There's still a month and a half before the primary, and already you can recite the words by heart.

"This is Arlen Specter, and I authorized this message to tell you about my record.'' "I'm Congressman Pat Toomey, and I approved this message because Pennsylvania Republicans deserve a senator who will stand up for our principles.'' Or variations on the theme.

It's the political version of singing along with Tammy Wynette. Only this tune is called "Stand by Your Ad.'' That's what the pols are jokingly calling a new provision in federal law that requires candidates to take on-air responsibility for their campaign commercials.

The disclaimer rule is everywhere on the airwaves in the runup to the April 27 primary, as Sen. Specter and Toomey, the Lehigh Valley congressman, clash for the Republican nomination for Specter's seat.

In Pennsylvania, the race is the first test of the new disclaimers. They are a little-noticed part of the landmark McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform law, formally called the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, or BRCA.

The idea is to try to fend off negative campaign ads by forcing politicians to attach their faces, as well as their names, to the commercials.

Whether it's going to work is debatable. Some campaign consultants are talking about farming out the really hard-hitting charges to supportive special-interest groups, to get around the disclaimer rule.

Voters are noticing, and commenting on, the disclaimers. Some find them annoying. Campaign strategists mostly hate them not just because of the negativity issue but because disclaimers eat up a precious four seconds of every 30-second TV spot. And air time is expensive.

"It's the bane of my existence,'' one consultant complained.

The guinea pigs That's an opinion shared by many political pros.

Except, perhaps, for Mark Dion, who manages Toomey's campaign.

"We haven't found it to be a burden,'' he said. "It allows the congressman to stand strongly behind his message in the ad.'' Toomey was the first federal candidate in Pennsylvania to use the disclaimers, since he was on the air back in June with his maiden TV ads. Specter's camp followed soon afterward.

"Our race is sort of like a test case,'' said Specter's campaign spokesman, Chris Nicholas.

The campaign finance reform law, BRCA, was adopted in 2002, but it was tied up in lawsuits until December.

Nicholas said the case was barely out of the courts when the senator's ads began to air, and it was hard to find definitive guidance on what the disclaimers had to say, and how.

"I compared it to walking into a dark room and not feeling for a light switch, but just seeing if there's even a light switch in the room,'' he said.

In the past, the disclaimers only had to be a written notice saying who paid for the ad.

Now, if a federal candidate's committee is paying the new law doesn't apply to state or local offices the candidate has to appear in a full-screen shot, has to identify himself or herself and has to claim credit for the ad personally.

Commercials sponsored by another committee for instance, a political party or by an outside interest group also must include disclaimers delivered by a representative of the sponsoring organization.

Print and radio ads have similar rules to follow. Nicholas said the disclaimers even apply to telephone calls for instance, those made from a campaign phone bank or the recorded calls to voters that have become common in recent years.

The disclaimers haven't gone unnoticed. Nicholas said voters have been asking about the "authorized'' ads.

"People get confused,'' he said, because the disclaimers aren't something they're used to seeing.

But they undoubtedly will find out quickly. President Bush started running his reelection spots Thursday.

Time not on their side For candidates, the most immediate effect of disclaimers is that they are losing more than 13 percent of each 30-second television commercial.

"Although four seconds sounds like a small amount of time, it is a big deal when you are already trying to creatively convey a message in a 30-second-time ad,'' said Melissa Sabatine, a former Lancaster County resident who now is a consultant for the Brabender Cox firm in Washington, D.C.

Air time is a major investment for candidates. This year, the Campaign Media Analysis Group projects national spending on political advertising at $1.3 billion, up from $1.2 billion in 2002.

But that's an unintended consequence of BRCA. The main aim of the disclaimer rule, said Franklin & Marshall College political analyst Dr. Stephen Medvic, is to try to cut down on harshly negative campaigns.

"It does make you think how you word the spot,'' Nicholas said.

The disclaimer rule has been getting a workout in other states, courtesy of the Democratic presidential campaign. And candidates are, in some cases, getting creative with disclaimers. The Web site FactCheck.org points out one Dennis Kucinich spot in which he enthuses, "Do I approve this commercial? You bet.'' Medvic said there's some speculation that the disclaimers might have hurt former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean and U.S. Rep. Dick Gephardt in the Iowa Democratic presidential caucuses last month, since both candidates went negative in failed attempts to win the critical first test.

If politicians perceive that going negative hurts a candidate in the wake of disclaimers, "the next time around, I think the tone will change,'' Medvic said.

Specter, the moderate incumbent, and Toomey, the conservative challenger, have taken different approaches on critical ads.

Toomey's commercial arguing that "three decades of liberalism is enough'' for Specter, used a disclaimer that "Pennsylvania Republicans deserve a senator who will stand up for our principles.'' But Specter's toughest ad, the one in which the father of a disabled child says that Toomey failed to help the family find nursing care, ends with Specter's simple disclaimer, "I'm Arlen Specter, and I authorized this message.'' Medvic said that while the Senate ads have been rough, they are not beyond the pale yet so maybe the disclaimer rule is working.

A way out? In politics, though, there's always a loophole. In this case, it may be the special-interest groups that have been pouring increasing amounts of money into campaign-related advertising in recent election cycles.

Rather than attach a candidate's name and face to a sharply negative ad, strategists may opt instead to have outside interests fire the most damaging shots.

"Expect to hear a lot of "I approve this ad' from Specter and (Democratic Senate candidate Joe) Hoeffel and Bush and (John) Kerry,'' said consultant Jess Yescalis, a Manheim Township native who runs Yescalis Campaign Strategies, "while the negative ads get run by the parties and special interests.'' Specter's campaign already has slammed Toomey for ads run by the conservative Club for Growth criticizing Specter.

Still, Medvic said, using an outside group means a candidate loses control of at least part of his message, something politicians hate to do.

Medvic, for one, approves of standing by your ad.

"I think,'' he said, "it really does hold candidates more accountable.'' blog comments powered by Disqus