Blunt's chief embarks on letter-writing campaign

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. -- There are various tools in the art of political persuasion -- news conferences, press releases, mailed fliers, telephone calls, advertisements and commercials.

And then there is "The Letter" -- slightly more subtle, yet a sure way to drive home a political point.

It works like this:

1. A politician uses official-looking stationary to write a letter to a political opponent demanding they take action on some allegedly egregious situation.

2. The letter is made public -- often before the political opponent even sees it.

3. The publicity makes the point. There's really no expectation the political opponent will comply with the demands.

The tactic seems particularly popular right now with Gov. Matt Blunt's chief of staff, Ed Martin.

In a recent span of 15 business days, Martin wrote seven publicly released letters: all on the same topic; all critical of Blunt's likely opponent in the 2008 gubernatorial election, Attorney General Jay Nixon; and all unlikely to produce the stated result they sought.

"In general, it's an effective strategy, particularly when you're not in the heat of a campaign," said political scientist Beth Miller of the University of Missouri-Kansas City. "This is one of those ways to constantly keep the public aware of what (a political opponent) is up to."

So what is Nixon up to? Or what is Blunt's administration up to with its letters?

A year ago, Nixon's campaign received more than $19,000 in contributions from St. Louis-based Ameren that were passed through various Democratic political committees. The donations occurred as Nixon was investigating Ameren for the December 2005 collapse of a mountaintop reservoir at its Taum Sauk hydroelectric plant.

A few days after The Associated Press reported the contributions, Nixon's campaign said last June that it would return the money to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest.

The state has yet to reach a settlement with Ameren over the reservoir disaster -- partly because Blunt and Nixon remain at odds over the terms.

Although a full year has passed since the contributions, Martin used a recent Public Service Commission hearing on Ameren's requested electric rate increase to revive the issue.

First, Martin wrote a public letter the PSC chairman expressing "serious concerns" about Ameren and asking for an investigation into the contributions. It was an unusual request, since the Missouri Ethics Commission, which handles campaign finance investigations, already had cleared Nixon of wrongdoing.

Then Martin, writing that he was "a bit troubled," sent a public letter to Ameren's new president urging him to direct the company's general counsel to testify about the contributions -- essentially to whatever public officials would listen.

The next day, Martin followed with a public letter to Ameren's general counsel expressing a "fear that you may be covering something up" about the contributions.

And the day after that, Martin publicly wrote to Ameren's chief financial officer, asserting: "It is time for Ameren to come clean with the public."

A few days passed before his next public letter. This one, to Ameren's communications director, suggested the company "could clear this whole incident up" by complying with six specific demands for information.

Next up on Martin's public letter campaign: the chief executive officer of AmerenUE. While "respectfully requesting" Ameren take five specific steps "to testify to the truth," Martin declared himself available to testify about the topic to the PSC.

And then came Martin's biggest public letter of all -- to Nixon. Martin asked the attorney general to recuse himself from all dealings with Ameren, accused Nixon of trying "to suppress my testimony" and proclaimed that he expected to testify nonetheless before the PSC.

The governor's office put out a press release with the exact time, date and place for Martin's testimony. Oops! The PSC said it had not decided whether Martin could testify.

Ultimately he did not, and Martin was reduced to reading his nine pages of prepared remarks to reporters in his office.

That turn of events was a bit embarrassing, Martin acknowledges. But he's not deterred. Martin notes Ameren's stockholder meeting is coming up. Perhaps it's another avenue for a public letter.

"All I have ever done is said both Ameren and the attorney general have displayed behavior that is contrary to good public behavior," Martin said.

Blunt's chief of staff is not the only one publicly releasing letters. Nixon's staff has done the same, on occasion -- though not as often.

Martin's intense letter-writing campaign began the week after Blunt forced the resignation of his agriculture director, Fred Ferrell, following the public disclosure of Ferrell's alleged sexual harassment of an employee. Blunt had been made privately aware of the allegations nine months earlier, and had decided at the time to keep Ferrell on the job.

To some, the timing is no coincidence.

"There's not this spate of good news or success" for Blunt's office, said political scientist David Kimball, of the University of Missouri-St. Louis, "so you might as well go after your opponent. It sure beats having to play defense -- to defend your office every day against charges of overlooking sexual harassment."