The slime campaigns reach Washington state

If you've been watching TV, listening to radio or even opening your mailbox lately, you might be feeling like you need to wash off the slime.

The phenomenon of third-party negative ads in the primary election was so impressive, the state Public Disclosure Commission charged its staff with making recommendations for what to do about the hijacking of political debate. A PDC staff report was breathtaking. In state Supreme Court races, five of every six dollars were spent not by candidate campaigns but by independent organizations, such as unions, trade associations and corporations.

The Supreme Court races, with their particularly loathsome batch of negative ads, got most of the press, but the 35th Legislative District Senate primary onslaught is worth noting.

Wildcard Tim Sheldon has been an unruly Democrat since he went to the Senate in 1997. He organizes with the Democrats but sometimes votes with Republicans. His ambivalence makes the Democrats' narrow majority in the Senate somewhat tenuous — and apparently not reliable enough for special interests that support Democrats. In the primary, Sheldon was challenged by Kyle Taylor Lucas; about $50,000 was spent supporting each candidate.

Then add into the mix the $182,625 spent opposing only Tim Sheldon. That money came from the Service Employees International Union, Washington Conservation Voters, Washington NARAL Pro-Choice PAC — groups whose interests likely would be served by a more-reliable Democrat.

The voters of the 35th Legislative District were not persuaded by the piling on. Neither were voters swayed to oust Chief Justice Gerry Alexander, who was targeted by the Building Industry Association of Washington. The BIAW is making something of an unsavory tradition of flooding Supreme Court races with its cash.

Washington has one of the nation's most comprehensive laws requiring disclosure of political contributions. There are some campaign limits imposed on contributions to candidates, but not for third-party expenditures.

The PDC is right to be concerned about the phenomenon of special-interest cash flooding campaigns — but what to do about it is not so clear.