Tim James on 2010 Governor’s Run
Republican businessman Tim James of Greenville expanded a bit on his 2010 run for governor when he told the Parlor last week that he was not running for the 2nd Congressional District seat.
"I feel very confident that we can win the nomination. Right now, we are in good shape.
"I’m probably the only guy in the state of Alabama who didn’t realize I was going to lose last time [in 2002]. I’m geared to win. That’s the way I am.
"There are a lot of reasons I lost. It was very close to when my dad [Gov. Fob James] lost. A lot of my supporters told me we need to wait.
"But much of the Republican Party got to know me. I ceased being Fob’s son and started being Tim James. His legacy, according to polling data, becomes better as time passes, on issues like integrity, for example. Time is your friend.
"My team of professionals is all but in place. I’ve built a conservative base that I work well with. In the primary, you focus on 12 or 13 counties for the most part."
Would it be fair to say that a key part of your core support could be characterized as ‘the Roy Moore crowd?’ I asked. "Yes, absolutely. The state is about 30 to 40% conservative evangelicals. Moore hit a ceiling around 42%. We should get their support. We’ll earn it. We’ll work very hard for it. I come from a business background. I’m a business person. In the Republican primary in the state of Alabama, if you are a social conservative, proven, with a business background, you ought to be able to do fine."
"I understand how state government works. You know how to control it? Turn the spigot off. You control government by controlling the spending. I understand the money aspect of government.
"You could throw 20% more money into the Education Trust Fund, and I guarantee you that you wouldn’t see test scores go up. There’s just no correlation. Money is not the answer.
"We all want our children to come back to Alabama and get a job. We want to educate our kids. Money is not the answer. It is a day to day consistent approach in public education. It is the truth. That’s how you do it. There is no other way.
"K through 12 is the ballgame. That’s what drives me.
"There will be many issues that come into play in the days ahead. This immigration thing is getting bigger and bigger. The federal government has dealt with it in a bad way. The states are starting to engage the issue. The ones that are not are having problems."
Related Articles:
Last in funding. Last in education.
No relationship. None.
Comment by Gunney Highway — January 17, 2008 @ 10:09 am
Thanks for that commentary from the AEA Gunney Highway. Wake up sister.
Comment by JT — January 17, 2008 @ 10:26 am
I would say that there is a good deal of evidence that money is not the ONLY thing necessary to improve education and may not be the MOST IMPORTANT component. And are we last in education funding? I am not sure about that statement. If you include the benefits package along with our public schoolteachers salaries and factor in the low cost of living in Alabama, we are giving teachers a compensation package that is very competitive regionally and not far from the national average. So our poor performance is not solely tied to the leve of funding.
Not saying funding isn’t important - it is. But simply raising salaries has definitely NOT worked in Alabama. A wiser investment of precious resources may be needed and certainly should be studied.
Comment by Too simplistic, Gunney — January 17, 2008 @ 10:31 am
Danny - By the way, I was impressed with the way Tim James handled issues, whether you agree with him or not. I was interested in your impressions of James, if you don’t mind doing some “opinion” work on this page.
Comment by Too simplistic, Gunney — January 17, 2008 @ 10:33 am
Are we so starved for political information that this joint has turned into Tim James’ personal publicist?
C’mon Danny. Dude has less of a chance than he did on 2002, backed out on an eminently winnable Congressional Race, and probably won’t even run in 2010.
Let’s get some chatter going about breaking the perceived logjam in the Senate, pre-filed bills for the 2008 Session, or even the ramping up of the Presidential contests on Feb. 5.
Comment by Enough already — January 17, 2008 @ 10:52 am
Man what have you got agianst Tim James? Sure he was way back in 2002 race but he is a smart, articulate, successful businessman with TV-ready appearance and a beautiful family. I wouldn’t count him out. And those who have met him know he has a strong grasp of the issues. I think he could be the sort of candidate the GOP needs to get away from Boy Troy, Not-So-Big Luther, and wallflowers-at-the-dance kay Ivey and Beth Chapman.
Comment by Switch to Sanka, dude — January 17, 2008 @ 10:57 am
This is the state that pays college football coaches millions of dollars, but doesn’t want to fully fund public school education. So, if money isn’t tied to performance what’s up with paying college football coaches millions of dollars???? How about we fully fund public education and see what happens? We already know what’s not happening..
Comment by bhmhomeboy — January 17, 2008 @ 11:25 am
Exactly when would we be “fully funding” education? I’ll bet that according to Dr. Hubbert, there is no such thing as “fully funding” education. We might be more “fully funding” education right now if we had used some of the budget money the last few years for classroom supplies, technology, equipment, etc, rather than using EVERY SINGLE DIME for teacher pay raises. Hey - teachers aren’t overpaid. But we are not using our resources wisely in education. If we give more money, it all goes to salary. I think we would have a lot more faith in education as taxpayers if we didn’t see the money available gobbled up by raises that send us into proration.
Comment by Anonymous — January 17, 2008 @ 11:40 am
I was impressed with two things in the James piece. The first was when he admitted that his myopic vision regarding winning didn’t serve him well in ‘06. It’s reminiscent of Nixon’s wound-licking from ‘63 to ‘67.
The other is his refusal to fun away from “the Roy Moore crowd.” I’m about as far to the left as Judge Moore is to the right, but James is definitely wise in staking out as territory and making it “his.”
My only puzzlement is regarding his claim that “the state is 30 to 40% conservative evangelicals.” That’s quite possibly true in a GOP primary but the raw numbers are far lower–even in Alabama.
He’s smart though. He is perpetuating the illusion that there is an overwhelming presence of evangelical Christians comprising the Alabama electorate–in spite of the fact that every study done has shown that there are no more people filling Alabama pews on Sunday morning than in any other state. And studies can be flawed, but the emperical evidence in my own little corner of the world seems to indicate the same–I attend the 8:30 a.m. mass at St. Francis Xavier every Sunday and I have room on both sides of me–this in one of the Birmingham Diocese’s larger parishes (yeah, yeah, Roman Catholics don’t count as conservative evangelicals, but the idea is the same).
But, alas, perception can be reality, and James will likely do well riding that perception. And us Democrats will continue to fear the evangelical paper tiger that doesn’t exist.
Comment by Jeff Culler — January 17, 2008 @ 11:49 am
Most of what he said sounds like vintage Fob. Be interesting to see the jockeying start this fall.
Comment by walt moffett — January 17, 2008 @ 11:54 am
I do particularly care for any argument containing “well, if you consider this” or “if you factor in this”. Dime store.
Also, when considering funding, I’m not solely speaking of teachers’ salaries. We have plenty of county and city pilot programs in need of funding for statewide expansion that can and eventually will vastly improve the futures of our students. But I do appreciate the BCA/ALFA sound byte. There are many wise ways to spend appropriate education funding, we just don’t have appropriate or stable funding.
Bottom line — last in education funding, last in education. Nice billboards of Riley though. I like his hair.
Come to think of it, least public highway funding. Worst highways. Same for Medicaid. Same for Prison systems. I notice a trend.
I can shoot a hole in a gnat’s ass at 500 yards.
Comment by Gunney Highway — January 17, 2008 @ 1:04 pm
Hey Gunney - nice marsmanship skills there . . .I can see the headlines in the papers now: “Hole drilled in Gnat’s ass by Giant ass hole”
Comment by Tee hee — January 17, 2008 @ 1:13 pm
Huh?
Comment by Gunney Highway — January 17, 2008 @ 1:19 pm
I would point out this linkage to Gunney: Paul Ray Hubbert has led the Alabama Education Association for almost 40 years. In all of those 40 years education has not improved in Alabama; in fcact, it has declined and has hugged the bottom throughout his period as the most powerful man in Alabama education.
There is almost certainly a connection.
Maybe that’s why our schools suffer. By any objective measure, AEA and Hubbert have been disastrous to Alabama education. They have been good for school employees - that’s their job - they are union bosses. But they have undoubtedly injured Alabama education and I would contend they have been more of a detriment than any perceived money shortages.
Comment by Linkage — January 17, 2008 @ 1:21 pm
No perceived shortages, there are shortages. Check
http://www.al.com/news/birminghamnews/index.ssf?/base/news/1200561395117920.xml&coll=2
The anti-Hubbert Kool-Aid tastes good to most metropolitan area private-schooled panty-wastes. I’ll bet a tax cut results in more government revenue as well.
Comment by Gunney Highway — January 17, 2008 @ 1:50 pm
How about we pay the classroom teachers like we pay college football coaches and see what kind of results we get?
Hubbert and AEA are not the ones that make our schools suffer, it’s the hatred of Hubbert and AEA (Alabama Education Association) that make our schools suffer. It’s not about Hubbert and AEA (Alabama Education Association), it’s about our CHILDREN, remember them? Value the children of Alabama like you value college football programs.
Comment by bhmhomeboy — January 17, 2008 @ 2:00 pm
We pay Hubbert like a football coach - he gets hundreds of thousands of dollars annually from the DROP program (which he personally lobbied the legislature for BTW). The money, according to the lobbying spin at the time, was supposed to keep excellent state employees on the job longer . . .but guess who the top two moneymakers in the DROP program are? Joe Reed and Paul Hubbert - neither of whom is a state employee and both of whom work for AEA.
So have the hundreds of thousands that Reed and Hubbert both make (augmented by hundreds of thousands more that they make off their union-dues paying membership in addition to their state-funded windfall) resulted in terrific education? As you have pointed out earlier, it has not. And when you point the figure at underfunding, remember that the state of Alabama has paid Joe Reed and Paul Hubbert - with taxpayer-supplied money - about $3 million the past 5 years (that’s $300,000 each for 5 years which they both drew from DROP). Is that a wise expenditure of our dollars? Has it resulted in better education?
I am sorry but they have to be held responsible for the mess they have been an active part of creating.
Comment by Linkage — January 17, 2008 @ 2:51 pm
I’ll agree with that. DROP was and is a mistake. No argument here.
Comment by Gunney Highway — January 17, 2008 @ 3:07 pm
Please tell me specifically what Hubbert and AEA have done to create this “mess”? Are you saying it’s their fault the State of Alabama would rather spend money building prisons than schools? Is it their fault the state doesn’t want to give teachers pay raises and believe they should just have a “liveable” wage, while some college football coaches are paid millions? Are children coming to school sick because Hubbert and AEA don’t want them to have health insurance? Are they in portable classrooms because Hubbert and AEA want them in portables? Are they using old and outdated textbooks because Hubbert and AEA want them to use inadequate material? Is it Hubbert and AEA’s fault there is a slow down in the economy and the state will have about $500 million less to spend on education in the next fiscal year? Is it their fault the state funds education with revenues from income and sales taxes? Exactly what “mess” are Hubbert, Reed and AEA responsible for creating?
I’m sure no football coach at either of the Big Two’s (Alabama/ Auburn) would work for the same pay and benefits has Hubbert and Reed. There was an article in newspapers recently about the State Republican Chair getting 500 Aubburn football tickets, parking passes and other perks. You seem to have a big problem with Hubbert and Reed’s salary and perks just because of who they are.
Stop thinking of Hubbert, Reed and AEA as the enemy and think about the future of our state. Children are our future. If they aren’t educated, not even football can save our state.
Comment by bhmhomeboy — January 17, 2008 @ 3:42 pm
Could he bring Martha Nachman back to DHR?
That appointment may have been Fob’s worst mistake as Governor.
Comment by OldCloverdale — January 17, 2008 @ 3:47 pm
Oh yes, Nachman was a mistake. His first term appointments were much better, Bronner as Finance Director, Fox at Public Health and Baggiano (sp?) at medicaid.
Comment by walt moffett — January 17, 2008 @ 4:30 pm
How does everyone think James will match up in 2010 with Hubbard, Strange, and King?
Comment by Anonymous — January 17, 2008 @ 4:55 pm
Tim, 9% James, will likely do no better the second time than he did the first. He has done nothing, and I mean NOTHING to build the Republican party or to help Republican candidates since 2002. This is all about Tim and what he wants and not about Alabama at all.
Comment by Anonymous — January 17, 2008 @ 5:35 pm
Question: Do AU and UofA pay their football coaches with taxpayer money, or do their athletic departments raise the money?
Comment by Don — January 18, 2008 @ 8:20 am
After living in ALabama 51 years, I now see that the poorer areas of our state drag down all the positives in our metro areas. Children in the Black Belt don’t have hot water to wash their hands, nor computer labs to hook them to the internet (thousands of libraries) less the teachers who can teach them to gather, read and dream about ways they can become citizens who contribute to the overall statistical health of this state. When we see Alabama at 49th or 48th and know why the best performers never return, then we must concentrate on bringing the rural areas up to standards. The test scores in Vestavia or Mt. Brook will almost never be achieved by a Black Belt school. Money is not the answer, Hubbert and the AEA are not an answer. Our state needs to improve the basic capital improvements to the these schools so that executives from American and foreign companies would want to bring their families to the communities. Although many of these Black Belt cities do not have large consumer strip malls and big police forces, they do offer nature and a sense of community pride. What the world offers today draws many away from the rural towns. Alabama must devise a way for making it satisfying to move back.
Have Gov. Riley retrofit the rural schools with basic necessities like cable modems, hot water heaters, air conditioning systems, newspaper and magazines in their libraries and teachers who want to teach regardless of tenure but actually put pay raises in for those who go there to teach. We need to see some consistent 27s or 31s on ACT tests coming from this area before industry moves in to take advantage of the workforce, which might bring Alabama up to 25th by 2015.
Comment by Sasquatch — January 18, 2008 @ 10:16 am
I think those continuing to bring out Tim James’ finish in 2002 miss the mark. It has little bearing on 2010. Jamees got a late start against two well-financed household names in Alabama (Bob Riley and Steve Windom). Both his opponents were in high elective office. James got very little chance of election from the press and therefore even less attention than he might normally have received.
James has name recognition to build on. With an EARLY effort and solid fundraising, he can be formidable in this race. He is articulate, good-looking (and a former Auburn football player - it helps to be an ex-jock here), and he knows the issues - whether you agree with him on them or not.
I think he is stronger than Kay Ivey, Beth Chapman, Troy King, and a host of others who have been mentioned on this page as possible nominees.
Comment by About Tim James — January 18, 2008 @ 10:31 am
The question of what students need cannot be answered without considering the family that a child comes from. The reason children in Mountain Brook, Vestavia, and other wealthy schools have better scores can only partially be attributed to finances. The bigger issue is the importance placed on education by the child’s parents. When parents don’t bother to get their children to school or teach them how to behave once they are there, they handicap their kids. I know this sounds a little simplistic, but I have taught in inner-city schools and seen students fail simply because there was no value put on education by the parents. I could have had a million dollar classroom, but I don’t know if it would have helped with the students that I taught. They were not encouraged to come to school regularly and their parents rarely showed any real interest in the children’s education.
Comment by it's the parents — January 18, 2008 @ 4:31 pm
It’s the parents/taxpayers fault that Alabama is ranked last in eduation. Only the students of wealthy parents that live in wealthy school districts can learn in the great state of Alabama, where football is King.
Since when are student’s “encouraged to attend school? It thought it was the law that students attend school until age 16? They don’t need to be “encouraged” to attend school, it’s mandatory. School systems need to bring back truant officers.
I like your reccomendations Sasquatch, thank you for coming up with some possible solutions. Of course they won’t be implemented because the powers that be would rather play the blame the parent/taxpayer game.
Comment by bhmhomeboy — January 18, 2008 @ 8:48 pm
I was reporting what I experienced. There was a severe lack of proper reporting of student absenses by the administration. Because schools get funds based on student attendance, the principal did not want to report absentees. When you add his refusal to report them, his threats of teacher’s jobs who disagreed with him, and the general atmosphere in the neighborhood that education didn’t matter, the total came out to be poorly educated students. I never meant that only children of wealthy parents could be educated, only that their chances are better because they usually come from families that take education seriously.
Comment by it's the parents — January 18, 2008 @ 10:17 pm
Regarding comment #4, I thought Tim James was quite nice, very candid, and enjoyable to talk to… He told me a while back that he would call me when he made a decision on AL-02, and I have to admit I was impressed when he did.
Regarding comment #5, I thought James had some really interesting things to say, and from some of the comments I gather that others did too. Regarding your suggestion that we talk about other matters, I will say that there are always more topics I’d like for us to be talking about.
Commenter #5, I have a question for you. Would you be willing to email me via the contact form? Of course, the only possible downside is that I would know your email address, so if there is a privacy concern that makes you wary, maybe you can find one that you don’t mind using… Thanks…
Good comments.
Parents who take education seriously make a huge difference. I would be willing to bet that if their children were put in some of the state’s worst schools, that the children’s learning would suffer, even with parents who take education seriously. Sometimes the answers to these questions are not either-or, they are both-and. Actually, comment #27 was saying that already to some degree.
Long day…
Comment by Danny — January 18, 2008 @ 10:41 pm
I posed a question in #24 because there had been some prior comments about the salaries of the football coaches at AU and UofA. I guess no one knows the answer, but I’m still curious if someone does.
Comment by Don — January 19, 2008 @ 9:41 am
To Question 24 -
A nominal sum of the head football coaches salary comes from the University (i.e., taxpayer money). In 2003, Tommy Tuberville was paid $150,000 by Auburn University - I’m sure that sum has gone up a little, but not much. So, the rest of his salary would come from the athletic department (which raises its money through boosters).
Comment by football — January 19, 2008 @ 10:14 am
Thanks, football, that’s what I thought but I wasn’t sure.
Comment by Don — January 19, 2008 @ 11:06 am
Uh, aren’t the Athletic Departments at public institutions a part of the STATE University system? Isn’t the Alabama STATE Department of Education responsible for grades K-12,2 year, Vocational/Technical and 4 year STATE instituions? Aren’t football coaches employees of the STATE department of Education?
Comment by bhmhomeboy — January 19, 2008 @ 1:51 pm
I might be wrong, but I don’t think that 4 year universities fall under the state board.
Comment by margaret — January 19, 2008 @ 3:24 pm
To post 34 - Did you even read my post?
Yes, you are correct, the athletic cepartment is a part of the state university system. However, they raise money from private donors with which to fund most of their enterprises (in addition to the nominal amount of state, i.e., taxpayer, money they receive).
Wow. I assume you’re a member/supporter of the AEA.
Comment by football — January 19, 2008 @ 11:06 pm
I am a proud supporter of the Alabama Education Association. I’m going to assume you are a proud supporter of college football. And Margaret you are wrong, State Colleges and Universities fall under the State Department of Education.
Wouldn’t it be great if public schools formed Academic Booster Clubs and people supported them like they do Athletic Booster Clubs?
Comment by bhmhomeboy@aol.com — January 19, 2008 @ 11:24 pm
To post 37 -
Yes, it would be great if people would form academic booster clubs to support schools. Oh wait, they already do. This occurs everyday in private schools (where parents pay out of their own pocket), or in school districts such as Mountain Brook, where parents vote to raise property taxes that will support schools.
But like others have said, its not about the money. Any child can get a good education in any school, if they want to.
Comment by football — January 20, 2008 @ 11:10 am
To football,
The parents that live in Mountain Brook can afford to vote to raise taxes to pay for schools. Also parents that choose to send their students to private schools choose to pay taxes and tuitions. Parents that choose to send their students to private schools can afford to pay taxes and tuition. According to your logic only the wealthy or those that can afford it are entitled to, and have access to a quality education, public or private. Education Bama style.
Comment by bhmhomeboy@aol.com — January 20, 2008 @ 11:59 am
No, I am actually for vouchers, which would give all children access to better schools.
I was just commenting on your point re: academic booster clubs. You asked the question why people did not form “academic booster clubs”, and my point was that they do.
Comment by football — January 20, 2008 @ 12:20 pm
four year colleges do not fall under the state dept. of education. just k-12 and the two year system.
Comment by Anonymous — January 20, 2008 @ 1:50 pm
Vouchers will not give ALL student’s access to “better schools”. Vouchers will take public funds from public schools, which will help the private schools but further hurt public schools. Public schools are open to all students, Private schools are not. Why should my tax dollars go to fund schools for the fortunate few at the expense of the masses?
4 year college employee are on the States payroll.
Comment by bhmhomeboy@aol.com — January 20, 2008 @ 7:57 pm
But they are not part of the State Department of Education. That was the question you posed in #34.
Comment by Margaret — January 22, 2008 @ 12:09 pm
Oh yeah, I think the amount paid to coaches is crazy, but then, you have to remember it is not coming from the tax payers. Furthermore, it’s those guys’ responsibility to keep about 80,000 people buying seats in the stadium. Those tickets are an enormous money generator for the universities.
Comment by Margaret — January 22, 2008 @ 12:16 pm
Is there proof that four year colleges don’t fall under the State Department of Education?
Comment by bhmhomeboy — January 22, 2008 @ 12:31 pm
Well, one could review the state constitution and Alabama Code to resolve that issue, to which the asker is directed for answers.
Comment by walt moffett — January 22, 2008 @ 12:53 pm
Education Bama Style.
k-12 and two year colleges fall under the Alabama Education Department. State 4 year colleges have boards of Trustees and fall under the Alabama Commission on Higher Education. http://www.ache.state.al.us/
Comment by bhmhomeboy — January 22, 2008 @ 2:21 pm
You have Van and I support. We will work as volunters at republican headquarters in Greenville. We want to see you become the next Governor of Alabama.
Comment by Barbara Speir — February 15, 2008 @ 4:01 pm