Birmingham Blues

UPDATE:  Let the state Democratic Party know what you think.  Email Joe Turnham, party chair, or call party headquarters (334) 262-2221. 

The contest hearing for District 54 has been rescheduled for Thursday at 2:00 pm.  Despite the fact that all the citizens affected live in Birmingham, the hearing will be in Montgomery (same place as before).  I’m wondering if the later time means the party is hoping for lower turnout — or maybe that’s just too cynical.  I’m also wondering how many committee members are beholden to Joe Reed.

The Birmingham News endorsed Gaynell Hendricks in the District 54 race, but it seems at least one editorial writer there is fed up with the sore loser attitude and power games of Hendricks and her backers.  Tom Scarritt compares this contest to the debacle in the 1986 Democratic primary for governor, when Charlie Graddick received more votes, but party leaders found a loophole to hand the nomination to Bill Baxley.  Then we ended up with Guy Hunt for governor; this time we could end up with severe rifts in a diverse district that needs to pull together.

Patricia Todd defeated Gaynell Hendricks in the July 18 primary runoff election by 59 votes. The people have spoken. There is no reason to believe the outcome is anything but an honest expression of the preference of voters who went to the polls. It is time to move on.

However, Hendricks and her supporters are contesting the election, trying to find some technical loophole that might allow them to win before a party committee the victory they were unable to win in the field.

Hendricks says she is paying for the contest. However, Reed did deliver a check to the Democratic Party to pay for the contest if Hendricks’ check did not arrive on time, Jerome Gray, field director for the ADC, told a News reporter. The hearing on Hendricks’ challenge was delayed when members of the panel failed to show up.

Close elections court contests. Candidates who believe that elections were not carried out according to the rules have a right to have the vote reviewed. The intervention of a party heavyweight, though, appears once again to pit the party hierarchy against the voters….

…Reed’s position, he wrote, “involves the art of politics and, foremost, our group interests. We should always determine that - and not let others highjack or undermine our agenda.”

This newspaper endorsed Hendricks because of her record of civic involvement and her position on such issues as transit and access to health care. The voters chose Todd, a white candidate who also is well-qualified. The party should not highjack or undermine that choice.

It’s a bit hard to tell from this article.

Alabama Democratic officials today said they expected Gaynell Hendricks’ challenge to the House District 54 election result eventually to be brought before the party’s executive committee.

A hearing to decide the contested election between Hendricks and her opponent, Patricia Todd, was postponed Tuesday after members of the presiding committee decided not to attend. The party is hoping to hold a new hearing Thursday.

There’s no mention of Patricia’s call to dismiss the contest. There’s also no mention of a time or location for the hearing. I’m told that Jefferson County party leaders are pushing to hold it in Birmingham, which makes a lot more sense than having everyone involved drive to Montgomery again.

Whatever the committee’s decision, the result probably will be appealed to the executive committee during its Aug. 26 meeting, said Jim Spearman, the party’s executive director.

Is there any chance the party will get its act together and do the right thing?

Kyle Whitmire, whose “War On Dumb” column appears in every edition of the Birmingham Weekly, has been following the District 54 race and its aftermath. He has a new piece up today that details the racial politics and backroom shenanigans that continue to influence the disputed election.

His previous columns:
No More Gracious Losers (8/3/2006)
Turning Off Whitey (7/20/2006)

Patricia Todd held a press conference today at the base of the statue of Dr. King that stands in Kelly Ingram Park in downtown Birmingham. She’s kept quiet for several weeks now, waiting for the state Democratic Party to do the right thing, address the issues raised in the contest of her election as State Representative for District 54, and remove all doubt that she won fairly. That hasn’t happened.

Today she called on the Alabama Democratic Party to dismiss the election contest.

“I cannot stand by as one person – Dr. Joe Reed – attempts to hold the Alabama Democratic Party hostage just because he doesn’t like the outcome of the race in District 54. Dr. Reed has been closely involved in the racial slander that played such a role in my opponent’s campaign, trying to pit white voters against black. Despite his direct involvement in the Hendricks campaign, he demanded to be placed on the contest committee, and to appoint two other members of the five-person committee. Yesterday in Montgomery, when it became clear that he was not going to control the process, he made sure the hearing would not take place. This is not fair, and I will not stand by as Joe Reed attempts to steal this election from the voters of District 54.

Therefore, I am calling on the Alabama Democratic Party to dismiss the election contest. First of all, I have contended from day one that the contest is without merit, and I stand by that contention. With specific regard to Dr. Reed’s involvement, the media and the public should be aware that Alabama state law requires that the person contesting an election pay the contest fee – in this case, that would be Ms. Childress. But the fee was not paid by Ms. Childress; it was paid by Dr. Reed. This is a clear conflict of interest by a party official, and taints the entire process.”

Sources in the party have told Patricia that there were three checks involved in the attempt to pay the $3,000 contest filing fee. First, a check from Ms. Hendricks’ account bounced, then came a check from Alabama Democratic Conference (Dr. Reed’s organization), and finally the fee was paid with a cashier’s check drawn on RegionsBank.

Kelly Ingram Park is a lovely place, lush and green, with a direct line of sight to Sixteenth Street Baptist Church and the Civil Rights Institute. I thought it was particularly appropriate that Patricia spoke in the shadow of the man who dreamed of a day when we would no longer judge people by their skin color.

Okay, state party officials – it’s your move.

al.com coverage

UPDATE: Here’s the full text of Patricia’s statement:

(more…)

Fifty to sixty people gathered at the Alabama Center for Commerce this morning to witness the contest hearing for House District 54. There looked to be about an even split between supporters of Patricia Todd and supporters of Gaynell Hendricks. Sadly, the sides were racially split as well, with just a few conspicuous black faces among the Todd group, including Charlie Williams, who ran for the nomination initially but endorsed Patricia in the runoff. Patricia’s attorney was dressed in a Matlock suit, as were several of the other lawyers.

We sat waiting for the state Democratic Party subcommittee that would hear testimony and decide if Patricia would retain her nomination. News cameras at the ready, the buzz of conversation, and a bit of sweat as the room got warmer. Patricia was holding a particularly nasty flyer from the campaign, admonishing the reader to BEWARE the lesbian candidate. How does she laugh this off? I’d be devastated by the hatred.

Finally, about half an hour after the expected start time, Patricia, Ms. Hendricks, and their representatives stepped out into the hall. We joked that they were going to fight it out or maybe flip a coin.

Around forty-five minutes into the wait, we’re all getting restless. Finally, Amy Burks, the vice-chair of the Alabama Democratic Party, sits down at the microphone, and we all think this is it. Unfortunately, we’re all wrong. Ms. Burks tells us that there was a mixup about who was supposed to be on the subcommittee, so the hearing won’t be held today. Angry audience members try to ask questions – who is supposed to be on the subcommittee, why aren’t those people here? Ms. Burks says that she is the only statutory member of the committee and that she tries to get other members from areas of the state not affected by the election at issue. The candidates had agreed to waive the time requirements and reconvene at “a convenient time”, perhaps early next week.

Angry constituents gather in the hall outside the auditorium, hoping for an explanation from the party leadership, but Ms. Burks and Alabama party Executive Director Jim Spearman are out of there as fast as they can move their feet. A Hendricks supporter lambastes Charlie Williams, telling him he’s like “a man without a country” because he supported a white candidate.

I talk to a source who does not wish to be named who says that Joe Reed, head of the legislative black caucus, was initially appointed to serve on the subcommittee. That sounds questionable, given that he strongly supported Ms. Hendricks in the runoff. It becomes even more questionable when I hear that Ms. Hendricks’ check for the contest filing fee bounced, and Mr. Reed covered it. This presented a conflict of interest (no sh*t), so he couldn’t serve on the committee, and supposedly there wasn’t enough time to replace him.

Is this Democratic incompetence or backroom game-playing? I’m guessing a bit of both, and I hope to find out more later.

Patricia says, “I wish we could get this over with. I’m ready to work, but we’ll have to wait and see.” We will. Stay tuned.

UPDATE: AP coverage

ANOTHER UPDATE: I thought I got a pretty good head count today, but other sources are reporting anywhere from 100 to 150 people in attendance at the hearing. I wonder if they’ll all come back next week.

Nephew Zach and I are off to Montgomery to observe democracy at work — or at least politics. We’re going to the contest hearing for House District 54, and I’ll put up a post as soon as possible. We’ll try to get pictures, especially if fisticuffs are involved.

If you’re interested in the really down and dirty aspects of the political process, head to Montgomery on Tuesday (401 Adams Avenue, Room 770, 9:00 am) and see what happens when an election is contested.

Patricia Todd defeated Gaynell Hendricks by 59 votes in the Democratic runoff for State House District 54. Because there is no Republican candidate, Patricia is on her way to becoming the first openly gay legislator in Alabama. The close result, coupled with some voting machine problems and what appear to be healthy doses of racism and homophobia, led to a contest of the election filed by Ms. Hendricks’ mother-in-law, Mattie Childress. In a document filed on July 27, Ms. Childress accused Jefferson County election officials of “malconduct which occurred [that] was calculated to prevent a fair, free and full exercise of the elective franchise”. She claimed that Patricia received “illegal” votes and that vote totals were changed without notification to Ms. Hendricks. Kyle Whitmire of the Birmingham Weekly covered the runoff in depth:

Last Thursday, Gaynell Hendricks held a press conference in front of the Jefferson County Courthouse where her supporters in her plain sight accused white people of stealing the election for Todd.

I too was accused of fixing the election. This might stem from the fact that, in addition to being white, I, unlike nearly everyone on Hendricks’ campaign staff [emphasis added], showed up at the courthouse on election night to watch the returns being counted….(Click here to continue reading a detailed account of how the vote totals were first screwed up and then straightened out by election officials.)

Ms. Childress accused the Todd campaign of filing its most recent campaign disclosure forms late (that part’s true and not a big deal legally) to hide a contribution from the Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund. I hate to break it to Ms. Childress, but Patricia has been out for years, and the Victory Fund solicited and matched contributions from her supporters (including me). We knew exactly where that money was going.

Ms. Childress was also upset that the Todd campaign paid Kamau Afrika and Charlie Williams, Jr., both of whom initially ran for the nomination but endorsed Patricia in the runoff, for consulting and polling work. This is an extension of accusations before the primary that Patricia had somehow convinced additional candidates to enter the race in order to split the black vote. I doubt there’s anything officially wrong with paying former candidates to work on your runoff campaign, and it certainly seems smart to use their neighborhood knowledge and contacts if they’re willing to share. Anyway, if they earned some money with their expertise, it probably wasn’t worth this:

Charlie Williams and Kamau Afrika woke up Tuesday morning to Patricia Todd campaign signs in their yards. No big deal, since both men supported Todd during the District 54 campaign for the Alabama House. Only, these signs had been spray painted with the words “Uncle Tom” and images of an eight-ball. It was the latest ugly act in a campaign that’s still running two weeks after the Democratic primary.

Ms. Childress asserts that the Todd campaign falsely claimed the endorsement of the Jefferson County Citizens Coalition. Patricia did receive the Coalition’s endorsement for the runoff, although some members improperly tried to rescind it later. Her name was on the Coalition’s sample ballot, and the Birmingham News reported the endorsement as well.

Patricia has filed a response to the contest, and she’ll be at the hearing Tuesday prepared to defend her victory. There should be a ruling by the end of the day.

She says, “I’m ready to go to work.” It’s time to let her.

The hearing for the contest of runoff results in Alabama House District 54 will be held Tuesday, August 15th, at 9:00 am (in Montgomery, 401 Adams Avenue, 7th Floor, Room 770 — click here for map). It’s open to the public, so if you have a dog in the fight or just an interest in the process, come on down, or up, depending on where you live.

Full disclosure: I’m pulling for Patricia.

I posted on Friday that losing candidate Gaynell Hendricks’ mother-in-law has filed a challenge to the runoff results in Alabama House District 54. Today, there are more details available, and they constitute a nasty attack on Patricia Todd, who won the runoff by 59 votes.

In the election challenge, [Mattie] Childress claimed that the release of a campaign finance report by Todd was timed to prevent voters from knowing that Todd received a $25,000 contribution from the Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund. Voters also didn’t know that Todd made payments of $12,750 to two primary opponents who endorsed her, according to the challenge.

The contest claims Todd received illegal votes, and it challenged the way Jefferson County elections officials handled the returns.

“I want this controversy settled,” Childress told The Birmingham News. “This is happening like when Bush and Gore were running for president. I don’t like it.”

The article doesn’t define “illegal” votes. There was a problem on election night with a memory card at one precinct, and it was resolved at the time. Unfortunately, given that it’s fodder for the conspiracy theorists among us, the precinct was in Crestwood, which has a high percentage of gay residents.

And The Gay^tm seems to be the core of Ms. Childress’ objection. She thinks voters wouldn’t have supported Patricia if they had only known she was — * gasp * — a lesbian. There’s a tiny problem with that assumption — Patricia has been out for years. Every news story I saw on her runoff victory mentioned that she would be the first openly gay legislator in Alabama history. This wasn’t a big revelation to anyone who was paying attention. And if the majority of voters in District 54 don’t care that she’s gay, why would they care that she received money from the Victory Fund? The Victory Fund offered to match all contributions to her runoff campaign that came in within a set 3-day period. I expect many of those voters gave money themselves. (Full disclosure: Husband and I did, even though we don’t live in her district. So sue us. Or not.)

Gaynell got herself into trouble with some voters that I know with her last minute appeal to “family values”. Now her mother-in-law is challenging the election with yet more veiled appeals to homophobia. I have a message for both of them: GET OVER IT!