not the first identical postings Tancredo has used for his congressional work and presidential campaign. On Oct. 11, the same news release lambasting officials in El Paso for opposing a border fence also appeared on both websites.

The House rule book on campaign activity says members' campaigns must wait a few days after a news release is issued before reproducing its contents.

Tancredo's Houlton asserted the rule is outdated because he said it doesn't factor in the emergence of the Internet.

“This decision was made in 1982 before e-mails,” he said. “With today's digital media and e-mails, a few days isn't necessary.” [emphasis added]

On Boyles' program, Zimmerman proceeded to read another passage from the House Ethics Manual regarding when official materials can be shared with a campaign. He then repeated substantially the same argument that the Post reported Houlton had made about “today's digital media”:

ZIMMERMAN: No, I've got the, I've actually got the passage in front of me, if you want to hear it.

BOYLES All right, so the Post, well, go ahead, if you will. What does the Post allege?

ZIMMERMAN: Well, they say that -- what happens a lot of times with incumbent members who are running for other offices is, in their normal course of their duties they'll send out press releases. You guys get those from our office. Once those are out in the public domain, campaigns can pick those up just like anybody who runs a blog or a radio show or a newspaper can and then post those on their website -- provided that you're not coordinating with them to develop the press releases. And, so of course, Tom's presidential campaign has taken some of the press releases that we've sent out after the fact and posted those for informational purposes on their website.

BOYLES: What did the Post then say?

ZIMMERMAN: Well, they alleged in the lead paragraph that this was, constituted some kind of coordination, that it violated the ethics rules. And then, of course, they didn't go into any detail about what the ethic rules actually say about press releases.

[Boyles laughs]

ZIMMERMAN: And what they do say is that a member's campaign is free to “reproduce and distribute materials that were originally prepared by the congressional office” to the campaign provided that “the materials were prepared for a bona fide official purpose and that the use of the materials has been exhausted.”

BOYLES: You told them this?

ZIMMERMAN: I did. And then they go -- they actually go further and explain that “as a general matter, the official use of the release is exhausted once it has been disseminated and the media have had an opportunity to utilize its contents.” Now, in today's world, I mean, as we all know, I mean, some of this stuff goes out there in real time. I mean, especially with a guy like my boss who says some things that are controversial from time to time. Those are picked up on the Internet, on the radio, and on TV within minutes sometimes.

The passages that Zimmerman cited appear in the same section (“Providing Published Materials to the Campaign”) of the booklet that the Post cited, and contain multiple references to publication of such materials on campaign websites, including an explanation of when an item is considered “exhausted.” The text the Post cited regarding the necessity for campaigns to delay publishing official press releases appears in the rules as an application of the term “exhausted” and immediately follows the sentences about the term that Zimmerman misleadingly noted that the Post had “omit[ted]”:

Providing Published Materials to the Campaign. A congressional office may provide a campaign office with a copy of any materials that the congressional office has issued publicly, such as press releases, speeches, and newsletters. In stating that such activity is permissible, the Standards Committee assumes that only a minimal amount of congressional staff time will be consumed in responding to campaign requests for materials of this nature. However, in no event should the congressional office provide the campaign with a quantity of any such item for distribution by the campaign.

[...]

A separate question that arises at times is whether a Member's campaign, having received a copy of an item that the congressional office issued publicly -- such as a press release or Congressional Record statement -- may then reproduce and distribute that item at campaign expense. The Standards Committee addressed this matter in its Advisory Opinion No. 6, which was issued on September 14, 1982 and is reprinted in updated form in the appendices to this booklet. A Member's campaign is free to reproduce and distribute, for campaign purposes, materials that were originally prepared by the congressional office, provided that the following requirements are satisfied:

• The materials were prepared by the congressional office for a bona fide official purpose, and the official use of the materials has been exhausted,

• All the expenses associated with reproducing and distributing the materials are paid from campaign funds, and

• The materials themselves or the context in which they are presented clearly establishes their campaign or political purposes and hence their non-official use, so that there is no appearance that private funds are supplementing official allowances.

In reproducing such materials, the campaign must remove all official indicia, such as the official letterhead from a press release that the congressional office had issued, and any references to the address or telephone number of the congressional office. The name of any congressional staff contact that appeared in the material as issued originally must also be deleted. Subject to the same requirements, such materials may also be posted on the Member's campaign Web site.

A question may arise as to when the official use of an item has been “exhausted” as that term is used here. As a general matter, the official use of the normal press release is exhausted once it has been disseminated and the media have had an opportunity to utilize its contents. Thus usually a campaign will be able to reproduce the contents of congressional office press releases a few days after their original issuance, provided that the other requirements set forth above are satisfied. On the other hand, where a congressional office posts a statement setting out the Member's views on the major issues on its official Web site, the Member's campaign is not free to reproduce that statement so long as it remains on the official Web site. So long as a statement of that nature remains posted on the official site, its official use is not exhausted. [emphasis added]