... the two leaned against the wall and chatted like old friends.
Then Sparks, state agriculture commissioner, told the local chapter of the National Active and Retired Federal Employees Association Chapter that Bentley is "a good man and a good guy. We just approach issues differently."
"Ron and I have been to many meetings, about 40 forums," said Bentley, a state representative and retired Tuscaloosa doctor. "And we've made a commitment to run a clean campaign. Attacking each other doesn't put one single person back to work. We have views on different issues, but we'll be civil about it."
I'm told they mixed it up a little more at the Tourism Conference a few days ago, although this article doesn't touch on that. Here's the video. It's 47 minutes long. If you watch it, please tell the rest of us where the juicy parts are.
Not to worry about that poll my Sparks friends tell me, Ron always runs best as an underdog and Rasmussen leans right anyway. This is all fine.
Like I said, so far this race is pretty low key. Unfortunately, all the excitement in the governor's race (at least on the Democratic side) is still focused on the Democratic primary, which by my count has been over for two and a half months.
Last week we noted that Artur Davis skipped the traditional appearance at the SDEC meeting and has no plans to campaign for Sparks, who he said lacks vision and a plan to bring real change to Alabama. This week Sparks wrote a nice op-ed for the same paper titled "Defining Vision." In my opinion Ron Sparks would have been much better served to have led with page 2 of the article where he lays out his accomplishments and proposals and makes his case for being our next governor. His tenure as Ag Commissioner was always his strongest argument for promotion and he can't emphasize that enough. Page 1 (which is as far as most online viewers read) was devoted to Sparks' relationship with Artur Davis who, last time I looked, was no longer running for governor. This is classic "punching down" and to quote Keith Olbermann, "You don't punch down."
The Democratic primary is over and the Democrats who keep picking at that sort of scabbed over wound are just keeping the ill-feelings stirred up. I do not understand how that plays to a winning strategy in November. Please explain if you do.
The Alabama State Democratic Executive Committee met yesterday in Montgomery in a meeting room with no air conditioning, no wifi and precious little cell phone signal. Uncomfortable and isolated -- it may be an appropriate metaphor for the party this year.
[Update: ADP Chairman Joe Turnham has provided a statement on yesterday's SDEC meeting. It is included below the fold in its entirety.]
What did the Committee Members do in this sweltering room with no links to the outside world? This is what I can piece together from the two news reports (hat tip Dana Beyerle and Eric Velasco) and a few personal reports of the event.
They changed the bylaws to allow the Executive Board to seek re-election immediately rather than next January. They did so and the current Board was re-elected. "Turnham said that conducting elections Saturday rather than in January preserves continuity through the November election." Ummm, holding the election in January would have provided the exact same continutity. This guarantees the same Chairman, Vice Chairs, Secretary, Treasurer, etc. for another 4 years. We need more detail on this point -- Dr. Paul Hubbert said he was resigning from the Board effective yesterday so who was elected Vice-Chair for Public Labor Sector?
They changed the bylaws to base minority representation on the % of minority voters who voted for the Democratic candidate in the most recent presidential, rather than gubernatorial, election. This is not a number that anyone can actually determine (a license to make stuff up for political advantage), but in practice it will allow an increase in appointed minority committee members to bring the minority (when asked yesterday, Joe Reed said "minority" means "black" in this case) representation up from about 55% to about 65%. "Alabama Democratic Conference chairman Joe Reed said the change won’t materially affect the racial makeup of the party’s executive committee." That's spin for the mathematically challenged. Reed is the big winner in this action since he has the major say in who gets those extra seats on the committee.
The committee did not vote on an amendment that would give the President of the Alabama Federation of Democratic Women a place on the Executive Board (I think it's definitely the Board, not just the Committee). Why the hell not?
The committee confirmed Tuscaloosa District Attorney Tommy Smith as the Democratic nominee for the general election. I don't follow the details here, but this action will apparently prevent a challenge to Smith from an independent candidate who was on and then off the Democratic primary ballot.
The committee took no action to fill the ballot vacancy for Circuit Court Judge, Place 7 on the 23rd Circuit in Madison County. I'm told Madison County did not bring a nominee. Why the hell not?
Here's the agenda so you can see what they planned to take up yesterday. No word on whether they filled any vacancies on the SDEC, but I'm told there are still some vacancies. I don't know what if anything they did about the District Court Judge vacancy in Calhoun county or the House District 8 vacancy. [See below the fold for action on those items.]
Not sure which Joe was presiding today. Turnham, Reed or Stalin #alpolitics#asdec
Which I take to mean that things were being pushed right along from the podium. Several attendees said many people were "disgruntled" in the wake of the meeting.
The usual ritual at these events is that the runner-up in the primary embraces the winner and pledges full-throated support for the nominee in the fall.
In a break with tradition, I did not attend that event and will not be campaigning for the Democratic gubernatorial nominee. I want Democrats and independent-minded voters to know just why not.
One of the reasons I entered elective politics as a Democrat is because I worried that the Republican administrations of Guy Hunt and Fob James had set the state back in fundamental ways. The emerging Republican Party in the state offered little in the way of new approaches to revive the economy or modernize our schools. A few narrow interest groups held unusual influence in the GOP, and those interests appeared uninterested in any public purpose beyond maintaining their own power.
After almost two years of navigating the Alabama Democratic terrain as a gubernatorial candidate, I fear that the forces that dominate my party have turned into the same conservative anti-reform elements that I went into politics to oppose.
Davis has said he never planned to be a professional politician and he certainly doesn't sound like one now, although his assertion that jobs should be the next governor's top priority is politically astute. He pointedly did not endorse Bentley either (although some will accuse him of it) and reiterated his intention to leave the political arena when his term in Congress is over. This is Artur Davis speaking his mind, expressing frustration with the conservative mindset reformers are up against in the Democratic power structure and closing with a familiar lament that so many educated young Alabamians still have to leave the state to find opportunity.
I regret that neither political party in Alabama has laid out a genuine course to keep those young people home. I'm not surprised that Republicans haven't done better, and I am deeply disappointed that Alabama Democrats are failing the test as well.
A lot of people are disapponted in the Alabama Democratic party and concerned about its future, as well as the future of the state. The folks who run the Alabama Democratic Party have literally bet the party on B-I-N-G-O in 2010. The leadership has no time or interest for Democrats who care about any other issue beyond gambling. Constitutional Reform? That's for do-gooders. Ethics in government? Dreamers. Jobs from green industries? This is Alabama. Now this strategy may pay off in a big way in November if Democrats hold both houses of the Legislature, take back the governorship and most of the constitutional offices and win back the 5th district congressional seat in North Alabama. If that happens Ron Sparks and the party leadership will be hailed as heroes.
My question for the ADP leadership is this: why change the bylaws to re-elect yourself now, well in advance of the November election if you think you'll be heroes after the election? Is it possibly because the leadership is concerned that even a hand picked SDEC might be in an ugly mood next January and decide Alabama Democrats need to go in a different direction? Elect different leaders who might care about more than a single issue? That path is now closed -- Democrats could lose every race in November but we're guaranteed to keep the same party leadership for another 4 years, whether they're heroes or heels. It makes no sense to me, but it apparently makes a lot of sense to the party leaders who are concerned with "continuity" -- and/or hanging onto their positions.
I'd like to see some vision and leadership from the party and our nominees. I'd also like to have seen some calls for party unity after the primary. The Republicans are talking up unity, airing their disagreements and at least getting their grievances out in the open, but Democrats have simply gone back to their isolated corners after June 1 and stewed. Ron Sparks hasn't adopted even token parts of Davis' campaign platform, in spite of his early pledge to "woo" Davis supporters. At least in public, no one in the leadership is even bothering to urge Davis voters to get behind the nominee in November. Ignoring this rift will not bridge it.
I don't say these things because I enjoy being critical of my Party or of our gubernatorial nominee -- I hate it -- but because I'm genuinely concerned that the lack of leadership toward bringing Democrats together in a sense of common purpose is going to hurt us in November. None of us will be better off if Democrats lose big this year. If we run the table on Nov. 3rd I will obviously have egg on my face, happily so, but right now I'm worried that we're headed for the political wilderness for a good long time. The future may look bright to you folks in Montgomery, but I'm hearing "all is lost" from too many insiders and November 3 is shaping up more like Armageddon than Oz from where I stand.
What would happen if four of Alabama's most notable political figures were cloistered in a Montgomery mansion together and had their adventures taped by a camera crew from APT?
BREAKFAST
It is 6:30 in the morning. The mansion is quiet. Only Artur Davis is awake. He sits alone in the huge kitchen, making coffee. C-SPAN is playing on a television in the background.
Artur Davis: (Mumbling inaudibly, stirring coffee)
Ron Sparks: (Races into kitchen, flailing arms) Gommornin', you beautiful Alabemmies! Gemme some dagnabbit Wheaties!
Dale Peterson: (Walks in from pantry) Ain't got no Wheaties, Ronnie. (Shoulders .22) I bet some of them crooks and thugs stole them all! (Fires warning shot into the ceiling)
Artur Davis: (Covers ears, ducks) I....uh...It's time we begin an honest discourse...
Ron Sparks: Dagnabbit! Tho me a nanner, Petey!
Dale Peterson: (Stuffs banana into gun barrel, fires the gun, bits of fruit go everywhere)
Ron Sparks: HOO-WEE!
Bob Riley: (Descending down staircase in red felt bathrobe, pipe in hand) Good morning, boys. Bob Riley is awake now.
Artur Davis: (Smiles, waves) Uhh...I'm happy...it's...(voice trails off)
Dale Peterson: What we gonna do today, Bobby?
Bob Riley: (Twirls belt of bath robe, looks annoyed) What a question. Bob Riley does what Bob Riley does.
Dale Peterson: I tell ya what I'm gonna do today--I'm gonna find out who stole the Wheaters!
Artur Davis: (Whispering) Wheaties.
Dale Peterson: (Loading rifle) An after that, I'm gonna head down Mobile way and see if I can't fix that dang oil spill!
Ron Sparks: (Licking banana pulp off the counter) Huh?
Artur Davis: (Cowering) Actually...um....guys...they fixed it...
Dale Peterson: I'M A MARINE!
Ron Sparks: C'mawn Petey! We can tax them fire balls!
Artur Davis: (Crawling under table with coffee mug) Tar balls?
Bob Riley: (Walks into kitchen in panda slippers) Good luck, boys. Bob Riley tried dumping bingo machines into the leak, but to no avail...
Dale Peterson: (Takes off cowboy hat, wipes brow) Then we'll blast it.
Ron Sparks: HOO-WEE! An tax the bullets!
Bob Riley: (Spreads Nutella on piece of black toast) Bob Riley once tried to raise taxes. (Sighs) Alabama was not ready for Bob Riley.
Artur Davis: (Crawling out from under table) If I could make a suggestion...
Dale Peterson: (Fires rifle across kitchen, blows apart the piece of toast in Riley's hand)
Bob Riley: (Unmoved) Bob Riley was not hungry anyway.
Artur Davis: (Dives back under table)
Ron Sparks: Dagnabbit Petey! What got into you?
Dale Peterson: Sorry fellers. Thought I saw Timmy James.
Riley, Peterson, and Sparks look at one another and begin to laugh in unison. Artur Davis attempts to take a sip from his mug while lying under the table and spills coffee all over himself. END SCENE
That's the gospel. If you don't believe Davis, just ask Tim James who spent around $3 million and fell 267 votes short of Bentley after a recount. Or ask Bradley Byrne, widely thought to be the presumptive GOP nominee, who spent twice that much and came in 56,000 votes short in Tuesday's runoff. Robert Bentley will be hard to beat in November, in part because of the way he won his party's nomination, as Davis points out:
Davis said Bentley's win was impressive because he overcame opposition from his own party's leadership. Gov. Bob Riley and several members of Alabama's Republican congressional delegation bucked party tradition and openly endorsed Byrne.
In response, Davis said, Bentley went out and built strong support among independent voters. That should put him in a strong position as he heads into the general election, Davis said.
"November elections are decided by independent voters," Davis said. "Bentley had to reach out to independents because the establishment was supporting Bradley. It was a very effective strategy and he executed it well."
Bentley succeeded at what Davis tried to do. He ran against a big chunk of his party hierarchy and won. One key difference was that Bentley had AEA on his side in the Republican primary, whereas Davis sought to curb the influence of AEA and other special interests in the Democratic party and, as a result, they opposed him with a vengeance. Literally with a vengeance.
Another factor at work here is that independent and middle of the road voters in Alabama seem to identify more with Republicans than Democrats these days. Participation in the Democratic gubernatorial primary has declined over 50% since 1994 (2010 was the lowest yet) while participation on the Republican side has steadily increased. And we haven't done very well in general elections in that time period, either, electing only one Democratic governor since 1986. Why is it that our party is shrinking, and what can we do to stop it?
I think Artur Davis put his finger on one reason the Alabama Democratic party has declined, which is why I felt strongly that he would be our best nominee this year:
"The party is losing its way. We are losing ground in Alabama and we are losing it unnecessarily," he said. "We want to hide behind the excuse that the national party is unpopular right now but that's not what's causing it. The fact is we're seeing the complete domination of the party by a narrow group of insiders who are completely out of step with average Alabamians."
Now, it may be that the powerful insiders will transfer their interest over to the other party for awhile. That will create financial hardship for Democrats, but it will also open up some moral and ethical space and create an incentive for us to get back in touch with average Alabamians, particularly the voters who famously "vote for the man, not the party." All politics really is local and we have a chance with those folks if we honestly address their concerns and convince them to look past their perception of the party and see the good, honest people inside it.
This article mentions one more thing I want to touch on: Davis says he's hearing from some of his supporters who may vote for Bentley in the fall. I have corresponded with many former Davis supporters and an alarmingly high proportion are not in the Sparks column for November. Some have lined up behind the nominee because it's the thing to do, but a great many are openly talking about undervoting the governor's race or even voting for Bentley -- although I think Byrne would have been a much easier-to-stomach-Republican than Bentley is for most Davis supporters. I particularly want to make the point that although Ron Sparks won the nomination in June, he has some work to do to bring his base together and shouldn't take it for granted that all Democrats will automatically line up behind him in November. Sparks could have used the six weeks since he won the primary to publicly reach out to Davis Democrats and try to bring them into his fold, but I haven't heard he's done that. Time is passing and once those folks put a Bentley bumper sticker on their vehicle it will be hard to get it back off.
Robert Bentley is a scary right-winger, he will be tough to beat, and Ron Sparks shouldn't leave any Democrats on the table in November.
Some people say that God invented football, but those people are gall darn liars. God invented Bear Bryant, and Bear invented football.
A long time ago, before there was money, people in this country used cotton. This worked out well for people down South, because cotton was everywhere in Dixie. Up North, however, cotton was scarce. Northern people finally got discouraged with trying to grow the stuff and they built gun factories instead. This came in handy during the Civil War, which the South lost after we finally realized that we couldn’t shoot cotton.
After the Civil War the South was desperate for a way to regain its pride. One day a man named Bear Bryant was attacked by an actual bear, who I guess was blitzing. Bryant knocked the animal down and figured that that would make a good game—knocking people down. Bear Bryant hated Yankees more than anything else, so he gathered up a bunch of Alabama boys and went around knocking Yankees down. It was the first football season.
So far, I hear no more than tepid support for Sparks from the Davis supporters I've spoken with. They may vote for Sparks, but don't plan to do anything in the way of working for him.
Speaking for myself, the issues I cared about two weeks ago are the issues I still care about today and I'm sure they will influence my vote in November as well. Real ethics reform, to include campaign finance reform, should be a high priority. Ditto letting the people vote not just on bingo, but on a constitutional convention. Those are my top priorities. Unfortunately, I honestly don't expect to see Ron Sparks make any attempt to woo folks like me on that ground. He might possibly make an attempt in the area of fair pay where he could adopt Davis' pledge to make gender equality one of the evaluation criteria for state contracts, something that could be done by the governor via executive order.
What else? This is for the Davis voters among us: How can Ron Sparks best woo you?
Davis Accepts Responsibility for Loss, Will Not Run Again
The day after his 62-38 loss to Ron Sparks, Rep. Artur Davis granted us one final interview to discuss the failure of his bid to become Alabama's next governor. Unlike those who blame their staff and fire underlings, Davis accepted full responsibility for the loss, saying, "I did not do a good enough job as a candidate" and made it quite clear that he does not plan a future in politics. "I never intended to be a career politician."
Davis' 62-38 loss, and particularly the magnitude of that loss, surprised political observers and apparently even the campaign itself. As late as 7:30 pm Tuesday campaign insiders still believed they had a shot at winning a squeaker and staffers who were upbeat Tuesday afternoon and early evening looked positively stunned by 8:30. Davis said none of their polls predicted the magnitude of voters' sharp turn toward Sparks.
"Obviously, there was a dramatic movement in the last two weeks away from this candidacy. Every poll missed it. ... There certainly was a tightening race and a race that turned into a dead heat but ... no polling organization captured the dramatic movement that resulted in a 24 point win. ... There was some set of dynamics at work in the electorate in the last two weeks that was different from what existed before that."
Davis says it's inevitable that people will speculate that his vote against health care reform is responsible for the loss, but that isn't born out by the polling.
"That's not what the trend line of the race really indicated The race tightened substantially after the health care vote, then it opened back up again. Our polling showed that the race had opened up to a double digit lead ... then, frankly, we showed the race collapsing again. And we still don't have a good handle on why the race collapsed after that. Obviously we were not subjected to a negative television attack, we were not subjected to any adverse free media."
That certainly agrees with the publicly available polling we've seen -- throughout this campaign polls showed Davis leading by a large margin. After the health care vote in late March, a PPP poll showed the race had tightened, but another independent poll (R2K) showed Davis again had a comfortable lead about 2 weeks ago, though he was still under the 50% mark. So what happened?
"It just seemed that there was ... an accumulation of doubt that built up around the state. We had a substantial drop off in both black and white support in the final two weeks and I take the blame for that as a candidate. When you lose 62 counties there's not room for a lot of microanalysis of the campaign."
"The voters rejected me as a candidate. And I won't say that they rejected the message, I'm not sure that's fair to say. But we did not do a good enough job as a campaign making our message relevant and resonant with the Democratic core voters."
It would be easy to look at yesterday's defeat for Artur Davis as simply a case of Joe Reed's ADC (Alabama Democratic Conference) having its way, but it would be as wrong to assume that, as it was to assume that black voters would automatically vote FOR Davis because he is black.
The fact is, that after punching the ADC in the mouth, which I'm glad he did, Davis didn't seem to have a real plan for connecting with black voters, which was still possible, despite the rift with the ADC. Believe it or not, there's no overwhelming love for Mr. Reed or the ADC in the black community, of which I'm aware.
The fact is, Davis never really did connect with many voters, black or white, on an emotional level, something Emory professor Drew Westen implores Democrats to emphasize as much as their intellectual firepower or logical "ten-point plans".
Just last week, a family member saw Davis speak at the Jeff Davis High School graduation and she told me that he just never reached the predominantly black audience at the ceremony. He only spoke about ten minutes, but she told me the audience was more captivated by one of the student speakers. Even though he actually went to the high school he was speaking at, the crowd, she said, never seemed to feel like he was one of them.
Whether it's true or not, I always had a gut feeling that there was a sense on the part of the Davis camp that he would get the black vote automatically. I'm also glad that mythology was put to rest yesterday, though I'm not celebrating in any way Davis' loss.
In fact, despite my own serious issues with Davis' votes on the "bankruptcy bill", net neutrality and the healthcare bill, I voted for him, not because of his race, but simply because I thought he had the better of two less-than-stimulating Democratic campaigns.
Yeah, the ADC snub didn't help, but in my opinion it wasn't a fatal blow that a candidate with more personal appeal could not have overcome. Perhaps, one day, a different candidate will kick open the door that Davis knocked on with his candidacy.
Over a year ago, I wrote this diary debunking an ugly Artur Davis email smear piece that accused him, among other things, of being gay (like that's a problem? even if it's not true.... "craving" authority, and being "jealous" of Obama.
We smacked that down a year and a half ago, but the rumors have continued underground through whisper campaigns, emails, blogs, etc. Alabama Senator Hank Sanders though, burst out of the underworld this week with a stunning anti-Davis piece that was - amazingly enough (or not amazing when you consider these previous campaign email here and here) - distributed to Ron Sparks' campaign supporters list.
According to Senator Sanders, Davis - who previously wan't black enough - is now trying to masquerade as black or pretend to be black or trade on his blackness or.... well, you be the judge.
That's a hanging offense apparently - at least, if you read Senator Sanders' article. On the flip is the original text that arrived in my email from the Sparks campaign. In italics is what I imagine was edited from the original version.
Ron Sparks and Artur Davis spoke at the More Than Conquerers Faith Church yesterday. Sparks was introduced by former governor Don Siegelman, who was himself introduced by Rev. Gregory Clarke, previously convicted of tax fraud. It sounds a little bizarre:
The battle for the Democratic Party nomination for governor was waged Sunday in black churches in Birmingham, where the two candidates looked for votes and one of them campaigned with two felons still popular among some of the churchgoers.
...
Clarke introduced Siegelman, calling him his friend and one of the "great governors in Alabama history." Siegelman, in turn, praised Clarke, who initially he kept calling pastor Green until the crowd corrected him. Siegelman, who enjoyed strong support among black voters for years, said the only reason Clarke was prosecuted was "because he was a friend of mine."
Ron Sparks repeated his standard empty promise that "Every child who walks across that graduating stage should receive a diploma in one hand and a scholarship in the other hand." How about a chicken in every pot and a car in every driveway, too? I'm glad to see that Davis has finally begun calling him out on that meaningless promise:
Going after Sparks, Davis told the church that he sees more for Alabama's children "than casinos in every black neighborhood. ... I don't just see somebody handing somebody a $200 check at graduation, I see somebody saying you have a future, a new Alabama, a new pathway where you can work in chemical engineering, in biomedicine, in alternative energy. Instead of a check for $200, we're going to give you a future, not just chump change."
Alabama needs a governor with a real plan for the future, not bait and switch promises based on a plan that might have worked 15 years ago. We need an economic plan for 2010 that will lift people out of poverty and make this a more prosperous and productive state.
Artur Davis will deliver brief remarks at the Talladega Memorial Day Celebration. Ron Sparks' schedule is not listed.
I spent my Memorial Day weekend in Baldwin County. My intention was to have a leisurely trip to visit some old friends, but from almost the instant I got onto AL-59, a new topic reared its ugly head. I did have time to relax, but I ended up working for most of the weekend.
Almost immediately, I noticed that there are no signs anywhere for Democratic candidates in statewide or local races. I wasn’t sure what to think of it-- possibly some irreverent Republican canvassed the county, pulling them up and replacing them with signs from their own party.
Yesterday when I read this in an email from Ron Sparks I just about choked:
A Vote for Sparks is a Vote for Change ... Your one vote could make the difference in a close election, the difference between Alabama realizing its great potential or more of the same control by the special interests.
What unbridled BS! It couldn't be clearer that a vote for Ron Sparks is a vote for business as usual in Montgomery.
That little bit of SparksSpeak inspired me to finally finish this chart illustrating who, exactly, is taking the big bucks from Political Action Committees (PACs) in the governor's race: Ron Sparks! No surprise if you've been paying attention the last few months.
Ron Sparks is leading the PACk in special interest money. His campaign would have been dead in the water last January had he not been bailed out by PAC money, and they've been fueling his operation ever since. Over 60% of Sparks money comes through PACs and 70% of the money in his most recent report is PAC money, not contributions from individuals or businesses. A great deal of that money comes from the sort of PACs that exist to launder contributions by disguising the identity of the money source.
It's a system that facilitates influence peddling in Alabama government and Ron Sparks is clearly the biggest beneficiary of it this year -- maybe ever. Do you think Sparks will reform the PAC to PAC transfer rules if elected? Not on your life! Mouthing "change" in an email to supporters is just a cheap attempt to rebrand his status quo campaign -- all eyewash, no substance.
Republican Bradley Byrne is also taking a disturbing amount from PACs with special interest money totalling almost 40% of his haul so far this cycle. Byrne actually leads in absolute PAC dollars with $1,918,959 from PACs in the $4.8 million he's raked in thus far in the 2010 election cycle.
Tim James showed little interest in PAC contributions early in the race -- perhaps figuring he could rely on his three good friends and his personal wealth -- but he's hitting the PACs almost as hard as Byrne in the latest report. James is also the beneficiary of "independent" spending by the True Republican PAC -- that's money that doesn't show up on his books but has been funding a scorched earth ad campaign against fellow Republican Bradley Byrne. No evidence that James is coordinating with TR PAC, but it's a further illustration of just exactly how whacked our campaign finance laws are in Alabama.
The one candidate who is serious about reforming campaign financing rules and eliminating the PAC to PAC money laundering is Artur Davis. You don't even have to read his ethics reform proposal to know that; just look at who the PAC purveyors are shunning. Only 12% of Davis' money comes from PACs.
The business as usual interests in Montgomery understand quite well that Davis would clip their wings right up to their backbones -- which is exactly why they're dumping huge amounts into Ron Sparks' campaign coffer. Davis would limit their contributions and make sure the public can see where the money is coming from, not just the power brokers. In a state where individuals can make unlimited campaign contributions, Davis' individual contributions average less than $1000 -- sounds like a lot, but in Alabama, that's a people powered campaign, especially since folks who contribute less than $100 aren't itemized at all.
Look at the numbers. If you want a governor who will break the special interest stranglehold in Montgomery and truly change Alabama for good, vote for Artur Davis on Tuesday. If you like the idea that special interests can give millions to candidates while hiding behind a series of PACs, then vote for one of the other guys. Doesn't matter which one, they're all business as usual insiders.
I have to say, I’ve always enjoyed primary elections more than the general.
Of course, there’s more bearing to voting in the general election, but to me, the primaries are much more fun. You get to vote for who you want to. There’s a lot to be excited about.
The last thing you’d expect to hear about a Democratic candidate for Governor is that his own employees had to take him to court for race discrimination.
That candidate is Ron Sparks. Sparks’ Agriculture Department has been sued three times for race discrimination by his own employees. They said Sparks created a hostile workplace for blacks.
And what did Ron Sparks do about it? He took over two years to respond to an administrative judge’s finding that a black female’s rights were violated, a delay the federal court called “unjustifiable.”
Sparks even had to use our tax dollars to cover up his department’s mess with a secret settlement.
The very people who trusted Ron Sparks to give them the right leadership. Three of them had to take him to court?
Claims of race discrimination. A rebuke from a federal judge.
That’s who Ron Sparks really is. And Alabama would be much better off without him.
I would add "as governor" to that last line. Ron Sparks frequently mentions the number of women and minority personnel he has appointed during his tenure as Ag. Commissioner. These complaints are fairly recent (2007) when Sparks had been in charge of the Department of Agriculture and Industries for over 4 years.
In 2007, three employees of the Alabama Department of Agriculture and Industries filed federal race discrimination lawsuits. [Shannon Burton v. Alabama Department of Agriculture & Industries. Case #: 2:07-cv-00548. Complaint filed 6/20/2007.
Wilma I. Fitzpatrick v. Alabama Department of Agriculture and Industries. Case #: 2:07-cv-00519. Complaint filed 6/12/2007.
John L. Crayton v. Alabama Department of Agriculture & Industries. Case #: 2:07-cv-00626. Complaint filed 7/9/2007.]
And ...
On 12/2/2008, Federal Judge Myron H. Thompson entered a final judgment in Burton’s case with the Court having been informed that the case had been settled. Alabama’s electronic checkbook records a payment of $15,000 from the Department of Agriculture and Industries dated 12/18/2008 to Burton’s attorney, Juraldine Battle-Hodge, for plaintiff’s attorney fees.
This information is in the public record. It's a little surprising no one has mentioned it before now -- it has to be known to people within the Ag. Department -- but definitely better to have it in the open before the primary than have the Republicans making hay with it in October. Discrimination on the basis of race or gender is wrong and indefensible. No statement so far from Ron Sparks.
Alabama author Jane DeNeefe shares her concerns about the outdated Alabama Constitution and endorses Artur Davis for Governor in this video recorded on her webcam and compiled by LIA into a YouTube video.
Speaking as the "ghost of Boo Radley" from "To Kill A Mockingbird," DeNeefe explains how our state Constitution "turned Alabama grassroots activists into a bunch of Boo Radleys" because it makes citizen involvement in government so difficult. With all power centralized in Montgomery, local governments have very little authority over their own cities and counties.
"Sometimes ordinary citizens feel powerless to confront a political situation that is out of control. Overwhelmed like Boo Radley, we retreat into our private worlds. Luckily, when Scout and Jem really need him, Boo Radley comes out and participates.
The grassroots people of Alabama are the Boo Radleys of our state's political process. The Constitution of 1901 may keep us at a distance, but we are the people who can show up to save the day. We can emerge from the shadows.
Come out, Boo Radley! Alabama's children need your help again!"
DeNeefe calls us all out - all the progressive Boo Radleys who have retired from the fight for progress in Alabama - to do battle at least one last time and help elect the only candidate for governor who has made Constitution reform a major campaign issue.
Politicians and Montgomery lobbyists under investigation again.
And what about Ron Sparks? This year Sparks got a $500,000 bank loan on a state government salary with no assets; from a bank with ties to the same gambling interests who may have been trying to bribe politicians.
Alabama newspapers say Sparks’ loan raises questions about his integrity and credibility. Banking experts say they’ve never heard of such a sweetheart deal. Politicians and tainted money, that’s Ron Sparks. And it’s everything that’s wrong with Alabama politics.
2010 is shaping up as a good year to run against corruption -- one of those rare seasons when politically smart lines up with the right thing to do. Ron Sparks was quick to react to this ad which the Davis campaign says is airing statewide:
“Not only does it prove he is losing,” Sparks said. “It proves he will say anything to be elected governor, even if it means having to buy airtime to spread his lies. This ad is not only completely false, but it's defamatory and I'm calling for Artur Davis to take down these despicable ads.
Sparks did not explain what part of the ad he believes is false or defamatory. Here is the fact check document from the Davis campaign.
The Research 2000/Daily Kos (R2K) poll of the Alabama governor's race released this morning already had good news for Democratic candidate Artur Davis. In a poll of 400 likely Democratic primary voters they found Davis leading Ron Sparks 41 to 33 with a +/- 5% margin of error. Any candidate likes to see an 8 point lead one week before the election, but if you look at the crosstabs on this poll, it's obvious R2K underestimates Davis' lead by grossly undersampling African-American Democratic voters -- only 25% of the total -- in the primary. If we adjust the demographics to reflect a reasonable (45% AA) racial makeup of likely Democratic primary voters, Davis leads Sparks 44% to 30%.
Thank you Research 2000/Daily Kos. This is why we all love crosstabs.
Daily Kos just released results of an R2K survey of the Alabama Governor's race. The poll of 600 likely voters (live telephone interview) was in the field May 17-19 and has a +/- 4% margin of error. Toplines are below. Detailed crosstabs here -- a wealth of information for those of us who enjoy this sort of thing.
Democratic Primary:
Davis 41, Sparks 33
Republican Primary:
Byrne 29, Moore, 23, James 17, Bentley 9, Johnson 3
The last independent poll of general election matchups that I remember was the PPP poll in March. Except for reiterating that any Democrat has an uphill road in November (Duh!) I don't see much in the way of similarities -- and the PPP poll definitely had some shortcomings. R2K is a reputable polling firm, but I've wondered if their voter model might lean a tiny bit far right in the South -- based on all the birthers and such-like they find. Or maybe my neighbors really do believe all that stuff.
They also polled the Alabama Senate race -- not much to report there -- and asked a bonus health care question:
QUESTION: Would you be more likely to vote for a candidate who supports and will work to improve the new health care reform law, or a candidate who will work to repeal it completely?
SUPPORTS
REPEAL
NOT SURE
ALL
31
66
3
MEN
28
69
3
WOMEN
34
63
3
DEMOCRATS
64
33
3
REPUBLICANS
4
93
3
INDEPENDENTS
26
70
4
These health care numbers are scary-bad. 2 out of 3 Alabamians would support a candidate who favors repealing the law, including 1 out of 3 Democrats and nearly 3 out of 4 Independents. The propaganda has been amazingly successful here.
On taxes, Sparks said, "I will never support raising taxes on working families and small businesses."
Davis has taken the same position, but says he would raise taxes on out-of-state companies that own large tracts of timber in Alabama but pay little taxes.
Sparks says Davis can't do that legally without raising taxes on Alabama timber owners, but then Sparks says, "I want to tax out-of-state companies that do not pay their fair share in taxes."
Say what?
That last sentence (bold mine) is a perfect illustration of another key difference between these two men: Artur Davis makes an argument that is consistent from one end of his platform to the other. He never gets distracted and starts arguing with himself the way Ron Sparks does.
T.H.E. Social Work Agency Adoption home studies & care management services in the North Alabama area.
Licensed, certified, caring social workers. blog advertising is good for you
The Alabama State Democratic Executive Committee met yesterday in Montgomery in a meeting room with no air conditioning, no wifi and precious little cell phone signal. Uncomfortable and isolated -- it may be an appropriate metaphor for the party this year. 
Ron Sparks is leading the PACk in 
Speaking as the "ghost of Boo Radley" from "To Kill A Mockingbird," DeNeefe explains how our state Constitution "turned Alabama grassroots activists into a bunch of Boo Radleys" because it makes citizen involvement in government so difficult. With all power centralized in Montgomery, local governments have very little authority over their own cities and counties.
