Race for the PSC Presidency
An AEA poll on the race for the Public Service Commission Presidency is floating around that shows Democrat Lucy Baxley with a 53%-29% advantage over Republican Twinkle Andress Cavanaugh. I find it hard to figure that this is anything other than a name ID poll, and so it’s no surprise that a former Lt. Governor would have a large lead over Cavanaugh who has had the lower profile roles of former state GOP chair and gubernatorial adviser.
In polling just the GOP candidates of Cavanaugh, Jack Hornady, and Matt Chancey, 70% of respondents had no expressed preference. The three were close with two barely cracking double digits.
Baxley is the only Democratic candidate for the position.
A reader points out that Don Fisher, an organizer of the previously mentioned Montgomery County GOP event that featured GOP candidates for the Court of Criminal Appeals along with Cavanaugh but no other candidates for PSC President, is also a donor to Cavanaugh’s campaign (pdf).
The Montgomery Co. GOP side of the story heard here is that Cavanaugh was invited to be a featured speaker to the event when she was the only candidate who had qualified for that race, and that later the decision was made to invite the judicial candidates. Other candidates for PSC President were not invited as it was never designed to be a forum for that race.
Related Articles:
It looks like Twinkle has no real support, so the most qualified candidate - Jack Hornady - may actually WIN this one. That would be great for Alabama. Let’s hope that for once that the best candidate wins. There is no doubt that in this race the best candidate is Hornady.
Comment by Fading Twinkle — May 1, 2008 @ 10:45 am
Danny, if I were Don Fisher and I had given money to a candidate for PSC president . . and that same candidate was the ONLY one who would be speaking to my Republican club . . .and other candidates expressed an interest in participating . . .I would feel that I ought to allow them to participate, in order to not present the appearance of bias at my club. But I guess Don Fisher does not feel compelled to be fair or balanced.
Too bad Don won’t be able to only allow Twinkle’s name on the ballot next month, as that would be the only way she could win.
Comment by Anonymous — May 1, 2008 @ 11:10 am
It’s nice to see the Republicans wholeheartedly endorse affirmative action. Obviously Twinkle is totally unqualified to be PSC president, while Jack Hornday is eminently qualified. However, Jack is a white male, so obviously Twinkle, as a female, should get the job under the affirmative action policy pioneered by Lyndon Johnson. I can think of no other reason for anyone to support Twinkle.
Comment by Affirmative Action — May 1, 2008 @ 11:33 am
I can think of one other reason. She’ll be able to raise money to compete and possibly win. Hornady? Not so much.
I remember the last time everyone on the internets was so excited about “the most qualified” GOP PSC candidate. I believe he is a democrat now.
Comment by JD Hogg — May 1, 2008 @ 12:23 pm
“on the internets . . .”???? George W. Bush, is that you????
JD you are right that she can raise some money. But she will need a LOT to get the sort of media she will need to distance herself from the field. She may be able to raise just enough to not be enough . . .
I don’t think anyone ever said that the guy you referenced above - who is indeed now a Democrat - was the “most qualified” . . .just that unlike Perry Hooper, Jr., that he was not owned by the utilities . . .in that race, as in this one, the most qualified candidate - without question - is Jack Hornady.
Hornady may not be able to raise the money - but then again, maybe he can. It lookls like right now - a month before the election - he is dead even with Twinkle. He has a very real chance of winning.
Comment by Hey JD — May 1, 2008 @ 12:42 pm
I’m talking general election, not primary. The party’s job is to win elections with candidates that can successfully implement its voters’ policy preferences. To me, that means there are 3 things to consider in a primary: (1) can they beat the demo? (2) do they agree with my policy preferences? and (3) do they have the experience, qualifications, etc. to successfully implement their policies?
I say Twinkle’s better on the first part b/c she has the ability to raise money through her GOP connections. You say Hornady’s better on the third part, which is probably true. The second part, I won’t pretend to know. I like low power bills but I believe in free markets - how does that translate to what the PSC actually does? And do the two candidates have any significant differences in policy positions?
I’m not saying I’ll vote for Twinkle, I’m just saying that, even if one concedes she’s not the most “qualified,” there’s at least a practical argument for voting for her in the primary, other than “affirmative action.”
Comment by JD Hogg — May 1, 2008 @ 1:09 pm
Twinkle Twinkle fading star
Empty skirt is what you are
Not qualified for the job
“Please help me, Minda and Rob!”
Twinkle Twinkle fading star
Empty skirt is what you are . . .
Comment by Mozart — May 1, 2008 @ 1:50 pm
Twinkle is nothing but a pawn in the Riley machine. I will be so excited when they finally lose all of their elections and are gone from Alabama politics.
Comment by Tobie — May 1, 2008 @ 4:19 pm
Here’s a question for Mike Hubbard: Is Twinkle better at raising money or spending money? Second question: Mike, how much debt did the Alabama Republican Party have when Twinkle left as chairman? Get’s honest answers to those questions and you’ll see why Twinkle shouldn’t be elected to any office.
Comment by Chap Bethman — May 1, 2008 @ 8:40 pm
i love trigger, she does ever thang i ever asked her to do. she gone fix up all phil poole diapers because haskell slaughter gone put her over the top. I am the man.
Comment by Stain Payte — May 1, 2008 @ 9:00 pm
Twinkle has no qualifications to serve as chairman of the public service commission. None. She’s a nice lady, but this isn’t time for on the job training. I think Jack Hornady is the most qualified. Experience counts. Check out Jack’s qualifications and see for yourself.
Comment by Anonymous — May 2, 2008 @ 7:47 am
If Twinkle and that other guy actually cared about Alabama they would withdraw. Hornady is so much better qualified that they cannot make a reasonable case for their election.
Comment by Anonymous — May 2, 2008 @ 8:03 am
“that other guy” is Matt Chancey, well qualified and a fine man. http://www.mattchancey.com
Comment by John Killian — May 2, 2008 @ 8:38 am
The Public Service Commission is headed for a rough patch. Federal polution standards are going to cause a crunch in Alabama where we get most of our electricity from coal fired plants. We need a man that knows the issues of the PSC to guide us through this very difficult period or all of us consumers will pay through the nose.
Comment by Paul Douglas — May 2, 2008 @ 8:58 am
For John Killian - I have no doubt that Matt Chancey is a fine man. He is also totally unqualified to be PSC president. Only Jack Hornady is qualified. I truly do believe that it would be in the best interests of Alabama for people who are not qualified for the jobs they seek to step aside when clearly qualified candidates are available. So it would be an act of civic responsibility for Chancey and Twinkle (along with Lucy - who is also unqualified) to withdraw. I will not hold my breath.
Comment by For John Killian — May 2, 2008 @ 10:09 am
And John, I have read much of what you have written and respect your opinions. But to call Matt Chancey “well qualified” is simply not accurate. Matt has zero experience with the PSC. He has no experience with utilities. Matt Chancey is qualified to lead the PSC like Gilligan is qualified to command the Pacific fleet . . .and Twinkle is every bit as qulaified as Mrs. Howell . . .
Comment by For John Killian — May 2, 2008 @ 10:20 am
Hornady, why don’t you get off this blog and do something useful? Try raising a little money perhaps?
Comment by On Lunch Break — May 2, 2008 @ 11:54 am
Jack won’t need much money. He’s the best candidate. If that is important, he wins in a walk.
Twinkle should get some actual real job experience before seeking to be a supervisor. And Matt Chancey should stick to political activism - that’s not what the PSC is for. And he would know that if he knew anything about the PSC.
What Twinkle and Chancey don’t know about the PSC should scare the crap out of consumers.
Comment by Twinkle Twinkle, Not Qualified — May 2, 2008 @ 12:00 pm
Hey, Hornady, just keep on thinking that. It’s a great strategy.
Comment by On Lunch Break — May 2, 2008 @ 12:03 pm
Kind of funny that you tell “Hornady” - the only candidate in this race who actually has HAD actual gainful employment in his life and has not spent his entire career in appointed political positions or advocating for pressure groups - to do something “useful.” I would contend that two decades of service to this state on the PSC (in a professional capacity) and two more decades of work for an actual utilty are useful.
Comment by Best — May 2, 2008 @ 12:08 pm
Twinkle is useful - for any comedian searching for a punchline.
Comment by Shecky Green — May 2, 2008 @ 12:09 pm
I noticed that Twinkle’s strategy is to post pictures of herself with well-known people of ACTUAL accomplishment to make herslf appear to have real qualifications - much like her political idol Perry Hooper, Jr. used to do to make himself look competent. So she is planning to go get her picture made with Jack Hornady . . . .
Comment by The Hooper Strategy — May 2, 2008 @ 12:17 pm
There are those that would argue that working for the government hardly qualifies as “gainful employment” :-) But, I’m not going to agree with them.
However, he’s going to have to do more to show that he’s not in the back-pocket of the utilities. It’s hard to overcome that label when you were on their payroll for 20 years.
Comment by GK — May 2, 2008 @ 12:18 pm
Twinkle has a TV commercial up on YouTube. You can see it here http://youtube.com/watch?v=WcVOmGNS5qY
Comment by Chancey is the Ding Dong — May 2, 2008 @ 12:30 pm
You may have good reason to disagree with Twinkle politically, but by all accounts, she is a fine person and a committed Christian.
The Republicans have three good candidates for PSC President. Any of them are preferable to Lucy Baxley for PSC President.
Having spoken well of Twinkle, may I also express respect for Jack Hornaday and support for the candidacy of Matt Chancey www.mattchancey.com
Comment by John Killian — May 3, 2008 @ 12:00 am
Twinkle
She is a couple fries short of a happy meal.
And not a good politician either.
Comment by anonymous lucy — May 3, 2008 @ 6:10 am
I don’t know much about Twinkle personally other than she has been very involved politically. I would guess that John’s opinion of her is grounded in fact. Matt Chancey does seem like a fine young fellow. However, the end analysis on this position is not difficult. Jack Hornady is by far the most qualified.
If this position was - by nature - a political one, then Twinkle and/or Chancey could make a stronger case for consumers to “hire” them. But this job is professional and administrative. Twinkle and Chancey quite frankly would not meet any minimum requirements for a position like this in the “real world” while Jack Hornady not only meets the minimun requirements, but exceeds them. And I have read each candidates’ bio carefully before making that statement.
And John I would guess I agree with you 99% of the time - just not on this one.
Comment by Good points, John . . .but . . . — May 4, 2008 @ 10:32 am
Please know that I have a high opinion of Jack Hornaday. I agree that he is uniquely qualified.
Here is my one concern–two years ago, Hornaday had all of the newspaper endorsements, but his campaign was invisible.
Twinkle Cavanaugh and Matt Chancey are raising funds for an aggressive campaign. Is the Hornaday campaign active?
No questions on Horaday’s character and qualifications– let’s just see how serious is his candidacy.
Comment by John Killian — May 4, 2008 @ 12:25 pm
John I agree that we have two candidates raising funds for an agressive campaign. But that should be of zero value to voters.
This job SHOULD be filled by someone who is qualified. You will notice I said SHOULD as I am not naive enough to think that political money doeesn’t usually decide these things. But consumers are not well served when politicians fill this position.
I would hope that voters will vote for the best cndidate -and that is clear in this election - regardless of how much political money they raise.
Will that happen? I do not know. But we owe it to ourselves to suppoprt the best candidate for this state and that’s Hornady.
Comment by Anonymous — May 5, 2008 @ 8:18 am