DAPHNE — All seven candidates for United States Congressional District 1 weighed in on Wednesday’s U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) ruling in Louisiana v. Callais, finding that the use of race-based redistricting is unconstitutional.
Jerry Carl, Jimmy Dees, Rhett Marques, Joshua McKee, John Mills, James Richardson and Austin Sidwell participated in the Baldwin County Republican Party’s forum at the Daphne Civic Center.
Moderators were 1819 News editor-in-chief and host of Mobile radio FM Talk 106.5's “The Jeff Poor Show” Jeff Poor and WTVY news director Ken Curtis.
The candidates were asked about Social Security, the minimum wage, rural healthcare, Mobile Bay mud dumping, carbon storage and the I-10 Mobile River Bridge and Bayway project. On redistricting, the candidates were asked about their reaction and how the state should react.
McKee said he sees a clear need to draw districts based on the people and their needs.
“Right now, we have a lot going on in District 1, from the Port of Mobile all the way up to the Wiregrass and peanuts, and you have tourism and manufacturing in between,” said McKee. “So, how is it to have a representative that cover all of these different areas, these daily lives of these people, if the district is drawn out like this? I think that it would be great for Alabama if we could turn around and get our districts back to the best representation possible. For them, the sooner the better.”
Marques said the landmark case will have lasting effects that will spread across the country, but his focus is on the current district.
“The Louisiana case will go across the country, but right now, all I'm focused on is the first congressional district,” Marques said. “I grew up here in Baldwin County. I know this area. I lived in the Wiregrass. I know how to represent both sides. This is the map that we have now. This is the congressional district that we have now. I can't worry about what's going to happen in the future. I can't predict the future. I know what it is now, and I can represent this district.”
Mills said he supports whatever decision is made, but realized it could create issues if changed in the middle of an election year.
“So, putting it back the way it was is not necessarily a bad idea, because you can better represent the new lines, if you will,” said Mills. “As far as when they do it, I have no idea. I heard they could do it now. But the special session hasn't been called yet, so who knows when it will happen. I think it will be a little bit of chaos if it happens during this race, but I know what District 1 is. It goes from the Mississippi line all the way to the Georgia line. It's nine counties. It's difficult to cover all that area, so whatever the decision is, I'm there.”
Richardson emphasized his respect for authority, saying that his military experience has taught him to accept whatever decisions are made.
“Right now, I'm focused on the task at hand, which is the current congressional district one,” Richardson answered. “What happens in the back, that's not my problem at the moment. What happens now is I focus on the people, and I focus on listening to the people. If they change the district, then I'll change and go towards that mission. But my focus will always be on the people and listening to the people.”
Sidwell gave a legal answer, saying that as the only candidate who had graduated from law school.
“So actually, the avenue for the state to do something prior to the primaries is not through the governor's office, it's through the attorney general's office,” Sidwell explained. “Because there's a current appeal of the case a couple years ago that is on appeal, and we could file to have that brought back and then we can apply the previous districts to this case. I'm all for that. I think, as one of the candidates who hasn't taken dark money, it would negatively affect me, but for the people, you have to be represented in a district that actually matches up economically. So I'm all for it, we need to get it done, and as a super-majority, supposed conservative state, I would hope that we would be fighting for more seats in Congress.”
Carl said he has suffered the most from redistricting in Alabama, but he wants to see the lines redrawn quickly.
“I spent two terms in Congress, and both terms in Congress, my district was changed or altered in some way,” Carl said. “The third one was when the two districts were merged together. I ran businesses for 40 years in multi-states. It's not rocket science to run this as one district. Wiregrass, the Gulf Coast, we can all work together under one congressman. It's not a problem. But what I do want to take advantage of is the opportunity for us, as a Republican Party, to take all seven districts in this state. We've got districts in California and Virginia that are going to be losing. We've got to make it up somewhere, so let's make it up right here.”
Dees said the decision will not affect his campaign.
“To me, it's all noise,” he said. “It doesn't affect what's going on during this campaign. If it means we send one more Republican to Washington, great. And if they actually deal with meaningful immigration reform, health care reform, if they actually address the amount of money that we're spending on debt and on programs where there's fraud and no one wants to address the fraud, then great. Let's do that. But if it just means we're going to send one more person up there, it's going to be the status quo. To me, it's just all noise.”
To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email [email protected].
Don't miss out! Subscribe to our newsletter and get our top stories every day or become a member to gain access to exclusive content and 1819 News merch.
