Sen. Davis’ desperate attack on Chap Peterson.

I just saw a totally over-the-top attack ad on TV that Republican Sen. Jeanmarie Devolites Davis is running against her Democratic challenger, Chap Peterson. Davis, who is shooting for reelection by claiming that she’s not actually a Republican, paints Peterson as a far-right conservative in the ad.

One of the claims is that Peterson wouldn’t even vote to keep guns out of schools. I happened to catch the bill number — HB 1017, from 2002. There was just one vote on the bill, held in the Militia, Police and Public Safety committee. The committee had a bunch of bills that they hadn’t gotten to by the time crossover came around. They had to pass over the lot of them and, in a unanimous vote, did so. That was this vote.

When you download a spreadsheet of a legislator’s votes from Richmond Sunlight, the first three rows are polluted with non-vote data. Those rows read:

Please note that votes are not necessarily for or against a bill. Many are procedural votes. Verify the context of votes at richmondsunlight.com when in doubt.

That text is there to explain what’s obvious to the sort of people who read my blog, but that the average voter may not understand. Sen. Davis’ ad is premised on the correct assumption that the average voter won’t understand that Peterson’s vote had nothing to do with the content of the bill and everything to do with the constraints of a short session and too many bills. (Davis should be familiar with the problem of too many bills: in 2007 she filed more bills than 97.8% of her colleagues, coming in as the #3 most prolific filer with 46 in all. It includes such essentials as creating a “DIG WITH CARE” license plate and commending Central Fairfax Services, Inc., on the occasion of its 35th anniversary.)

There are hundreds — hundreds — of instances where Davis has cast similar votes, any number of which could be used against her. Here’s a spreadsheet of ’em. She voted to let homeowners associations bar display of the American flag. And to allow firearms dealers to illegally sell guns. She wouldn’t even vote to uphold individual freedom of religion.

Davis couldn’t possibly believe that these would be fair characterizations. That’s because they’re not. There is no definition by which any of those claims are reasonable. Likewise, there is no definition by which her attack on Peterson is reasonable.

I haven’t been following this race, but it’s pretty clear to me what’s going on here. To state something that’s so easily shown to be false must mean that Sen. Davis feels she’s in real danger of losing her reelection bid. She must be hoping that she doesn’t get called on this between now and Election Day. Here’s hoping that the voters in her district find out the story behind this ad.