The Birmingham News reports this morning:
A Democratic Party committee disqualified an openly gay candidate for the Alabama Legislature and the woman she defeated because both violated a rule that no other candidate has obeyed since 1988.
After reading the headline, my first impression was that this move was motivated as an anti-gay decision, but the facts seem to point toward in-fighting and egos, and what has caused the Democrats to become less than significant in State politics since the early eighties.
Patricia Todd ran a spirited campaign for the seat in District 54, a key district that includes Birmingham's downtown business district as well as its most established African-American communities which surround the City Center on the West and East sides. Although there were several candidates vying for this important seat, the election came down to two candidates, Patricia Todd and Gaynelle Hendricks. A runoff was held between these two candidates on July 18, when Todd won the seat by only 59 votes.
Todd's attorney, Bobby Segall, plans to appeal the decision by the Montgomery based committee.
Apparently this all came about when representation for Hendricks challenged Todd's victory by claiming that Todd had not filed her campaign finance forms five days prior to the election. This is a requirement outlined in a 1974 bylaw that requires the candidate to file with the party chairman.
In 1988, however, a State statute was passed requiring candidates to file with the secretary of state. Since that time, no democrat candidate has adhered to the 1974 bylaw, the basis of the claim that Todd had not filed in a timely manner.
Since the complaint against Todd cited the 1974 bylaw as its basis, it was easy for Todd to argue that Hendricks was in violation as well, since she filed her statements with the secretary of state and not with the party chairman.
Regarding the committee responsible for the decision, Todd is now accusing Democratic Conference Chairman Joe Reed of "stacking the committee" as he was endorsing Hendricks during the campaign for the seat.
Where it appears to stand now is that the committee that ruled to disqualify both candidates will likely be charged with picking a replacement for the seat. It would appear that this is the reason that Todd is voicing her concerns now regarding a biased committee.
Reasons, Schmeasons. This is the type of fruitless and damaging in-fighting that has made the once dominant Democrat party less than significant in State politics. What happened to the days when the losing candidate would bow out gracefully and pledge support to the other candidate?
Dems, as is evidenced in Connecticut, Alabama, and, most likely, countless other places, have more to fear from the practice of eating their own, than from the flacid assaults by the GOP noise machine.
All I can say in conclusion is that this is wrong, and that it would be nice to see this same level of obstinence and challenge applied toward potential voter fraud and campaign irregularities committed by the GOP. Come on Dems, we need a united front!