Democratic Sen. John Walsh (D-MT) was forced to drop his Senate bid due to plagiarism, but serial plagiarist Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) is being touted by the media as a serious 2016 presidential candidate.
According to the Billings Gazette, Sen. Walsh said in a statement, “I am ending my campaign so that I can focus on fulfilling the responsibility entrusted to me as your U.S. senator. You deserve someone who will always fight for Montana, and I will….I am proud that with your support, we held our opponent (Daines) accountable for his hurtful record to privatize Medicare, to deny women the freedom to make their own health decisions and to sell off our public lands. I know how important it is to continue the fight for these Montana values, and it is time for us all to return to the real issues of this election.”
Sen. Walsh’s reelection campaign went from an uphill battle to impossible after The New York Times broke the story that he plagiarized sections of his dissertation. Walsh blamed his PTSD, but that excuse didn’t fly with voters, and his support collapsed. Even in the best case scenario, it was unlikely that Walsh would win reelection. He has trailed Republican Rep. Steve Daines in every poll.
To get more stories like this, subscribe to our newsletter The Daily.
What is interesting is how rare the Walsh situation is. The Washington Post reported, “According to Kate Scott of the Senate Historical Office, there’s been one other time (that she was able to find) in which a sitting senator earned his party’s nomination, but resigned before the general election. And it was recently, too.”
Walsh’s departure is good news for Democrats. If Sen. Walsh stayed on the ballot, Democrats would have no chance of keeping the seat. The state party gets to hold a convention before August 20 in order to pick a new nominee. The new Democratic nominee will have to hit the ground running, but a different nominee at least gives Democrats a chance in November.
There seems to be a partisan contradiction in the treatment of plagiarists by the media. It would nice to know why serial plagiarist Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) is considered a serious presidential candidate in 2016, but Walsh was run out of town on a rail. Is the difference that Rand Paul plagiarized speeches, while Walsh plagiarized parts of his dissertation? If plagiarism is disqualifying for Walsh, it should also disqualify Paul.
One form of plagiarism isn’t excusable while another is punishable. Plagiarism is plagiarism. Both senators are guilty, and both should be treated the same way. Plagiarism is a serious breach of trust and ethics. It is intellectual theft, and if we are going to punish our political leaders for it, our standards should at least be consistent.
Jason is the managing editor. He is also a White House Press Pool and a Congressional correspondent for PoliticusUSA. Jason has a Bachelor’s Degree in Political Science. His graduate work focused on public policy, with a specialization in social reform movements.
Awards and Professional Memberships
Member of the Society of Professional Journalists and The American Political Science Association
