The Crimson White Print Edition - October 12, 2023

4B
opinion
The garbage in, garbage out of campaign finance
Chance Phillips
Contributing
Columnist
Sen. Robert Menendez,
D-N.J., was indicted Sept.
22 for allegedly pocketing
hundreds of thousands of
dollars in bribes, including
literal bars of gold. However,
those who pay attention to
Alabama politics may have
some trouble figuring out
what exactly Menendez
did wrong.
In Alabama, ever since
Gov. Robert Bentley signed
Senate Bill 445 into law in
2013, corporations are free
to donate as much money
as they want to political
candidates.
Thanks to SB 445, Gov.
Kay Ivey’s reelection
campaign received an
eye-popping $235,000 in
donations from Alabama
Power. That’s almost a
quarter of a million dollars
from the same Alabama
Power that, according to the
American Council for an
Energy-Efficient Economy, is
in contention for the least
efficient utility company in
the country.
In 2018, Alabama Power
was fined $1.25 million
for polluting groundwater.
Five years later, in 2023,
the Alabama state
government is still trying
to give Alabama Power
a sweetheart deal so the
company doesn’t have to
properly and safely dispose
of their coal ash.
Bentley allowing
corporations to flood
elections with cash
has supercharged this
seemingly quid pro quo
approach to policy making.
Of course, political
campaigns need to raise
money somehow: to pay
for ads, to hire campaign
staff and to host rallies. I’ve
personally donated to more
than a couple candidates
for public office in my home
state of Virginia.
But a system where
corporations, PACs and the
super rich handpick which
candidates have a fighting
chance is both unjust
and undemocratic. When
companies getting lucrative
public contracts donate
thousands upon thousands
of dollars to the campaigns
of the people who approve
those contracts, we need
to be asking some hard
questions.
Here in Tuscaloosa,
every single sitting city
councilor accepts donations
from companies that do
business in Tuscaloosa,
including businesses that
bid for public contracts.
For example, J.T. Harrison
Construction Company
was recently awarded a
$7.3 million contract to
build a new YMCA. J.T.
Harrison Construction and
its founder and president,
Tim Harrison, donated
to the campaigns of City
Councilors Cassius Lanier,
Norman Crow and Raevan
Howard in 2021, as well as
Mayor Walt Maddox.
They might not have
received bars of gold, but
I would sure feel awfully
grateful to anyone who gave
me $500 or $1,000. Councilor
Lanier was absent from
the Sept. 12 City Council
meeting, but neither
Crow nor Howard recused
themselves from the vote to
tentatively award the YMCA
construction contract.
Both voted to give $7.3
million to J.T. Harrison
Construction Company.
Am I saying the
Tuscaloosa City Council
isn’t following Alabama’s
competitive bid law to
the letter? No, I’m not. J.T.
Harrison Construction was
the lowest of five bidders
for the YMCA contract.
But federal government
contractors are expressly
barred from making any
political contributions for
good reason.
Democratic politics don’t
just require the absence
of impropriety. They
require the absence of the
appearance of impropriety.
When Tuscaloosa
residents know real estate
companies donate tens
of thousands of dollars
to the mayor and to City
Council members, they may
start doubting whether
the city government has
purely selfless reasons for
its horrifying inaction on
Tuscaloosa’s housing crisis.
Worst of all, some members
of Tuscaloosa’s current city
council haven’t even tried to
avoid the appearance
of impropriety.
Going into the last week
of May 2021, more than
a month after the runoff
elections, City Councilor
Matthew Wilson’s campaign
had a balance of $0.65.
That week, he received two
donations of $1,250, one
from Pride PAC II and one
from T-Town PAC II. On May
28, Wilson repaid $2,500 in
loans he had made to his
own campaign, leaving the
campaign once again with a
balance of $0.65.
Did anything illegal
happen? No, of course
not. PACs are meant to
give money to campaigns,
Wilson had loaned a
lot of money to his own
campaign, and paying off
debt is a valid campaign
expenditure.
It is also completely
accurate to say that a
month after Wilson was
elected, thousands of
dollars from two PACs run
by Michael Echols ended up
in Wilson’s pockets. Before
the election, Echols’ PACs
had exclusively been giving
money to one of Wilson’s
opponents, Katherine
Waldon, and not to Wilson.
Free from impropriety?
I believe so. Free from the
appearance of impropriety?
Of course not. After all,
donating to a campaign a
month after an election
won’t change which
candidate was elected.
In my opinion, the only
thing it could possibly
change is what the new
city councilor thinks of you
and your business interests.
Politicians can and should
refuse donations that
come with strings or from
unethical sources.
Josh Taylor, the treasurer
for Pride PAC II and T-Town
PAC II, said in an email that
“all contributions to and
expenditures from each
PAC are properly disclosed
and in compliance with the
Alabama Fair Campaign
Practices Act and are public
record available from the
Alabama Secretary of State.”
Wilson did not respond
to The Crimson White’s
requests for comment.
Besides helping
politicians pocket
thousands of dollars from
The Tuscaloosa City Hall is located downtown. CW / Jennifer Stroud
wealthy donors, laissezfaire
campaign finance
regulations make it almost
impossible for dissatisfied
voters to enact meaningful
change.
On the rare occasion
that a sitting city councilor
is ousted, voters will find
the same monied interests
backing the new candidate.
Freshman City Councilor
John Faile, dubbed a
“political newcomer” by
Tuscaloosa News, was
supported by the same
PACs and businesses that
bankrolled just about every
other candidate: United
PAC, BIZPAC, Pride PAC II
and Weaver Rentals.
Even though a fair
percentage of donations
in the 2021 City Council
races were from individual
donors, the average
donation from an individual
was $426.91. People able
to donate hundreds of
dollars to a candidate for
City Council simply aren’t
representative of the wider
Tuscaloosa population.
For voters and not
wealthy political donors
to pick Tuscaloosa’s
City Council, we need
campaign finance reform.
But if campaign finance
regulations with real teeth
could even get passed
when Alabama politicians
love their corporate cash
so much, they’d have
to pass scrutiny with a
Supreme Court irrationally
squeamish about public
election financing and limits
on campaign contributions.
The Supreme Court
has made it more than
clear in recent years that
it thinks any attempt to
help grassroots candidates
compete with corporate
stooges is unconstitutional,
unless it stops corruption.
At the same time, the
court has been gradually
redefining corruption and
making it easier for venal
public officials to stuff their
pockets, all while justices
treat themselves to free
trips on billionaires’ private
jets and yachts.
Thanks to the Supreme
Court, Seattle, Washington,
and Oakland, California,
have had to pioneer a new
way to help candidates
compete with corporate
cash. Both cities are giving
residents free vouchers to
donate to local political
campaigns. Candidates can
cash in these vouchers to
run campaigns without
begging for donations from
local businesses and PACs.
This is an obviously
flawed solution, but we
desperately need to do
something, anything, about
the campaign finance status
quo. Right now, to fund
a competitive campaign
candidates need tens of
thousands of dollars from
businesses, PACs and
wealthy donors, and voters
are supposed to just naively
assume this won’t affect
their decisions once
in office.
Are the businesses
donating tens of thousands
of dollars to Alabama’s
politicians really just
expressing principled
political preferences? Or do
they want a quid for their
quo, a public contract for
their metaphorical gold
bars, a license to pollute for
their $235,000?
Michael Echols said it
best: “Do people expect
anything in return for
making contributions? If
they don’t, I’m proud of
them.”
Contributors to City Councilors’ Campaigns
in 2021 Election Cycle (by Amount Donated)
Student Media Launch Dates
Alice Magazine
November 9, 2023 @
Monarch Espresso Bar
7 to 9 p.m.
1956 Magazine
November 8, 2023 @
John England Hall
6 to 7:30 p.m.
CW / Chance Phillips