GOPer Takes Down Parts Of Website After Plagiarism Allegations, Blames Ex-Staffer

The election night party for Monica Wehby, Republican U.S. Senate candidate, was held in Oregon City Tuesday May 20, 2014. She will face Democratic incumbent Jeff Merkley. (AP Photo/The Oregonian, Stephanie Yao Long)
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

Republican U.S. Senate candidate Monica Wehby’s campaign seems to have scrubbed parts of her campaign website and said blamed a former staffer after Buzzfeed reported that policy pages on the website appeared to have been plagiarized.

Buzzfeed recently reported that the health plan on the website for Wehby’s campaign seemed to have been plagiarized from a survey on healthcare reform conducted by Karl Rove’s Crossroads USA. Wehby, a physician, has repeatedly highlighted her medical experience to argue that it gives her a strong understanding of health care reform and Obamacare.

Separately, Buzzfeed reported that an economic plan released by the Wehby campaign seemed to have been “heavily plagiarized from multiple sources” including a section that word-for-word came from a plan produced by Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH).

On Tuesday Wehby spokesman Dean Petrone told Buzzfeed the charges were “absurd.” But The Huffington Post pointed out that the Wehby campaign also appeared to have removed the plagiarized content in response to the report.

On Wednesday evening Wehby’s campaign released a statement saying that the staffers who wrote the content in question were no longer part of the team.

“These website pages were authored by staff who are no longer employed by the campaign and were immediately removed once brought to our attention,” Petrone said in a statement to The Huffington Post. “Dr. Wehby will continue to fight against [Democratic Sen.] Jeff Merkley’s attempts to distract voters from his failure to help middle and working class Oregon families.”

The Oregonian said the campaign was blaming a former staffer. The spotlight, according to the newspaper, had been placed on Wehby’s former campaign manager, Charlie Pearce. Pearce told the newspaper he did not write the policy or economic plans that were allegedly plagiarized.

“I did not author the health care policy or economic policy plans,” Pearce told The Oregonian in an interview.

The TPM Polltracker gives Merkley a 19 point lead over Wehby.

Correction: This post has been updated to show that the campaign blamed a former staffer for the alleged plagiarism but did not say it had fired someone over it.

Latest Livewire

Notable Replies

  1. Avatar for jsfox jsfox says:

    Another Republican without an idea or a clue.

  2. “…heavily plagiarized…”

    Policy positions? Republicans surely don’t need policies. Government isn’t supposed to do anything. Or so these honorable people say.

    It’s a con.

  3. I teach in college and over the past three years about half of my courses have been online. The plagiarism in these course is much higher than in traditional, brick and mortar courses. But, in both cases, what surprises me is that many students don’t see anything wrong with it. They feel that the points are earned as long as their answer is correct, regardless of who wrote it.

    It’s very frustrating and I would be lying if I didn’t admit to occasionally saying "f*“k it, just give them the points”. It’s much easier than gathering evidence and arguing with the student and administration. At some point you just cut your losses and focus on the things you enjoy: classroom teaching and research.

    Outside of the top tier, schools are pushing online courses as a way to bolster their enrollment (i.e., revenue) and lower costs. The writing is on the wall – a lucky few will get excellent traditional educations from flagship schools, while the majority are herded through quasi-diploma mills like my school.

    My point is that you will likely see much more of this. In fact, we may be on the cusp of a “post-plagiarism” world where, outside a few small scholarly networks, plagiarism is viewed as perfectly normal and acceptable.

  4. On Tuesday Wehby spokesman Dean Petrone told Buzzfeed the charges were “absurd.” But The Huffington Post pointed out that the Wehby campaign also appeared to have removed the plagiarized content in response to the report.

    On Wednesday evening Wehby’s campaign released a statement saying that the staffers who wrote the content in question had been fired.

    "These website pages were authored by staff who are no longer employed by the campaign and were immediately removed once brought to our attention,"

    So on one side of their mouth they called the allegations “absurd”, yet on the other they are claiming they immediately removed the content when it was bought to their attention.

    But the Democrat that is running against Webby better not mention this because then it’s a distraction. Nevermind the fact that her campaign didn’t even write their own policy plan nor mentioned the source of the words.
    And yeah, blaming it on a “staffer”. One would think it was the guy that runs the Xerox machine or the person in charge of bringing coffer and donuts. But this is a CAMPAIGN MANAGER. You don’t think Webby knew where “her” plan came from? Please.

  5. “I did not author the health care policy or economic policy plans,” Pearce told The Oregonian in an interview.

    He’s being honest. He didn’t author them. Someone else did, and he copied them.

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

41 more replies

Participants

Avatar for system1 Avatar for valgalky23 Avatar for sooner Avatar for asanders91360 Avatar for snig Avatar for mcgloinm Avatar for leftflank Avatar for rudesan Avatar for trumpdog Avatar for frankly_my_dear Avatar for midnight_rambler Avatar for arc_of_the_universe Avatar for magical_panda Avatar for fitley Avatar for 538liberal Avatar for tao Avatar for downriver Avatar for dectra Avatar for drishtipat Avatar for fiftygigs Avatar for birdie2 Avatar for gregormendel Avatar for just_observing Avatar for Dazed1

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: