Abortion issue could get complicated in Alabama if Roe is overturned
By MARY SELL, Alabama Daily News
If the U.S. Supreme Court ends the constitutional right to an abortion, a voter-approved 2018 Alabama constitutional amendment “to ensure the protection of the rights of the unborn child” will play a big part in shaping the state’s future abortion laws.
Let’s step back a bit. The Legislature has passed multiple measures regulating abortion. First, in 2011 it enacted a ban on abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, with exceptions for rape, incest, viability of the fetus and life of the mother. This law remains the law of the land as others are held up in court. Then, in 2018, lawmakers passed and voters approved a constitutional amendment enshrining Alabama as a pro-life state and codifying rights for the unborn. Finally, in 2019, a near-total abortion ban was passed. That law is currently enjoined in federal court.
If Roe v. Wade is overturned as indicated in a leaked February draft opinion, Alabama’s 2019 law could become effective. It outlaws abortions when a woman is “known to be pregnant.” Performing or attempting to perform abortions is a felony and there are no exemptions for rape or incest.
Even if lawmakers want to add exceptions for rape and incest to the near-total abortion ban law passed in 2019, that 2018 constitutional amendment could lead to a state-level legal fight.
“The (2018 amendment) talks about the protection of the life of the unborn,” Eric Johnston, a pro-life advocate who has helped draft several Alabama bills, including the 2019 law. “And it doesn’t matter how you are conceived — rape, incest, in vitro, married or not married — it doesn’t matter. Once you’re conceived, you’re a developing person.
“… When the Alabama constitutional amendment says we respect the rights of the unborn, it would be hard to make that distinction (and make exceptions).”
Rep. Terri Collins, R-Decatur, sponsored that 2019 law with the goal of overturning Roe. Even after its passage, Collins said it wasn’t her preferred law and she’d rather see legislation she’d previously sponsored multiple times that banned abortion if a fetal heartbeat is detected. That legislation also allowed for exceptions for rape and incest.
“In Alabama, if Roe Vs. Wade is overturned, and that was the purpose of our Human Life Protection Act in ’19, in my mind what that would do is send that ability back to the states to make our own laws, and we’d want to decide what our laws about abortion are in Alabama,” Collins, R-Decatur, told Alabama Daily News recently.
She said she will likely bring a new bill proposal to the Legislature next year.
Johnston and others are careful to say they’re speculating about the pending SCOTUS ruling, if it looks like the draft leaked last week, the 2019 law, previously enjoined by a federal judge, could go into effect.
“If (there were attempts to add exceptions), you’d be running afoul of the Alabama Constitution,” Johnston said.
Othni Lathram, director of the Legislature Services Agency, which helps lawmakers draft bills, said the state needs to take this scenario one domino at a time, and the first to fall will be a real SCOTUS option and whether it leaves abortion access up to individual states.
The state constitution amendment comes into play several dominos down the row, if lawmakers tried to change the 2019 law.
“Should lawmakers attempt to pass a bill that includes exceptions or exclusions, then I think there is likely to be a legal challenge under the state’s constitution as to whether that would be permissible,” Lathram told Alabama Daily News.
Johnston said the Alabama Pro-Life Coalition, of which he is the president, would oppose changes to the 2019 law.
Rep. Chris England, D-Tuscaloosa, said the constitutional amendment would likely be “the base” state laws are built from. The attorney and chair of the state Democrats said that while the amendment doesn’t provide penalties or enforcement mechanisms, it would give anti-abortion advocates grounds to sue over future laws.
“There’s a lot of complicated discussions that are going to have to occur because we didn’t do the right thing or the responsible thing in the first place and pass laws for the purpose of governing versus passing laws to challenge Supreme Court precedent,” England said.
“I think you have to start from the position that if Roe vs. Wade is overturned, the Constitution completely outlaws the procedure,” England said.
Robin Marty, operations director at West Alabama Women’s Center, said Amendment 2 isn’t a “personhood” amendment because it doesn’t define when life begins, instead referring to “the unborn” and was likely written to be ambiguous. It gives lawmakers the ability to ban abortion “in whatever form they want to, when they are given the ability,” she said.
Marty called those who want the 2019 total ban anti-abortion extremists.
“There are a lot people who believed they were getting a total abortion ban for the point of having a total abortion ban and they do believe in the moment of conception and it doesn’t matter how that was created, it doesn’t matter if there’s no chance of survival outside the womb,” Marty said. “… That’s going to be an interesting thing to see play out.”
For Marty and other abortion advocates, the biggest current concern is a pre-Roe abortion prohibition that would become enforceable the moment Roe is overturned. Marty said providers have been advised to stop all procedures should that ruling arrive.
England said the legal ramifications of Amendment 2 go beyond abortions, including to people who used in vitro fertilizations to conceive and have frozen embryos for possible use later.
Senate race: Where we are
The Republican primary for Alabama’s open U.S. Senate seat has gotten wild and wooly in the last few weeks. Here in the homestretch of the campaign, Katie Britt has taken a commanding lead over Mike Durant and Mo Brooks, both of whom have previously been frontrunners themselves.
Let’s review the polls. Our Alabama Daily News / Gray Television poll with Cygnal taken May 6-7 showed:
- Katie Britt: 32%
- Mo Brooks: 22.5%
- Mike Durant: 21.4%
- Undecided: 15%
As a reminder, here’s how those numbers have shifted since we started polling in August:
|Candidate||May 2022||March 2022||August 2021|
A Forestry Association taken by McLaughlin and Associates on May 9-12 showed:
- Katie Britt 37%
- Mike Durant: 31%
- Mo Brooks 21%
- Undecided: 12%
Thankfully, Forestry seems to be doing weekly tracking now. So, for comparison sake, the same McLaughlin poll in a week earlier showed:
- Katie Britt: 38.6%
- Mike Durant: 27.4%
- Mo Brooks: 22%
- Undecided: 12%
There is now plenty of evidence to conclude that Britt is leading the race and should comfortably make the runoff. It is also safe to say that, at this point, both Durant and Brooks have a shot at making the runoff. Interestingly, those candidates have been mostly unwilling to take shots at each other, rather choosing to aim their fire at Britt. That has up to this point made sense in that whichever made it into the runoff would probably want the other’s endorsement. But that status quo may change with just a week to go until Election Day. Durant has plenty of money and could easily knock Brooks down a peg to ensure himself a spot in the runoff, but will he? Brooks’ resources are more limited so any shots he takes would be via earned media.
It also matters a great deal to Britt which candidate she faces in the runoff. Conventional wisdom says she would rather face Brooks, whose favorability is underwater with likely Republican voters. That means more voters view him unfavorably than favorably. The ADN/Gray poll showed him at -5.4% underwater, while the Forestry/McLaughlin poll showed him at -6.2% underwater. Here are those numbers:
|Candidate||Fav||Unfav||No Opinion||Never heard of||NET Fav|
Also working in that argument’s favor is that, according to the McLaughlin poll, Durant is the leading “second choice” candidate among primary voters. A full 25% say Durant is their second choice, compared to 17.2 for Brooks and 21.6% for Britt.
However, this could be a case of be careful what you ask for. While Brooks is not nearly the force he was before imploding this spring, he is seeing somewhat of a resurgence, to the tune of six points in the ADN/Gray poll. Plus, he’s already seen the worst thing possible happen to him in losing the Trump endorsement. Perhaps the most powerful reason Britt should be wary of Brooks in a runoff is that the Club for Growth would almost certainly engage, perhaps to the tune of $2 million spent attacking Britt over the airwaves. Up to this point, Britt has been pretty resilient in the face of attacks, but that kind of money could have an effect, especially among a smaller electorate. And speaking of the electorate, remember that the 5th district congressional race is likely to go to a runoff as well, meaning a more energized turnout in Brooks’ backyard.
It’s a somewhat similar situation to 2010, when Bradley Byrne, Tim James and Robert Bentley were all vying for the Republican nomination for governor. Byrne was the frontrunner and conventional wisdom said he would rather face the relatively unknown Bentley in the runoff. But some argued that the opposite was true. Byrne had already defeated James, largely through the TV ad about the toll bridge deal, and James was headed on a downward trajectory. On the other hand, Bentley’s numbers had been climbing as he positioned himself as the nice alternative to the two mean guys battling it out at the top of the ticket. And there wasn’t much about Bentley one could easily attack. There were many reasons Byrne ultimately lost that runoff, including several millions in AEA’s onslaught against him. But, it is interesting to think about what might have happened if the Byrne campaign would have eased up just a bit on James toward the end and kept him in the runoff instead of Bentley.
In the same way, Britt and her allies seem to have Durant on a downward trajectory after this deluge of attack ads. Could Brooks be the Bentley in this scenario? A spoiler with a well-funded interest group at his back?
All that said, if Brooks is in the runoff, Britt would almost certainly win the endorsement of former President Donald Trump, who wants to notch a win in the race and doesn’t want to be embarrassed by a Brooks comeback. That could very well put things over the top for Britt, despite all the other factors in Brooks’ favor.
Campaign finance and spending update: Senate
Going into the homestretch, Mike Durant continues to have the advantage money-wise, according to the latest campaign finance reports. The Army veteran and Huntsville defense contractor loaned his campaign another $2.65 million, bringing the total he has personally spent this race up to $9.45 million. After taking in another $83,215 in contributions and spending $3.8 million, Durant’s cash on hand sits at $3 million.
Katie Britt is close behind with $2.78 million cash on hand after raising $419,123 and spending $1.6 million last month. All told, Britt has raised $6.394 million this election.
Mo Brooks sits at $677,099 cash on hand after raising $122,945 and spending $1 million last month. Brooks has raised a total of $2.8 million this cycle.
What really matters is how the campaigns, and the involved political committees, are spending their money. Alabama Daily News / Inside Alabama Politics has tracked the amounts being spent on TV and radio via disclosures to the Federal Communications Commission. These latest data should include ads run up to the election because most ad buys have already been placed.
Campaign-led TV & Radio
- Katie Britt campaign: $3,125,000
- Mo Brooks campaign: $1,227,665
- Mike Durant campaign: $3,154,937
Super PACS supporting or opposing candidates
- Alabama Christian Conservatives PAC: $1,776,028 (pro Britt)
- Alabama Conservative Fund PAC: $2,180,607 (pro Britt)
- Alabama Patriots PAC: $3,165,413 (pro Durant)
- Alabama Rhino PAC: $1,836,546 (negative Durant)
- Alabama’s Future PAC: $3,612,725 (negative Brooks)
- Club for Growth PAC: $4,334,536 (negative Britt some pro Brooks)
- Conservative Outsider PAC: $762,640 (negative Britt)
- School Freedom Fund: $546,398 (negative Britt)
Quick math shows that total positive TV and radio for Britt comes to $7,081,635, while total negative spent comes to about $3.5 million. We are including half of what Club for Growth spent because the group aired ads both positive toward Brooks and negative toward Britt.
Total positive for Durant comes to $6,320,350 while total negative is $1,836,546.
Brooks is the only candidate to be underwater in negative versus positive spending. In total, about $3.4 million has been spent supporting Brooks, again taking half of Club for Growth’s numbers, while $3.6 million has been spent attacking him.
Some demographic data
Digging into the cross tabs from our ADN/Gray TV poll, there are some interesting demographic trends to note in the Senate race. One is that Durant’s slide and Britt’s climb can be most easily seen among female voters. Between the March poll and the May poll, Durant saw a big drop off among all ages of women – a demographic he had been mostly dominating.
- Among women 18-39, Durant lost 5.7% to now have 7.5%.
- Among women 40-45, Durant lost a whopping 24.6% vote share to now have just 18%.
- Among women 55-69, Durant lost 11.4% to stand at 19.6%.
- And among women 70+ Durant lost 18.5% vote share to now stand at 22.2%.
On the other hand, growing her support among women has been key to Britt’s climb. It’s a demographic she struggled with early in the campaign but is now doing better.
- Among women 18-39, Britt gained 24.1% to now hold 61.9% of that vote.
- Among women 40-45, Britt gained 12.7% to now claim 40.4%
- Among women 55-69, Britt gained 8.3% to now have 35%.
- And among women 70+, Britt gained 3.1%.
What is also curious is how many of the 70+ women who left Durant have not chosen another candidate. In March, just 9.2% of such voters were undecided in the race. That number almost doubled to 19.8% in May.
See screenshots of the cross tabs below.
We greatly value our ADN Insiders. As a paid subscriber of the ADN community, you’re supporting our fund brand of quality reporting and insider talk.
Our goal is to provide value, which is why we offer you the full toplines and crosstabs from the latest ADN/Gray poll on the Senate and governor races. There’s a lot of information therein and political junkies can have a lot of fun.
Download at the links below.
Can we talk about the postcard?
Campaigns can get weird down the stretch. Consultants and campaign staff are tired and on edge, to say nothing of the candidates who have logged countless hours pressing the flesh for votes. The voters finally start paying attention, which results in the numbers really starting to move, which only puts campaigns even more on edge. Perhaps some of that could explain the weirdness that took place last week when a postcard blew up the Alabama Senate race for a few days.
Mike Durant took to Twitter Thursday to share a postcard he had purportedly received from Lincoln Project co-founder Rick Wilson. The background here is that Durant has for weeks pushed back against attacks that a different co-founder of the Lincoln Project is backing him through contributing to a super PAC supporting his campaign. Those attacks, mostly launched by the anti-Durant RINO PAC, have been largely responsible for his recent slide in the polls. The Lincoln Project is a political group established by former Republicans to oppose former president Donald Trump and any Republican supported by or aligning themselves with Trump. In MAGA world, they are among the most despised groups, and Wilson is among the most hated media figures.
The note criticized Durant for supporting Trump on the campaign trail. “Do you honestly think aligning yourself with Trump is a good idea?” the postcard said, noting that Trump had previously spoken harshly against other veterans who had been shot down and captured in combat.
Apparently seeing an opportunity to distance himself from the Lincoln Project, Durant shared a photo of the postcard and said Wilson and the Lincoln Project hate him because he’s a “pro-Trump, pro-gun conservative patriot.”
“It is no wonder why Rick Wilson and the Lincoln Project hate our campaign. I am a pro-Trump, pro-life and pro-gun conservative patriot who will fight the establishment in Washington. The RINOs like Wilson are scared of an outsider like me. They should be,” Durant tweeted.
But Wilson quickly took to Twitter himself with a brutal response, saying he didn’t send the postcard, didn’t ask anyone to do it on his behalf and “didn’t have a single f#%* to give about you and haven’t bothered to follow your race.”
At the end of the day the back and forth only served to get people talking about Durant and the anti-Trump group. In one Twitter exchange, Wilson told Durant “you still have my total (and) complete endorsement.”
That is, of course, meant to be the kiss of death, considering how Trump Republicans loathe Wilson and the Lincoln Project.
There were many tweets, but these are the main ones:
It is no wonder why Rick Wilson and the Lincoln Project hate our campaign.
I am a pro-Trump, pro-life and pro-gun conservative patriot who will fight the establishment in Washington.
The RINOs like Wilson are scared of an outsider like me. They should be. #alsen #alpolitics pic.twitter.com/CsdgpR9Ktj
— Mike Durant (@MikeDurantAL) May 12, 2022
Let’s be clear.
I didn’t send that card to you, not did I direct anyone else to, either.
I haven’t been in Seattle in over a year, that’s not my handwriting, and most importantly, I don’t have a single fuck to give about you and haven’t bothered to follow your race. https://t.co/82KpY90bk6
— Rick Wilson (@TheRickWilson) May 12, 2022
4/ But you know, I’m a generous and helpful guy behind my cruel and cutting exterior.
So, @MikeDurantAL, because of your play, I am officially giving you My Total And Complete Endorsement.
Now watch what the other campaigns do with that.
— Rick Wilson (@TheRickWilson) May 12, 2022
Let’s be clear, this was a mistake on behalf of Durant or his campaign. No matter the origin of the postcard, tweeting and sending out press releases about the Lincoln Project will only produce more stories about the group’s alleged connection with Durant. Some IAP sources have indicated that this was the candidate himself insisting on this tack, which anyone who has worked on a campaign will tell you can happen. Many times the staff’s job is to keep the candidate focused and avoid self-inflicted wounds like this. Some have speculated that the Durant campaign team concocted the postcard and engineered the episode on its own, which would be a whole different level of political malpractice. Others have theorized that the postcard came from one of the other campaigns who were attempting to dupe Durant.
But, if you look closely at the postcard there is a much simpler explanation that emerges. The last sentence of the note appears to be quoting Rick Wilson saying “Everything Trump Touches Dies,” which is the title of Wilson’s book. The inclusion of Wilson’s name is not a postcard signature, but an attribution of the quote. Occam’s razor: the simplest explanation is most times the correct one. Someone, presumably upset with Durant for his embrace of Trump on the campaign trail, sent a postcard with a Rick Wilson quote. Durant, a staffer or perhaps both didn’t look closely enough, thought it was actually from Wilson and saw it as an opportunity to change the Lincoln Project narrative. Whoops.
Governor race: Where we are
There have been two publicly released polls in the last week that show some pretty different scenarios in the GOP primary for governor. First, the ADN/Gray poll from Cygnal showed incumbent Gov. Kay Ivey slipping six points since March and firmly headed to a runoff, as Tim James and Lindy Blanchard battle for the second spot.
|Candidate||May 2022||March 2022||August 2021|
Second, Forestry/McLaughlin had a poll showing Ivey in much better shape, winning without a runoff at 51.8% of the vote. Blanchard and James were tied at 15%.
For what it’s worth, internal polling from the Ivey campaign has consistently had her in the mid-50s, while internal polling from the Blanchard campaign has the governor in the mid-40s.
The Cygnal poll was vexing because it also showed Ivey with a 67.2% job approval rating and 70% favorability rating. That means 30% of respondents who said they had a favorable opinion of Ivey did not select her as their choice if the election was held today. What gives?
Looking further into the polling, of that 70% with a favorable view of Ivey, only half – 35% – have a VERY favorable view. The other half have a SOMEWHAT favorable view. It is those voters who are wandering, according to the polling cross tabs. Of that segment with a somewhat favorable view, 35% are still with Ivey, 18% are with James, 15% are with Blanchard and a full 21% remain undecided.
Make no mistake: whether or not Ivey wins outright on Election Day will be decided by voters with a somewhat favorable opinion of her.
Should the race go to a runoff, Ivey would be favored heavily. One principle reason why is that the air war dynamic would change. James and Blanchard have spent millions attacking Ivey over TV and radio, but she hasn’t laid a finger on either of them. That would obviously change during a runoff. The Ivey camp is probably loaded to bear with ads ready to land soon after votes are counted.
Which candidate would Ivey rather face in the runoff? Probably James, simply because the oppo file is so deep and rich. Someone could put a fresh coat of paint on Byrne’s toll bridge ad from 2010 and call it a day. Blanchard is harder to attack, and there are always her consultant’s ties to Trump world that would be worrisome for the Ivey camp.
Campaign Finance and Spending Update: Governor
According to the latest campaign finance reports, Gov. Kay Ivey has $816,905 cash on hand after taking in more than $1.3 million and spending more than $3.1 million from April 1 to May 9. The lion’s share has been on TV advertising, with more than $2.64 million going to Flashpoint Media, the Ivey campaign’s buyer.
Tim James has $453,396 cash on hand after raising $773,590 from April 1 to May 9. The James campaign spent more than $1.4 million on TV and radio ads, mostly through Red Eagle Media.
Lindy Blanchard has $621,285 cash on hand after spending about $1.7 million on TV and radio from April 1 to May 9. That spending is split between Multi Media Service Corp, which took in $1.04 million and Barbee Media that got $301,092.
Adding it all up
It’s not over yet, but this election cycle will likely set records for election spending in Alabama. Our back-of-the-napkin math shows that $25.7 million alone was spent on radio and TV in the Senate primary. It’s harder to calculate, but another at least $10.3 million was spent on TV and radio in the governor’s race.
So not counting all the other races on the ballot, those races have so far amounted to more than $36 million in TV and radio ads. It’s a good year to be a general manager.
Another business vs. trial lawyer proxy war
During the tort wars of the 1990s and into the 2000s, business groups and trial lawyers would go toe-to-toe in pretty much every judicial race on the ballot. Those battles tend to be lower profile these days as the political landscape has changed quite a bit. Perhaps the biggest change is that the trial lawyers changed their name to the Alabama Association for Justice and learned to speak Republicans’ language after the GOP won a legislative super majority in 2010.
Yet, every now and then, a classic Trial versus Business contest emerges, and that seems to be the case with this year’s GOP primary for the Supreme Court. That’s thanks to a surge of funding at the last minute revealed by recent campaign finance reports.
Greg Cook is backed by “who’s who” of business groups, including the Business Council of Alabama, the Alabama Association of Realtors, the Alabama Trucking Association, the Alabama Farmers Federation, the Alabama Retail Association, the Alabama Hospital Association, the Alabama Homebuilders and the Associated General Contractors, among others. These groups have funded the bulk of his campaign going back several weeks and months.
On the other hand, the bulk of funding for Debra Jones’ campaign has come in swiftly in the last several days – and those contributions are coming from mostly trial lawyers and affiliated PACs. Progress for Justice PAC, Trial’s premiere committee, contributed $654,500. BIZPAC, a Heather Coleman PAC that often plays in races with Trial, contributed $515,000. Other Trial-affiliated PACs have also given to Jones, including FAIR PAC at $95,000, CRA PAC at $80,000, Free Enterprise PAC at $50,000 and Mainstream PAC at $20,000. Additionally, 27 individual law firms have contributed to Jones totaling more than $130,000.
This has been a clever and effective tactic in recent election cycles for the trial lawyers. Without much movement early in the race, the business community could be lulled to sleep with a false sense of security thinking its candidate had a comfortable lead. Then, at the last minute, money flows and ad buys get placed, when it might be too late for business groups to react.
This year, the business side seems to have been more prepared. Trucking and BCA each went in for another $25,000 contribution to Cook in the last week. That puts them at $125,000 and $70,000 total this spring, respectively. Realtors not only gave Cook a $100,000 contribution but went beyond to invest in an independent expenditure campaign ad (more on that in a bit).
The Auto Dealers gave $25,000, Retail gave $15,000, Rural Electric Action PAC gave $10,000, Home builders gave $10,000, Regions Bank gave $10,000, the Medical Association gave $20,000 and the Hospitals gave $10,000.
This proxy war is making the Cook/Jones contest one of the most interesting and consequential races on the ballot. The question is will voters know or care about which sides are supporting which candidate? It used to be a major taboo for Republicans to be supported by trial lawyers. But that was a different political era and, like AEA on the education side, Trial has worked hard to rebrand themselves to appeal to conservatives.
There is some polling on the subject. Back in August, the ADN/Cygnal poll tested whether likely Republican voters had a favorable or unfavorable opinion of judicial candidates who receive funding from trial lawyer groups. A full 62% said they have an unfavorable opinion of those candidates who receive funding from trial lawyer groups.
That is surely the thinking behind the independent expenditure ad from the Realtors supporting Cook saying he will “stand up to trial lawyers and billboard attorneys.” Sources tell IAP that ad caught the attention of Trial and was partially responsible for the late flurry of cash in the last several days.
Reviewing major PAC spending
Not surprisingly, Alabama PACs had a busy month since we last reported on spending activities. Here’s a rundown of how the state’s biggest PACs spent on candidates to finish out April and the first week of May.
The Alabama Education Association’s Voice for AL Children PAC spent $278,332 on candidates in April and May, ending with a balance of $3.1 million in the bank. Those contributions included:
- Philip Ensler $10,000
- Jim Zeigler $10,000
- Juandalynn Givan $5,000
- Ralph Howard $5,000
- Jack Williams $10,000
- Vickie Holloway $7,000
- Pamela Portis $7,000
- Jamie Grant $10,000
- Jamie Kiel $10,000
- Proncey Robertson $10,000
- Tommy Hanes $5,000
- Yvette Richardson $15,000
- Louise Alexander $15,000
- Merika Coleman $15,000
- Ontario Tillman $10,000
LION PAC remains Alabama’s richest PAC with $3.8 million, but continues to hold pat in this election cycle. It has not made any contributions to candidates. IAP previous reported that LION PAC is the fund set up by some of the state’s most prominent companies as a way to pool resources and support candidates who need help or potentially go after candidates it believes need going after. One source said LION PAC was like “a loaded gun sitting on the table.”
Realtors PAC had a very busy April contributing $832,163 to candidates, but still has more than $2 million in the bank. Those contributions included:
- Richard Talley $2,000
- Vanita McClain $2,000
- Jim Hill $1,000
- Doug Reynolds $2,500
- Chip Beeker $2,500
- Jeremy Oden $2,500
- Parker Moore $5,000
- Tim Wadsworth $5,000
- Tommy Hanes $7,500
- Nathaniel Ledbetter $2,500
- Jim Carns $2,500
- Juandalynn Givan $2,500
- Penni McClammy $2,500
- Kenyatte Hassell $2,500
- Shane Stringer $2,500
- Ron Bolton $2,500
- Bill Lamb $2,500
- Donna Givens $2,500
- Marcus Paramore $2,500
- Frances Holk Jones $2,500
- Young Boozer $5,000
- Tracie West $5,000
- Phillip Pettus $5,000
- Proncey Robertson $10,,000
- Gil Isbell $10,000
- Debbie Wood $10,000
- Ginny Shaver $10,000
- Dickie Drake $10,000
- Russell Bedsole $5,000
- John Rogers $5,000
- Neil Rafferty $7,500
- Rod Scott $5,000
- Brett Easterbrook $10,000
- Prince CHestnut $5,000
- Ralph Howard $5,000
- Pebblin Warren $10,000
- Jeff Sorrells $5,000
- Rhett Marques $5,000
- Joe Faust $5,000
- Matt Simpson $10,000
- Sam Jones $5,000
- Jamie Grant $10,000
- Troy Stubbs $5,000
- Ontario Tillman $5,000
- Kevin Dunn $5,000
- Wes Allen $20,000
- Tim Melson $10,000
- Greg Albritton $10,000
- Billy Beasley $10,000
- Kay Ivey $25,000
- Steve Marshall $25,000
- Tom Butler $50,000
- Randy Price $50,000
- Dan Roberts $35,000
- Shay Shelnutt $50,000
- Lind Coleman Madison $35,000
- Tom Whatley $50,000
- Mike Jones $50,000
- And Greg Cook $100,000
The Business Council of Alabama’s ProgressPAC also had a busy month contributing almost $500,000 to candidates in April and the first week of May. The PAC has $1.1 million remaining in the bank. Contributions included:
- Tom Butler $30,000
- Tom Whatley $30,000
- Mike Jones $30,000
- Randy Price $15,000
- Dickie Drake $10,000
- Rhett Marques $5,000
- Proncey Robertson $10,000
- Pebblin Warren $5,000
- Debbie Wood $5,000
- Mike Kirkland $10,000
- James Lomax $5,000
- Phillip Rigsby $2,500
- Rodd Scott $5,000
- Kay Ivey $50,000
- Brad Tompkins $2,500
- Gil Isbell $5,000
- Brock Colvin $5,000
- Ginny Shaver $5,000
- Tim Wadsworth $2,500
- Phillip Pettus $5,000
- Mike Kirkland $15,000
- Matt Simpson $5,000
- Jeff Sorrells $5,000
- Greg Cook $25,000
The Alabama Farmers Federation Farm PAC contributed $188,325 to candidates in April and ended the month with $2.6 million cash on hand. Those contributions included:
- Bill McAdams $2,000
- Brett Easterbrook $1,500
- Kevin Dunn $2,000
- Rod Scott $1,500
- Chris Blackshear $1,500
- Corley Ellis $1,500
- Wes Allen $10,000
- Allen Treadaway $1,500
- David Faulkner $2,000
- Jim Carns $2,500
- Juandalynn Givan $1,500
- Ontario Tillman $2,000
- Brock Colvin $4,800
- Leigh Hulsey $5,100
- Russell Bedsole $1,500
- James Lomax $6,900
- Mike Kirkland $6,200
- Phillip Rigsby $5,400
- Gil Isbell $4,400
- Mike Jones $13,300
- Randy Price $11,900
- Tom Whatley $18,600
- Debbie Wood $4,500
- Proncey Robertson $5,500
- Nathaniel Ledbetter $6,000
- Mark Shirey $4,700
- Ginny Shaver $6,000
- Greg Albritton $12,000
- Matt Woods $6,000
- Patrick Johnson $5,500
- Troy Stubbs $5,600
The Alabama Homebuilders’ Builders PAC contributed about $74,000 to candidates and has $1.8 million cash on hand. Contributions included:
- Patrick Johnson $2,500
- Ron Anders $2,500
- Gil Isbell $2,500
- Proncey Robertson $2,500
- Debbie Wood $2,500
- Brock Colvin $2,500
- Jamie Grant $2,500
- Ron Bolton $2,500
- Brett Easterbrook $5,000
- Tommy Hanes $2,500
- Phillip Pettus $2,500
- Mike Jones $5,000
- Randy Price $5,000
- Tom Whatley $5,000
- Matt Simpson $2,500
- Russ Goodman $500
- Troy Stubbs $2,500
- Tom Whatley $5,000
- Hank Sanders $2,500
- Dickie Drake $2,500
- Greg Cook $10,000
House District 47 update
Hoover City Councilman Mike Shaw will be the Republican nominee in District 47, sources tell IAP. The other nominees considered included Earl Cooper and Ken McFeeters. As IAP previously reported, the ALGOP process to replace the deceased Rep. David Wheeler on the November ballot included a sub-committee of Executive Committee members who reviewed applications and interviewed candidates. The subcommittee included former State Rep. Paul DeMarco, current State Rep. Jim Carns, Phillip Brown, Sally Bryant and Renee Powers. Joel Blankenship was the non-voting chairman.
There will be a Democrat on the November ballot. Christian Coleman and Jim Toomey are Democrat candidates on the May 24 primary ballot.
House Race Chart
|District||Incumbent||2022 Status||Announced candidates|
|1||Phillip Pettus||Running||Maurice McCaney (R)|
|2||Lynn Greer||Open seat||Jason Spencer Black, (R), Kimberly Butler (R), Ben Harrison (R), Terrance Irelan (R)|
|3||Andrew Sorrell||Open Seat||Susan Bentley (D), Wesley Thompson (D). Fred Joly (R), Kerry Underwood (R)|
|4||Parker Moore||Running||Patrick Johnson (R), Sheila Banister (R)|
|7||Proncey Robertson||Running||Ernie Yarbrough (R), Moses Jones Jr. (D)|
|10||Mike Ball||Open Seat||David Cole (R), Marilyn Lands (D)|
|12||Corey Harbison||Running||James C. Fields Jr. (D)|
|13||Connie Rowe||Open Seat||Greg Barnes (R), Keith Davis (R), Christopher Dozier (R), Charles Waits (R), Matt Woods (R)|
|14||Tim Wadsworth||Running||Cory Franks (R), Tom Fredricks (R)|
|15||Allen Farley||Open Seat||Leigh Hulsey (R), Richard Rouco (D), Brad Tompkins (R)|
|20||Howard Sanderford||Open Seat||James D. Brown (R), Frances Taylor (R), Angela McClure (R), James Lomax (R)|
|23||Tommy Hanes||Running||Mike Kirkland (R)|
|24||Nathaniel Ledbetter||Running||Don Stout (R)|
|25||Mac McCutcheon||Open Seat||Buck Clemons (R), Mallory Hagan (D), Phillip Rigsby (R)|
|26||Kerry Rich||Open seat||Ben Alford (D), Brock Colvin (R), Annette Holcomb (R), Todd Mitchem (R)|
|27||Wes Kitchens||Running||Herb Neu (D)|
|28||Gil Isbell||Running||Mack Butler (R)|
|29||Becky Nordgren||Open Seat||Mark Gidley (R), Jamie Grant (R)|
|31||Mike Holmes||Open seat||R.T. Barksdale (R), Chadwick Smith (R), Troy Stubbs (R)|
|32||Barbara Boyd||Running||Evan Jackson (R)|
|33||Ben Robbins||Running||Fred Crum Sr. (D)|
|38||Debbie Wood||Running||Micah Messer (R)|
|39||Ginny Shaver||Running||Brent Rhodes (R)|
|40||K.L. Brown||Open Seat||Gayla Blanton (R), Julie Borrelli (R), Katie Exum (R), Pam Howard (D), Bill Lester (R), Bill McAdams (R), Chad Robertson (R), Jakob Williamson (D)|
|41||Corley Ellis||Running||Chris Nelson (D)|
|43||Arnold Mooney||Running||Prince Cleveland (D)|
|45||Dickie Drake||Running||Susan Dubose (R)|
|47||David Wheeler||Open Seat||Christian Coleman (D), Jim Toomey (D), Republican yet to be named|
|48||Jim Carns||Running||William Wentowski (R)|
|49||Russell Bedsole||Running||Michael Hart (R)|
|52||John Rogers||Running||LaTanya Millhouse (D)|
|54||Neil Rafferty||Running||Britt Blalock (D), Edward Maddox (D)|
|55||Rod Scott||Running||Travis Hendrix (D), Phyllis Oden-Jones (D), Fred "Coach" Plump (D), Antwon Womack (D)|
|56||Louise Alexander||Open Seat||Tereshia Huffman (D), Cleo King (D), Jesse Matthews (D), Ontario Tillman (D)|
|57||Merika Coleman||Open Seat||Kevin Dunn (D), Danielle Matthews (D), Charles Ray Winston III (D), Delor Baumann (R)|
|60||Juandalynn Givan||Running||Nina Taylor (D)|
|61||Rodney Sullivan||Open Seat||Ron Bolton (R), Kimberly Madison (R)|
|62||Rich Wingo||Open Seat||Brenda Cephus (D) Bill Lamb (R)|
|63||Cynthia Almond||Running||Samual Adams (D)|
|64||Harry Shiver||Open Seat||Angelo Jacob Fermo (R), Donna Givens (R)|
|65||Brett Easterbrook||Running||Dee Ann Campbell (R), Marcus Caster (D)|
|67||Prince Chestnut||Running||Laurine Pettway (D), Jarmal Jabbar Sanders (R)|
|68||Thomas Jackson||Running||Fred Kelley (R)|
|69||Kelvin Lawrence||Running||Karla Knight Maddox (R)|
|72||Ralph Howard||Running||Curtis Travis (D)|
|74||Charlotte Meadows||Running||Malcolm Calhoun (D), Phillip Ensler (D)|
|82||Pebblin Warren||Running||Terrence Johnson (D), Lennora Tia Pierrot (R)|
|85||Dexter Grimsley||Running||Payne Henderson (R)|
|87||Jeff Sorrells||Running||Eric E. Johnson (R)|
|88||Will Dismukes||Running||Will Dismukes (R), Jerry Starnes (R)|
|89||Wes Allen||Open Seat||Marcus Paramore (R)|
|91||Rhett Marques||Running||Les Hogan (R)|
|92||Mike Jones, Jr.||Open Seat||Steve Hubbard (D), Greg White (R), Matthew Hammett (R)|
|94||Joe Faust||Running||Jennifer Fidler (R)|
|95||Steve McMillan||Open Seat||Frances Holk-Jones (R), Richard Brackner(D), Michael Ludvigsen (R), Reginald Pulliam (R)|
|96||Matt Simpson||Running||Danielle Duggar (R)|
|99||Sam Jones||Running||Levi Wright Jr. (D)|
|100||Victor Gaston||Open Seat||Pete Kupfer (R), Joe Piggot (R), Mark Shirley (R)|
Senate Race Chart
|District||Incumbent||2022 Status||Announced candidates|
|1||Tim Melson||Running||John Sutherland (R)|
|2||Tom Butler||Running||Kim Caudle Lewis (D), Bill Holtzclaw (R)|
|7||Sam Givhan||Running||Korey Wilson (D)|
|11||Jim McClendon||Open Seat||Lance Bell (R), Michael Wright (R)|
|12||Del Marsh||Open Seat||Keith Kelley (R), Wendy Ghee Draper (R), Wayne Willis (R), Danny McCullars (D)|
|13||Randy Price||Running||John Allen Coker (R)|
|15||Dan Roberts||Running||Brian Christine (R)|
|17||Shay Shelnutt||Running||Mike Dunn (R)|
|19||Priscilla Dunn||Open Seat||Merika Coleman (D), Louise Alexander (D)|
|20||Linda Coleman-Madison||Running||Rodney Huntley (D)|
|21||Gerald Allen||Running||Lisa Ward (D)|
|22||Greg Albritton||Running||Stephen Sexton (R)|
|23||Malika Sanders-Fortier||Open Seat||Darrio Melton (D), Michael Nimmer (R), Hank Sanders (D), Thayer Bear Spencer, (D) Robert Stewart (D)|
|27||Tom Whatley||Running||Jay Hovey (R), Sherri Reese (D)|
|28||Billy Beasley||Running||Frank "Chris" Lee (D)|
|29||Donnie Chesteen||Running||Nathan Mathis (D)|
|31||Jimmy Holley||Open Seat||Mike Jones (R), Josh Carnley (R), Norman Horton|
|33||Vivian Figures||Running||Pete Riehm (R)|