Posted by Birmingham News – Veterans Affairs Board set to choose site for fourth nursing home.
Birmingham News – The Birmingham News views Alabama’s population growth rate as a positive, allowing sufficient time for infrastructure growth to match population increases.
Huntsville Times – Legislators frustrated by lack of budget information from Medicaid; Commissioner says she will be ready for budget presentation on January 16th.
Montgomery Advertiser – Governor says he lacks the authority to order post-conviction DNA testing.
Montgomery Advertiser – State appeals court upholds ruling in favor of environmental groups challenging ADEM permit in Tuscaloosa County case.
Montgomery Advertiser – Guest columnist challenges Advertiser editorial critical of Bush veto of SCHIP.
Tuscaloosa News – At least 2000 attorneys may miss deadline to direct interest from firm accounts to charitable purposes.
Times Daily – The Times Daily poor ranking as “green” state as evidence that ADEM “is not even a paper tiger, it’s dormant.”
Winnipeg Free Press – Canadian travel writer finds surprises on the Robert Trent Jones trail.
Niagara Gazette – Commentary from the Niagara (Falls) Gazette looks at plans of new chair of National League of Cities (representing Madison, Alabama) to “ensure that the federal government ceases its terrible budgeting practices and provide adequate funding to localities for transportation issues and poverty.”
Fox Business – U.S. Rep. Spencer Bachus (R) recognized for work in domestic violence prevention.
Montgomery Independent – Riley’s 2002 and 2006 may have violated campaign reporting law by improperly reporting use of corporate airplanes and improperly reporting donations.
Legislative Dispatch
Purple Dot Connection
2010 Big List
2010 Senate Elections
2010 House Elections
Press Releases
From the Niagara Gazette article, wonder whats wrong with “localities” funding their own transportation and poverty programs thru local taxes? Fear of facing the voters after raising taxes?
I this Gambacurta, a newspaper writer or a political hack campaign manager. I seem to remember him recently in the latter role, but can’t place just where.
Opps, first I should have been Is.
Bob Gambacurta served as Press Secretary to Alabama Gov. Fob James, Jr. (April 1998 – January 1999). As a Cabinet-level advisor and spokesman for Governor James, he responded to political crises, natural disasters, election year politics, even a state funeral for Gov.
…
Since the end of the James administration (January 1999 – present) Gambacurta has served as a public relations/media relations/political consultant to a number of clients dealing with a variety of issues. Gambacurta has also spent more than 20 years in radio and television, holding positions as News Director, TV anchor, reporter and talk show host at stations in Atlanta, Birmingham, Montgomery and Tuscaloosa. He has also held executive positions with advertising agencies in Montgomery and Birmingham. His work in broadcasting and advertising has received numerous awards from Sigma Delta Chi Society of Professional Journalists, Associated Press, United Press International and Ad Clubs in Birmingham and Montgomery. Source: Personal Résumé, 8/03.
So he is a political hack who writes for a newspaper, not an unbiased newspaper reporter.
Why attack the writer? Address the facts. Even political hacks can say things that are true. Motive is another matter.
Why is it when a newspaper reporter reports on allegations regarding Republican public officials they are called “political hacks”? It’s the job of reporters to report the facts.
I would agree with Lyn – is the information in the article factual, regardless of the person conveying the facts. And do you really think that the average newspaper reporter is unbiased? No matter how hard they try, personal feelings and perceptions can and do influence the way information is presented.
Not here to defend the Gov., I’m sure his aides that talked him into Admendment One can talk him out of the problem, if it really is a problem, the article started with the old saftey valve “may have” to add a layer of prtection to thew paper. My point was this is a political hack (not a negative term, just descriptive) writing as if he was a reporter. A little truth in publishing
JD, remember Churchill was a hack too.
On the serious side, this does look bad, mainly because Riley is unavailable to comment and those interviewed are saying bland nothings.
Yet, somehow this story has been sat on until the slowest week in the newspaper business and the usual suspects did not pick up on this earlier (say in the 2006 race, best they did was Riley’s membership in an all white lodge and alleged funding by Indian gaming operators). Leads me to wonder if the political class (candidates, apparatchiks) does not see this as an issue.
Howsomever, all politicians lose their teflon coating sooner or later.
I’m curious how Baxley, Folsom & Strange reported their air travel. I sure they all racked up a lot of hours. Is this the norm the way Riley did it or not?
JD, dunno, you can look up the campaign reports at the Secretary of State’s office, which show the value of the in kind contributions and who made them. Then, its matter of working the phones to get answers.
Maybe we’ll see other candidates’ reports getting the same once over, next week’s papers should be interesting.
Walt, here’s to betting the Milton McGregor owned Montgomery Independent will fail to look into any other candidates’ use of planes.
Wiil, no thanks, I’d rather invest my gambling money in the grocery market.
Isn’t it strange that Riley says he doesn’t have the authority to order post conviction DNA testing but he has the authority to appoint the commissioner in Jefferson County despite the fact the law calls for an election? If he doesn’t have the authority to order post conviction DNA testing, who does?
Will, should it matter whether the Independent looks into the use of planes by other candidates?
Like it or not, as the top state office holder in Alabama, Riley is under more scrutiny than any of the other yahoos in state govt.
IF other candidates records are examined and IF they are found to have used planes and not reported them according to FEC rules and regulations, what difference does it make? Two WRONGS don’t make a RIGHT. The old “Democrats did it too” defense an attempt to distract from the real issue.
Would be fitting to see most of state government in the dock
I couldn’t agree with you more walt.
First of all, bhmhomeboy, the FEC does not regulate state elections, so their rules prove irrelevant.
Second, I was merely referring to walt’s comment that, quote, “Maybe we’ll see other candidates’ reports getting the same once over, next week’s papers should be interesting.” Like it or not, Nixon, there will be no such reports forthcoming from the Montgomery “Independent,” as that paper is owned by gambling magnate Milton McGregor. My argument, if you had taken the time to read through all the comments, was simply that walt’s hope of future investigations into similar situations was unlikely and certainly not forthcoming from the Montgomery “Independent.”
Here’s the important question that should be asked: Assuming all these claims are proven true, which of course they have not been proven yet, what would the maximum penalty be? All these attempts to liken this situation to that of former Governor Siegelman seem intellectually lazy to me, as his convictions involved bribery. Does anybody here actually (this does not include those whose legal studies amount to reading the newspaper) know what the penalty for this would be?
I can’t help but be reminded of that episode of “Seinfeld” in which Newman tries to catch Jerry in mail fraud for attempting to collect on mail insurance for a stereo that had been damaged before it was sent. Upon doing so, Newman exclaims “It’s called mail fraud! Oh, how I have waited for this day! This day in which your pitiful play world will come crashing down!”
Upon being calmed by his superior, Newman continues, “There will, uh, be a small fine.”
Will, I read the preceding comments, but chose to address your “statement” in #13 due its loaded nature.
Your “argument” in #20 more accurately reflects your point and is well taken. Btw, the Seinfield quip is amusing and illustrative.
I have no time for a westlaw query on this topic on the afternoon of new year’s eve, but am interested to know what you discover/know etc about the ramifications [to the extent they exist] of campaign reporting violations.
Thanks.
Thank God for the Montgomery Independent, the other papers only investigate Democrats. And would someone please explain to me why Alabama elections are exempt from FEC rules and regulations? Isn’t this about filing false FEC reports? This is not a fictional episode of Seinfield, this is real life so I fail to see the comparison.
Maybe a more relevant question would be to look and see if any of the people involved in the donations got appointments or favors from the Riley Administration during the period since the donations. That would seem to make a more fitting parallel to the Siegelman-Scrushy situation, and maybe get around some of the statute of limitations concerns, as a “continuing conspiracy”, language which the prosecutors invoked to get around the same concerns in the Montgomery trial.
Judging from the campaign finance reports of both Republicans and Democrats, the reporting of in-lind contributions by individuals who also head corporations is a common practice.
Oh yes–Bob Gambacurta hates Riley. He was the hack that headed the anti-Amendment one campaign back in 03.
Susan, won’t surprise me in the least.
in the FWIW category, the Alabama Democrat’s blog make no mention of this story focusing instead on Mike Hubbard, his sports network and free tickets.
Glad the point was well taken, Nixon. I do not have access to Westlaw so I could not provide the information necessary. By the way, I hope my original post did not offend. It was merely designed to poke fun at the fact that Milton McGregor always seems to be searching for something to bludgeon Republicans over the head with (at least those Republicans he does own). I can buy into the argument that many newspapers in this state lean Republican, but I expect my friends on the left to be equally honest when it comes to papers such as the Independent.
bhmhomeboy, the “F” in the FEC stands for federal. Were it a race for the US Senate or House of Representatives in question, your point would be well made. However, as this is a state election, the FEC does not regulate campaign finances in this matter.
As for my “Seinfeld” quip, I was merely suggesting that the penalty for that which Governor Riley is accused, which he has not been proven guilty of of course, may not prove that draconian. If, for example, the penalty were a monetary fine, this might amount to much ado about nothing.
It’s “much ado about nothing” when it comes to Republicans but it’s a FEDERAL offense when it comes to Democrats, ask former Governor Don Siegelman who is serving time in a FEDERAL prison in Louisiana.
The main papers do “lean Republican”, that is why papers like the Independent are important. I am glad my friends on the right admitt are willing to admitt to the fact.
(Cap Locks on for emphasis)