Posted by 
Charley Grimsley, Democratic candidate for the Treasurer’s office, is having his candidacy challenged based on the state Democrats’ Radney Rule.
From Associated Press:
A member of the State Democratic Executive Committee, Pam Miles of Huntsville, filed a challenge with the State Democratic Party questioning whether Grimsley can run as a Democrat. She pointed out that Grimsley has contributed to Republican candidates and worked for Republican Lt. Gov. Steve Windom.
The Radney Rule allows a party member to challenge a potential candidate’s ballot qualification if the potential candidate supported a candidate for another party within the last four years. According to the challenge from Miles, Grimsley gave $500 to Secretary of State candidate Beth Chapman in August 2006 when Nancy Worley was the Democratic nominee. Over at Left in Alabama (who was first out with the story), Grimsley’s potential candidacy is finding few friends.
Speaking of the Radney Rule… Democratic political consultant Steve Raby has been mentioned as a potential candidate for Congressional District AL-05. Would he be vulnerable to a Radney Rule challenge himself through contributions he directed to Republicans through his PAC [.pdf]? Or would it be not so much of an issue because the contributions are technically from his PAC (albeit presumably at his direction) and not directly from himself?
Update: Readers have pointed out that the Democratic Party by-laws state that no candidate is permitted to qualify as a Democrat “who did not support the nominees of the Democratic Party in all Special or General Elections during the past four years.” While Raby has given to plenty of Republicans, he seems to do it during primaries, not during the general election cycle where you could say he was not supporting the Democratic nominee, at least as far as I have seen. Furthermore, the by-laws allow such a potential candidate to renounce his previous allegiance, explain the error of her ways, and “If, after such a hearing, the Executive Board is convinced by a preponderance of the evidence that such a person would be an asset to the Democratic Party, the Executive Board may, by a vote of two-thirds of those present and voting, allow that person to seek office as a Democrat.”
And, as has been pointed out, in Raby’s case this may be moot as he has not shown strong inclination to run for AL-05. But haven’t we all learned something.
The state Democratic Party’s by-laws may be found here in .pdf form.
Legislative Dispatch
Purple Dot Connection
2010 Big List
2010 Senate Elections
2010 House Elections
Press Releases
Well, Raby would not be affected, because Dem bylaws state that candidates are prohibited from supporting anyone that opposes a Democratic nominee in any special or general election. Thus, you can contribute to any side during a primary cycle, but not a special or general cycle.
From my understanding, Grimsley has contributed at least $25k to various Republicans over the last 10 years, during both general and primary cycles. Thus, his contribution to Chapman during the recent general election cycle should disqualify him under Radney.
What I find most puzzling are the Repubs that Grimsley supported (Roy Moore, Bob Riley, George Wallace, George Bush, etc.). Its not like he wrote a $500 check to a nephew who was running as a Repub for a state house seat. He supported a murders row of Repubs. Its a wonder he didn’t run against Wallace on the Repub side.
People forget sometimes the Liberal Democrat Secular-Progressive New South Triumvirate in the Alabama Senate was Steve Windom, Bradley Byrne (see facebook group of similar title), and Roger Bedford. Why the GOP accepted Windom and Byrne is simply because they were powerful. Grimsley gave to the Steve Windom he knew as a Democrat the one who was a RINO Lt. Gov. A Windom who would have been much better as Governor than the Party of NO Riley we have now. But, I digress. I guess even Kay Ivey forgets what it means to be a party switcher. And there’s no way Raby is ruled out because of the Radney rule – is there? I mean who’s the other half of his PACs?
The ADP’s bylaws are clear on this issue and it’s clear that Grimsley broke them.
This should be an open and shut case along the lines of the Autugua County Republican candidates (Larry Butler & Kelley Ingram) who violated Republican Party bylaws by supporting Democratic candidates.
http://www.politicalparlor.net/wp/2006/11/21/unmasked/
Charles Grimsley is going to try to whine that this is “back room politics” but it’s actually the party enforcing its own rules.
If candidates aren’t willing to play by the rules, how will they act as elected officials?
How did John Amari pass this rule?
Bhamattorney:
Raby has given to Republicans who have opposed Democrats according the FEC.
http://query.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/qind/
However, I don’t think we will have to worry about it b/c he will mosy likely never run for anything.
oops… and let’s not forget that Grimsley was the grinning guy holding the “jug” for Steve Windom. Who, btw, contributed $1,000 to Grimsley.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3P5M3EyCnfo
Perhaps the bigger question, if Grimesly is out for Treasurer, does that guarantee the seat to Wallace? Dems are playing circular firing squad again.
JJ, I couldn’t pull up your link. Please post again – though, I agree with you. I do not believe Raby will run. He’s had more than enough opportunities prior to this, so why do it now?
Mgm Insider, I’m not sold on Wallace for the Repubs. Wallace is a liability since he created PACT. Plus, can Wallace do better than he did three years ago? I don’t believe he can. I look for someone to get in the race other than Wallace.
The (by)laws and facts are against Grimsley, but politics sometimes disregards both.
A Wallace ad against Grimsley is easy, “Who does Charley Grimsley trust with his money? George Wallace, Jr. The financial reports prove it. Don’t trust a opportunist, flip-flopper. Trust the name you know.”
If Wallace has a liability with PACT, how about the other half of the WALLACE-FOLSOM PACT, Jim Folsom?
I think Pam Miles should be commended for the amazing amount of research she did on this issue that was included in her complaint. People are making too much out of the fact that she is represented on this issue by the law firm that employs Jeremy Sherer, Grimsley’s opponent. I have no doubt that Sherer would be held to the same standard had he ever worked for or given to a Republican. Kudos though to Grimsley for being the only person I know of who self-funded a multi year court fight against the Riley machine and WON. He stopped them dead in their tracks on the Gulf State Park debacle.
On a side note, prayers to Mr. Radney as he broke his hip recently and isn’t doing too well.
Ahh, Pam Miles. Now there is a shining star in our Democratic Party…Pam certainly thrives on attention, but not sure how much pull she has in the actual party base
Brian,
Bradley was not a Democrat when he was in the Senate. He was a solid Republican vote in the Senate.
I sure hope the Dems decide to exclude Grimsley. I’ve heard him speak to a PACT group. He would be a tough opponent in the general election.
Rep. Ball:
By solid Republican vote, I assume that you are referring to Byrne’s support of Amendment One.
No wonder the Tea Party folks don’t like Republicans so much.
BillT you are misinformed. Jeremy Sherer did in fact give to Repubs and did in fact work for a Republican. If they ban Grimsley then they will be forced to ban Sherer. Who would be next on the horizon to run for Treasurer. Looks suspiciously like Pam Miles may have filed the complaint against Grimsley knowing it would blowback on Sherer. Her complaint could eliminate all the competition. Pam Miles for Treasurer?? Dang now THAT is hardball.
Stephen,
The Republicans in both the House and Senate were divided on allowing the people to vote on the Amendment 1 referendum. After the people spoke during that referendum vote in ‘03, we passed some sensible budgets and grew out of the morass.
Bleever,
I don’t think Sherer will be disqualified based upon the four year rule. Sherer was a Democrat in the 2006 election cycle when he ran for state house.
Incidentally, Left in Alabama has made a post that has the entire text of the challenge. BillT was correct, it seems to be very well researched.
http://leftinalabama.com/diary/5656/challenge-hearing-for-charley-grimsley-tomorrow-in-montgomery
Mike Ball:
Did you vote to allow the people to vote on Amendment 1? If so, will you vote to allow us to vote on the bingo? I think that would only be fair.
NOTE: Soapblox (the LIA blog software) has a bug that sometimes breaks internal links.
You can access the Grimsley Motion to Disqualify directly at this link. It’s a PDF:
http://www.leftinalabama.com/upload/AL-SDEC.PDF
Sorry for any annoyance this caused anyone!
Mike,
There wasn’t all that much division, especially in the Senate.
Just think of how much the conservative movement might have moved forward if we hadn’t had to take half a year off (and spend lots of money) to defeat a tax major increase. We could have been doing something more productive with our resources in 2003.
And the issue has caused splits within the party and the movement that exist still to this day.
If you read the entire bylaw, all he has to do it say “i’m sorry” and all will be forgiven.
This is a dead and laughable issue. Its sad that Jeremy choose to go this route with Pam.
JJ,
Yes, I supported having the referendum and the people settled the issue.
My thoughts on a gambling vote can be found here:
http://www.flashpointblog.com/2010/01/17/gambling-alabamas-neverending-controversy/
Thanks for asking.
Bleever, I did a quick search on Mr. Sherer’s contributions and found nothing for republicans….