Bradford, Fa'izah: Alleged Violation of WAC 390-18-040 for inaccurate use of the term "reelect" in political advertising. (AUG 2019)

Case

#56009

Respondent

Fa'izah Bradford

Complainant

Nancy Jean Majors

Description

The PDC received a complaint alleging that Fa’izah Bradford (the “Respondent”) may have violated WAC 390-18-040 by using the term “reelect” in political advertising. PDC staff reviewed the allegation; the applicable statutes, rules and reporting requirements; and the response provided by the Respondent to determine whether they support a finding of one or more violations.

Staff’s review found the following:

The Respondent, who was appointed to the office of School Director for Highline School District 401, position 5 through December of 2019, and is a 2019 candidate for the same position, sponsored the following political advertising sometime prior to August 3, 2019: 1) campaign signs saying “Re-Elect Fa’izah Bradford;” and 2) robocalls stating the Respondent is “running for reelection.”

Pursuant to WAC 390-18-040, the term “reelect” is used to represent that the candidate was elected to, and presently holds, the same office being sought. The term “retain” is used to indicate the candidate is an incumbent but does not represent that the office was obtained by election. The term “return” is used to indicate the candidate now holds, or previously held, the office being sought but does not represent that it was attained by election.

RCW 42.17A.335(1(b) prohibits a person from sponsoring political advertising that falsely represents that a candidate is the incumbent for the office when in fact the candidate is not an incumbent. However, subsection (3) of .335 states that it is not a violation for a candidate or their agent to make such a statement about the candidate himself or herself because a person cannot defame themselves.

In response to the allegation, the Respondent indicated her belief that it was acceptable to use the term “reelect” in political advertising because she currently holds the position as an appointee. The Respondent voluntarily agreed to correct her campaign signs no later than September 15, 2019 and use the terms “elect.” “return” or “retain” on any future robocalls.

Based on these findings, staff determined that, in this instance, the Respondent’s use of the term “reelect” to describe herself does not amount to a violation that warrants further investigation. The PDC finds that no further action is warranted. and has dismissed this matter in accordance with RCW 42.17A.755(1).

Disposition

Case Closed with No Evidence of Violations

Date Opened

August 12, 2019

Areas of Law

RCW 42.17A.335, WAC 390-18-040