Lesson Learned from Riley’s Denial
Let’s not miss the bigger issue about why Riley and Co. are having to deny that they took Choctaw money to protect gambling interests. It is in large part because of our state’s ineffective campaign finance disclosure laws.
With stronger campaign finance disclosure laws, we would know who was giving big money to campaigns. Because of our lax laws, accusations of big money flowing into Alabama elections from objectionable sources can usually be dismissed because they are too difficult to prove. In Riley’s case, he may have felt more pressure to respond because the source was sworn testimony in a U.S. Senate report. But he shouldn’t have to, because the law should allow us to know.
Riley himself has endorsed a ban on PAC-to-PAC transfers. If we had such a ban, Riley wouldn’t say “he did not know if he received any campaign money” from his former press secretary, convicted lobbyist Michael Scanlon. Don’t Alabamians deserve to know if the associate of the also-convicted Jack Abramoff contributed to Riley’s campaign to influence the political process?
Of course we do. We deserve to know about every race, every year. Does your legislative candidate support banning PAC-to-PAC transfers? We should find out. You should find out. And press these legislators on the subject next session.
Alabamians deserve to know whose deep pockets are trying to influence the political process. Ask your legislative candidates if they will ban PAC-to-PAC transfers when elected.
I couldn’t agree more on the need to do away with PAC-to-PAC transfers, but the reality is so many legislators and the special interest groups that control them, and thus control the legislature, benefit from those transfers that it means the legislature will never deal with this cancer effectively. If that is ever to be done it will have to be done by the voters who supposedly own our state government and certainly finance it with their tax dollars. The key to doing that is to first help make Alabama the 25th Initiative and Referendum state. My website www.doctoriq.com is devoted to that proposition. Now, prior to the November elections, is the prime time to confront legislators on this issue, and I encourage everyone to do that. The results of my effort in that regard are @ http://www.doctoriq.com/report.htm.
Comment by Don — July 25, 2006 @ 9:52 am
I agree with Don. Demanding I&R is the best consolidated way to achieve a whole host of reforms. Even the threat of an initiative would likely be enough to spur the legislature into action so they can claim it as their own.
Comment by Dan — July 25, 2006 @ 10:46 pm
Best way to get these reforms through is to throw the Democrats out. They control the Legislature and block Riley’s proposed reforms, like pac-to-pac ban, every session.
Comment by Anonymous — July 25, 2006 @ 11:20 pm
Actually, the bill to ban PAC-to-PAC transfers was sponsored by a Democrat again (Rep. Jeff McLaughlin). It passed the House by a 97-1 vote, and the only House member to vote against it was a Republican (Rep. Greg Albritton).
I haven’t heard or seen where Riley has talked about this in the last two years.
I can’t see where it makes sense to blame or credit one party more than another on this one.
I can’t imagine any Republican working any harder than Rep. McLaughlin has to get this passed.
Comment by Danny — July 26, 2006 @ 2:44 am