Ant Bites
A short post about a small issue. An ant bite.
When Sen. Harri Anne Smith released her statement yesterday announcing the withdrawal of her Senate bill, the release listed the contact info for the consultant to her Congressional campaign. (You can see it here at RickyStokesNews.com.) Readers made the point in email to me that she is not allowed to use her official state Senate letterhead in relation to her congressional campaign.
By itself, this is not a huge deal.
By and large, neither is the other unwanted attention her campaign has received, for example, for missing a televised debate, for introducing an electronic bingo bill for her constituents that she decides they don’t want, for violating Federal Election Committee rules by using state campaign funds to pay for polling related to the Congressional campaign.
They are ant bites and bee stings. Not a big deal. But if you get enough of them, they will take a toll on you.
and we want this in Congress?
Comment by JohnJohn — April 15, 2008 @ 3:49 pm
I’m confused, why is her campaign consultant being used as a contact a problem? The issue was a state issue that was a part of her State Senate duties. She probably does not have a full time Press Secretary so she deferred comment to her campaign staff. Do we need to make it a big deal that the announcement came at her campaign office?
Comment by William Wyatt Wallace — April 15, 2008 @ 5:08 pm
I think the issue is the consultant’s name was put on State of Alabama Senate letterhead and that is a no no. ????? Danny may know.
Comment by ????? — April 15, 2008 @ 5:24 pm
For the supposed front-runner in this, someone who has been Mayor of Slocomb and a State Senator, Harri Anne is making some bone-headed mistakes. She looks backwoods and unprofessional.
I agree Danny - these ant bites and bee stings can add up. I’m sure she is looking less and less appealing to the national GOP, but they will back whoever is nominated. If I were them, I’d be wishing Bobby Bright had announced as a Republican.
Comment by Anonymous — April 15, 2008 @ 5:36 pm
She does look week I agree. I bet Bobby Bright hopes she is the GOP nominee so he can put the smack down on her. Too bad for the Wiregrass. I guess the slate (the “committee”) doesn’t know a lot about choosing candidates.
Comment by Slatescrewedup — April 15, 2008 @ 5:40 pm
How hard is it to get this stuff right? I thought that was what you were paying people to help you - so you wouldn’t make these kind of mistakes. I hate to think what will happen when it gets complicated.
Comment by John Deere — April 15, 2008 @ 9:19 pm
She doesn’t know how to hire the right folks apparently.
Comment by BBB — April 15, 2008 @ 9:25 pm
William Wyatt Wallace, in answer to your question, three sources told me that this was a definite campaign no-no in that it mixed the use of her state Senate letterhead with her campaign for federal office by listing her consultant for that campaign as a contact.
None of the three thought it a huge deal (nor do I), though they were pretty amazed that these kind of slip-ups are happening.
The point here is that it another misstep in a quick series of them. If this had been the only one, I probably would not have mentioned it here. I expect that the ship will get righted for her. If it doesn’t, she’ll have a frustrating campaign.
Comment by Danny — April 15, 2008 @ 9:46 pm
I see the boo-boo that Danny pointed out, but mere slapdash is all that this is. The bill that concerned a state (really local) issue was introduced in the State Senate by a State Senator only to be subsequently withdrawn by the same State Senator that introduced it. To take issue with the placement of the contact person (who happens to work on her Federal campaign) on the press release of the State Senator’s Senate letterhead is petty. The focus on such minutia really demonstrates the myopia found in some of the commentary here.
Comment by CherryCoke — April 15, 2008 @ 10:44 pm
Like Danny said it is one of many little slip ups over and over by someone that should know better. But the big issue you are right cherry coke it is about her being ‘against it now for it’ because she lacks principles on key issues…ring…ring…hold on senatro smith’s pollster is calling…hope she pays him with federal funds this time and not state ones!!!!!!!!!!
Comment by BBB — April 16, 2008 @ 7:20 am
Oh ok, I see. I just didn’t understand the issue, but now I do.
Comment by William Wyatt Wallace — April 16, 2008 @ 8:13 am
Actually, this may be ok. A Federal campaign worker is allowed to do work on her state business, and as CherryCoke points out above, this is legitimate state.
Still, that it’s questionable is bad enough fr her given the other issues which have arisen.
Comment by Dem — April 16, 2008 @ 1:28 pm
Federal funds, state funds . ..what might matter most is funds RAISED and according to those often-cited FEC reports she (Smith) is raising more than Love at a 4-to-1 clip . . .
If you read the FEC reports with a discerning eye, you will see that 1) Love is hemorraging borrowed money and 2) David Woods has more than Love . . .
Smith isn’t Love’s big worry - it is money and David Woods.
Comment by Bottom Line — April 16, 2008 @ 2:01 pm
Post 13 is nutty.
Comment by Nutty — April 16, 2008 @ 2:20 pm
Nope - whoever has the gold makes the rules. Money will matter in this election as in any election.
Comment by Money talks — April 16, 2008 @ 3:07 pm
I doubt Smith has raised 4 to 1. If money raised is important then Woods must not be important.
Comment by Nutty — April 16, 2008 @ 4:11 pm
Smith didn’t outraise Love 4-t0-1 in the first quarter - she actually outraised Love MORE than 4-to-1. The actual official figures are over $250,000 to $60,000.
Comment by Sometimes you feel like a nut — April 17, 2008 @ 8:00 am
Look at total contributions and cash on hand. You Smith radicals are nuts for sure.
Comment by BBB — April 17, 2008 @ 9:27 am
Cash on hand is very misleading - Love is in debt based on contributions versus spending, and red ink is never healthy for a campaign. And Love, Woods, and Schmidtke are all in red ink - though Woods is not LOANING himself money with the idea of recouping it. Good thing too - when you are raising money at the rate they are, you won’t ever see those loans repaid unless you win. So some of them are going to be big financial losers . . .
Ancient Chinese political proverb: candidate who takes out loans to run for office is a total frickin’ moron.
Comment by Confucius — April 17, 2008 @ 10:36 am
It is a loan from themselves buddy. It is done all the time and if Smith doesn’t kick in some of her own cash, she will be doomed. Sad, but true.
Comment by Proverbmy@$# — April 17, 2008 @ 11:21 am
The size of the loans in this race - especially those of Schmidtke and Love - ARE unusual. And they will be liable, so SOMEBODY is going to lose a LOT of personal money in this race - most LIKELY BOTH of them.
Comment by Eddie Money — April 17, 2008 @ 7:28 pm