Some of you may have seen the video of the Ron Sparks vs. Robert Bentley forum held in Arab last week, but it's quite long and many of us haven't had a chance to watch the entire show. The Arab Tribune has very helpfully published a transcript of the two candidates' opening statements. There is nothing too surprising in the openers -- the more controversial education remarks were made during the Q&A period -- but a couple of remarks illustrate that it's hard to put either of these guys into a neatly labeled box. Both men are working to reach outside their base a bit, I think.
Bentley:
We need transparency in Montgomery. We have been trying for years. (Rep.) Jeff McLaughlin has been sponsoring for years a law to ban PAC-to-PAC transfers. It always passes the house. I've been in the house for eight years, and I have voted for it every time.
Not rhetoric you hear from all Republicans, by any means. Similarly, Sparks is talking about the need for bipartisanship:
I'm going to reach across party lines. The Democratic party doesn't have all the answers for problems in Montgomery. We've got to have Democrats, Republicans and Independents working together.
"Since when did it become the job of the government to provide a college education to every child?" Bentley responded, looking toward Sparks.
"That's not the government's job. That's your job," Bentley said, pointing to the crowd of about 140. "Not every child can go to college, or should they."
This "not the government's job to educate your children" kind of statement actually works well for both men.
It's a standard, less government, self-determination frame that wins Bentley points with conservatives -- and he may need those points because he wasn't the chosen GOPer of the far right.
But that statement brings to mind an entirely different frame for the Democratic base, especially African-Americans, who remember that segregationist Alabamians resisted any implication that children had a right to a public education. Why, if education was a right, they might have to let poor black and brown kids into schools.
Sparks is right to publicize Bentley's statement. I think he likely gets more traction out of it than Bentley does. After all, there are only a limited number of families who can afford college with no help these days and Bentley already had their votes. Sparks, on the other hand, needed something to get his voters riled up against Bentley. This is a good start.
Sorry, but arrogance won’t endear you to Alabama voters, Dr. Bentley….
As the campaigning days roll by, ticking down to Game Day in November, we’re increasingly seeing Robert Bentley - the GOP’s nominee for governor - for who he truly is.
At a candidate forum in Arab, Alabama, the popular subject of an education lottery slipped into the dialogue. When questioned about opponent Ron Sparks’ proposal, Bentley dismissively swiped it down and offered no solution of his own, no alternative. But he didn’t stop there… Like a scolding schoolmarm, Bentley pointed at the audience of voters and lectured them, arguing that it’s their responsibility to provide for their children’s post-secondary education. Never mind that voters aren’t in the mood to be harangued, especially by a wealthy doctor who appears to be immune to current economic conditions. Never mind that the state is plagued by gruesome unemployment. Never mind that a college education’s cost continues to climb through the roof, increasingly out of reach for working Alabama families, and the Prepaid Affordable College Tuition program is in its waning days.
In fact Bentley’s words prompted a visual of him astride a majestic horse like a king, aloof and disconnected, smirking and chuckling as he threw pennies into the mud for us lowly peasants to wrestle over.
The basic conservative philosophy has some merit - that government should stay out of our lives…. Only how many among us - Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, independent - would like to do without labor and food safety laws, statutes that prevent discrimination, and everyday necessities like the American interstate system? Or what about Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare and Veterans Administration care? The philosophy itself has its charms… but in such a time of turmoil when most Alabama taxpayers are struggling to feed their families, stay one step ahead of a home foreclosure and in many cases simply trying to keep the electricity on, how kindly will we take to a wealthy specialty doctor wagging his finger arrogantly at us, scolding us to somehow make money fall out of the sky to educate our children?
Alabama voters to this point may have found Bentley’s folksy charm and grandfatherly demeanor to be cute… but as we see more of his layers pulled back and his true self exposed, we should be far more concerned that he appears to be out of tune, out of touch and rapidly running out of campaign gimmicks.
About the author: Joseph O. Patton is the editor-in-chief and founder of the Capital City Free Press. He is a former news editor for the Coosa County News, lead reporter for the Montgomery Independent and editor-in-chief of the AUMnibus, the student newspaper of Auburn-Montgomery. Patton is also the creator of and writer for the satirical news radio segment "Goat Hill Gossip," which previously aired on WAUD in Auburn, Alabama and appears on several Central Alabama radio programs as a political analyst.
... 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.
Democrat Ron Sparks and Republican Robert Bentley, will be at Samford University Thursday morning speaking to the Auntie Litter's Take Pride statewide conference.
The event, which is open to the public, will be at 8 a.m. in the Wright Center.
I hope someone asks them about earmarking of all gasoline tax revenue exclusively to roads and bridges, effectively prohibiting the state from investing in any mass transit, light rail, etc. What would you like to hear?
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.
(Thanks for adding context to the statement of these candidates. - promoted by mooncat)
Last week, gubernatorial candidates Ron Sparks and Dr. Robert Bentley appeared on WSFA 12 news in Montgomery to discuss the gambling issue. Listen below.
Danny at the Political Parlor is reporting that Joe Reed is behind a move to pick the next Democratic Party Chair at tomorrow's meeting of the State Democratic Executive Committee (SDEC) instead of in January as would be typical. Obviously, that puts the kibosh on any deal that would put Ron Sparks in the chairmanship (should he lose in November) or allow Sparks to essentially pick the next party chair (which would be customary should he win in November.)
Danny's sources also indicate that Reed will be backing a move to change the way SDEC minority membership is calculated.
Minority membership is currently represented on the SDEC in proportion to their presence in the Democratic Electorate of Alabama as determined by those who voted for the the Democratic nominee for governor in the last general election. (See Article III, Section I here in a .pdf file.) Reed’s proposal is to instead use the last Presidential election to determine the proportion of minority members who make up the Democratic Electorate.
Essentially, the motion described would exchange one mathematically impossible system for rigging the SDEC membership to another mathematically impossible system which gives the Vice-Chairman for Minority Affairs (Joe Reed) even more power than he currently has to select SDEC members.
The relevant paragraph in the current bylaws (from Article II, Section 1) is below the fold.
Rasmussen historically leans right by a few points, but their finding of Bentley at 55% is still a worrisome result for Ron Sparks, who garnered support from 35% of the 500 likely voters surveyed. 7% were undecided and 3% wanted a different candidate. Other findings:
Voters in Alabama not affiliated with either major political party favor Bentley over Sparks by a nearly three-to-one margin.
Only nine percent (9%) in Alabama rate the U.S. economy as good or excellent, but 51% rate it as poor. While 27% say economic conditions are getting better, 51% say they are getting worse.
Sixty percent (60%) of those who believe the economy is improving back the Democrat, while 73% of those who it's worsening support Bentley.
...
Bentley is viewed Very Favorably by 32% of voters and Very Unfavorably by just seven percent (7%).
Sparks is viewed Very Favorably by 19% and Very Unfavorably by 21%.
Rasmussen also asked about the stimulus and found that 41% of Alabamians believe it has hurt the economy, far more than the 26% who believe it has helped. There is a lot of misinformation to overcome out there -- we can't just say 41% of people are wrong or stupid, we have to develop effective talking points to convince them. It's a long term project in this conservative leaning state. The only consolation is that the facts are on our side -- not just on the stimulus but on health care, immigration, regulatory reform and a host of other issues. The trick now is to figure out how to use themeffectively to convince our neighbors.
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
There are over 100 comments on a recent thread asking "Why on Earth should I vote for Ron Sparks?" As of this writing, not a one seriously attempts to persuade the author as to the superiority of the Democratic nominee. Does no one understand that elections are won by votes and votes are won by persuading voters, not bludgeoning them? Laying into an undecided voter who asks a perfect set-up question is counterproductive beyond belief ... and don't just make this about Almoderate herself; hundreds or thousands of people will read that thread between now and Nov. 2, looking for the reason to vote for Sparks. Unfortunately, they won't find it.
Let's look at how to effectively persuade someone to your point of view. Pretend there is a customer and a car salesman -- we'll say he's selling Fords. The customer looks at a lot of different cars, including Fords, and eventually buys a Honda Accord. It is well made, nicely appointed and is just really everything she needs and wants in a car. She loves her Honda Accord.
Then the unthinkable happens. The beloved Honda is destroyed. Completely totaled. A smoking hulk of mangled metal. Right in front of the Ford dealership.
So, the devastated Honda owner ends up sitting in the Ford showroom, obviously in the market for another car. How does the Ford salesman persuade her to buy his car?
Scenario 1: "Wow, you are so much better off without that Honda. How could you have been so foolish as to pay 50% too much for that hunk of imported junk? You should have bought my nice, sensible Ford all along. Good thing your Accord got flattened right out front so it's nice and convenient for you to come in here and buy a Ford like you should have done all along. I hope you've learned your lesson now."
Scenario 2: "Wow, what a lucky thing you weren't killed or maimed in that accident. It's a real shame about your Honda, I know how people get attached to their cars. I still remember my first car even though I had to sell it 20 years ago -- needed the money to get married, you know? Listen, while you're here, how about I show you this new Ford? It has some great new safety features to protect the occupants in case, Heaven forbid, there should be an accident. And we've increased the fuel efficiency, too, so driving it leaves a smaller carbon footprint. I know this is kind of soon, but your Honda was always about taking good care of you and it wouldn't want you to be taking the bus for weeks while you wait on a new car. Look, I've got one here that's almost the same color as your Honda ... "
How does this story turn out?
In scenario 1 the customer will leave sans Ford even if she has to crawl. If the Honda dealership is 300 miles away she'll take the bus and will never, never, ever again darken the door of any Ford dealership. That salesman is destined for a short, hungry career in sales.
In scenario 2 the salesman (who may very well hate Hondas passionately) acknowledges the customer's loss and attempts to understand what drew her to buy a Honda in the first place. He makes a personal connection. He does not denigrate the customer's initial choice, to which she has a strong emotional attachment. And he points out the merits of his own product. He has a pretty fair chance of making the sale and of making a living persuading people to buy his products.
What does this tale of car sales have to do with candidates?
Robert Bentley received roughly 260,000 votes to win the Republican nomination.
Bradley Byrne received about 204,000 votes as he lost the Republican nomination.
Ron Sparks received 198,000 votes in winning the Democratic nomination.
Artur Davis received 119,000 votes as he lost the Democratic nomination.
Those people who voted in the primary and the runoff are people who vote every time the polls open. The Davis and Byrne voters did not prevail, but they will be back in the voting booth on Nov. 2 -- the big question is who will they vote for?
As a Democrat, I wish the supporters of Ron Sparks would make an honest attempt to persuade at least the Artur Davis supporters to move to the Sparks camp. And success will not come by copying the tactics of the salesman in scenario 1. The primary is over; Davis did not win and further Davis bashing will not endear you or your guy to any of his supporters. Look to the salesman in scenario 2 for a role model as you attempt to persuade, not bludgeon, people into shifting their allegiance to your candidate. Try to knock the wedge out, don't drive it deeper.
Last, but not least, for those who need help figuring out How to Win Friends and Influence People, a few tips from Dale Carnegie are included below the fold.
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.
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?
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.
Three of Ron Sparks' employees in the Agriculture Department filed EEOC discrimination complaints in 2007 alleging Sparks failed to remedy "systemic employment discrimination" on the basis of race and retaliation in the Alabama Department of Agriculture and Industries. Sparks says that isn't a bad record, considering that he has over 400 employees.
“you are going to have a few who think they were treated unfairly, but I think only three EEOC complaints in seven years is actually a good record.”
82,792/137,000,000 = 0.000604 charges per employee, average
362/137,000,000 = 0.00000264 suits per employee, average
3/400 = 0.0075 complaints per employee for Ron Sparks
Now, I'm not a lawyer and it isn't clear to me if the "complaints" filed against Sparks' Agriculture Department are classified as EEOC "charges" or "suits." I'm guessing they're "charges." Even so, the rate of discrimination charges for Ron Sparks' department is 12 times higher than the national average. Far from "actually a good record" as Ron Sparks maintains.
It's a crappy record and there's no way to put lipstick on this pig.
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.
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. 
Danny at the Political Parlor is 
Then the unthinkable happens. The beloved Honda is destroyed. Completely totaled. A smoking hulk of mangled metal. Right in front of the Ford dealership.
Ron Sparks is leading the PACk in 
