Thread by @TallmanIV

Alrighty, Seattle City Council candidates, let's have a talk about transparency, because a lot of you don't quite seem to get it (even some of you who I like a lot!). But first, a really quick history lesson . . .

Since 1972, Washington has had, as a direct result of voter support, strong campaign finance disclosure requirements. For some time, those requirements have included some specific things disclosures by commercial advertisers selling political ads.

The disclosures required a pretty simple; it's all about who is being targeted with the advertising, money spent, simple stuff like that that all advertisers have really easy access to.

But there are some advertisers, digital ones, who think the rules and laws supported by Washington voters don't apply to them. Some of them decided they didn't want to follow the law, but they didn't want to break it either, so they left.

But at least one decided that, while they didn't want to follow the law, they didn't really want to leave either: Facebook.

Now campaigns are in a bit of a weird spot. See, Facebook says y'all can't buy ads, but they also don't really enforce that rule very well. Importantly, they also still don't follow the law on disclosures and transparency.

And now to the point: a ton of y'all are being supported by ads which will never, unless something changes, be in compliance with the legal requirements for political ads in Washington. So let's talk about who you are and what's up, yeah?

Let's start with the CASE supported folks. Now, I don't actually know which one of you it was because of how CASE filed their forms, but at least one of you is being supported by some of these legally questionable Facebook ads.

So, @TavelForSeattle, @VoteMarkSolomon, Egan Orion, Alex Pedersen, Debora Juarez, @jay_fathi, @HeidiforCouncil, Jim Pugel, and @MichaelGforD7, what's up with that?

A ton of y'all are super dedicated to transparency and interested in what voters want. Are you okay with organizations supporting you buying ads which aren't as transparent as the law requires, or no? Will you call out CASE for participating in non-transparent ads?

Now how about the Moms for Seattle PAC people. There's a lot of money involved in this one . . .

I wonder how @VotePatMurakami, Alex Pedersen (again, and who really needs a Twitter, y'all), @HeidiforCouncil (again!), and @MichaelGforD7 (also again!) feel about being supported by ads which violate the spirit, and very possibly the letter, of disclosure laws.

Heck, the repeats between those two lists all even have "accountability" or "transparency" listed as things they care about!

There are even more folks though! And yet another PAC too!

So what's up what that, @Lisa_Herbold, @TammyMoralesSEA, and @jay_fathi (again)? Do you think ads which support you, but don't meet all the disclosure rules of our state, are fine or no?

And hell, what are you even doing @seiu775?! Y'all should know waaaaay better.

Great news for the folks being supported by these ads though! There are still loads of ways you can make your commitment to transparency super clear.

A wonderful start would be calling on these organizations, who are buying these ads which will never really fulfill disclosure requirements, to voluntarily disclose the required commercial advertiser information, even if @facebook refuses to follow the law.

It's not hard, it shows that even though @facebook doesn't care about what Washington voters want and what Washington law says that you do, and it would certainly make a difference to folks like me who care about real, all-the-time transparency and accountability.

I'm sure I missed some candidates who are buying ads on their own, or who are being supported by IEs which haven't been reported quite right. Don't worry though; I'm going to call all y'all out on this just as soon as I finish my coffee.

(And, important closing note, I like a ton of people mentioned in this thread. I plan on voting for one of them in the primary even. Part of the reason I'm calling some folks out is because I believe in y'all and what you're doing, and like you as people even.)

Correcting to screenshots in the thread because all three uploaded as the same image. Attaching the correct ones for the tweets on CASE spending and Moms for Seattle spending to this tweet.

Also correcting to note that the CASE expenditure was in support of @TavelForSeattle.