Democrats say they’ll go to court to remove Rick Crawford from ballot
The chairman of the Georgia Democratic Party this afternoon said he was prepared to go to court to have state Rep. Rick Crawford, D-Cedartown, removed from the November ballot – announcing a zero-tolerance policy for party-switchers.
“If you’re a Democrat, you’re a Democrat. But if you’re not going to be one, we’re coming after you. We’re going to do whatever we have to, to get you out of the office. That’s just good politics,” party chairman Michael Berlon told reporters.
Last week, Crawford, whose west Georgia district has been redrawn, announced he would shift his allegiance to the Republican party – if he survives his re-election bid.
With 16 Democratic officials gathered behind him, Berlon said that the party’s executive committee had stripped Crawford of his membership, and disqualified him as a candidate.
The case is unprecedented. Berlon conceded that Crawford has not withdrawn his candidacy, but in a letter to Secretary of State Brian Kemp, Berlon argued that party disqualification should serve as a legal equivalent – that a state party should be able to control who serves as its representatives.
Read the letter here. Said Berlon:
”If the secretary of state says that the executive committee of the state Democratic party can vote unanimously to take away someone as a nominee, and that’s not sufficient, then we’ve got a bigger issue that we’ve got to speak with the secretary of state about.”
Jared Thomas, a spokesman for Kemp, said the secretary of state could remove a candidate from the ballot only in clear cases of fraud – misstatements of residency, for instance. A statement by Crawford about his future intentions “doesn’t invalidate the earlier qualification with the Democratic party,” Thomas said.
Crawford, a three-term conservative Democrat and a professor of political science at Shorter College, said he decided to make his announcement after Democrats placed an endorsement of same-sex marriage into the platform they adopted at their national convention in Charlotte, N.C.
That was on Sept. 4. If a candidate withdraws 60 days before an election, the executive committee can replace him with a candidate of its choosing.
”If Crawford would have resigned either on the 4th, 5th, or 6th of September, as a party we would have had the option to replace him. Instead he waits til five weeks before the election. I don’t buy it. It’s not intellectually honest,” Berlon said.
Even if Democrats are successful in replacing Crawford, they concede that any candidate they choose is nearly certain to fail. Republicans remain solidly behind Trey Kelley, a 25-year-old manufacturer’s rep.
One reason for Democratic anger is the fact that they’re battling for relevancy. District maps drawn by Republicans last year could produce a two-thirds majority in the chamber that would strip Democrats of nearly any influence.
“Crawford now has us at minus-one in probably one of the most important elections that we’re going to have in a long time,” Berlon said.
Language at the Monday press conference was sharp and personal. “I’m very disappointed in my colleague and what he’s doing,” said state Rep. Roger Bruce, D-Atlanta. Bruce declared party-switching to be “the greatest form of voter suppression that I can think of.”
“It’s denying the public their right to be represented,” he said.
State Rep. Billy Mitchell, D-Stone Mountain, said he had considered Crawford to be a “friend” and “a loyal, dues-paying member of the House caucus.” Then he went on to condemn Crawford’s “intellectual dishonesty,” accusing him of making the switch for “political gain.”
We contacted Crawford late this afternoon. He had not heard any of the details of the Democratic assembly. The state lawmaker said his early announcement was an effort to be upfront with voters.
“I frankly think it’s something to be commended,” Crawford said. “God forbid that somebody should be honest about their intentions.”
As for the harsh reaction? “I don’t see but one explanation,” the lawmaker said. “I must be punished because I have challenged their leftist social agenda. Zell was right.”
- By Jim Galloway, Political Insider
For instant updates, follow me on Twitter, or connect with me on Facebook.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
65 comments Add your comment
BitterEXdemocrackkk
October 2nd, 2012
7:24 am
WHY do black folks STILL SUPPORT the VERY party that has kept them (and us ALL) ENSLAVED for 200+ years in America ???
Dont they KNOW that the MLK family were all Republicans, until JFK got MLKJr to jump the fence?
Democrackkks vowed to stop poverty over 50 years ago, and now we have record poverty. WHY is that??? Democrackkks are the founders of the violent KKK, and fought integration! WHY would anyone support these criminals????
honested
October 2nd, 2012
8:04 am
bitter,
Why attach a misguided racial question?
As a white person, I could never, ever vote for a republican or anyone from any party primarily identified as a conserrrrrrrvative.
Because I know better than to let children play with gasoline and matches.
nate from detroit
October 2nd, 2012
8:19 am
I do not live in Mr Crawford’s district now, but I grew up there and have known Mr Crawford since 1975 when we began going to school together in the 7th grade. I have never known him to lie and I don’t believe he is lying now. This further illustrates what is wrong with the political system we have now and I believe our founding fathers are rolling over in their graves. He lives in the district and if the people in that district want him to represent him then so be it, party affiliation should be secondary. Both parties are concerned with power and greed for the party, they are not necessarily concerned with what is best for the constituents that they supposedly represent. The system is broke and needs a complete overhaul. I would be happy with 2 changes: a viable 3rd party and term limits on all congressmen.
Steve Perkins
October 2nd, 2012
9:13 am
Even if we buy the notion that the Representative could not stomach the president’s evolution on Gay marriage, he could have decided to run as a Republican During Wualifying/ He chose to run as a Deocrata and opened the door to Trey Kelly. I assume the representative is also smart enough to read any number of newspapers or websites that sp[oke to the where his party was going to wind up on Marriage Equality from a Platform perspective.. His feign of shock that the Party ratified the plank is utterly ludicrous. He still had time even after the the convention to announce his intention.
I am not denying him the absolute right to switch parties. I take huge issue with his timing. It was cowardly and fraudulent.The Man has raised 4,000 and put himself in the position to be challenged effectively by a Republican with strong ties to GOP leadership.
His only chance of winning might well be to switch parties. And I do not begrudge him that either. The problem is that he did this in a craven way to block the party from having a chance to select a new candidate. That is grossly disrespectful to those who voted for him and the party to which he swore an allegiance. As Chairman Berlon said. You can’t kill your parents and throw yourself on the mercy of the Court saying that you are an orphan.
Every political party has the right to select its nominees. Crawford intentionally denied Democrats that right. He should be disqualified as our nominee and we should be able to field our own candidate.
Bob
October 2nd, 2012
9:15 am
@ honested “As a white person, I could never, ever vote for a republican or anyone from any party primarily identified as a conserrrrrrrvative. Because I know better than to let children play with gasoline and matches.” Yes Honested, Why are the kids in liberal cities being shafted with poor educations ? If beverly hall was in charge of the children you mention they would not be bright enough to know the differance between flammable and non flammable yet the test scores would say they did. Why do liberals hate the poor inner city children that they throw them under the bus to get support from teachers unions. Compare the murder rates between cities like Detroit, Atlanta and others to cities governed by conservatives and you will see how compassionate leftists really are, even if they are white like you. The professor in question let the voters know his intent prior to the election, he was honest about it, something that does not happen enough whether you are on the left or right.
NotATeaPartier
October 2nd, 2012
9:17 am
What else do you expect from the American Taliban aka the Republican Tea Party?
Steve Perkins
October 2nd, 2012
9:18 am
Even if we buy the notion that the Representative could not stomach the president’s evolution on Gay marriage, he could have decided to run as a Republican During qualifying/.He chose to run as a Democrats and opened the door to Trey Kelly. I assume the representative is also smart enough to read any number of newspapers or websites that spoke to the where his party was going to wind up on Marriage Equality from a Platform perspective.. His feign of shock that the Party ratified the plank is utterly ludicrous. He still had time even after the the convention to announce his intention.
I am not denying him the absolute right to switch parties. I take huge issue with his timing. It was cowardly and fraudulent.The Man has raised 4,000 and put himself in the position to be challenged effectively by a Republican with strong ties to GOP leadership.
His only chance of winning might well be to switch parties. And I do not begrudge him that either. The problem is that he did this in a craven way to block the party from having a chance to select a new candidate. That is grossly disrespectful to those who voted for him and the party to which he swore an allegiance. As Chairman Berlon said. You can’t kill your parents and throw yourself on the mercy of the Court saying that you are an orphan.
Every political party has the right to select its nominees. Crawford intentionally denied Democrats that right. He should be disqualified as our nominee and we should be able to field our own candidate.
Bill Orvis White
October 2nd, 2012
9:30 am
I don’t blame the guy from bolting from a party that has strayed so far to the left it is hardly recognizable any longer. What’s wrong with joining a party that espouses common sense, fiscal responsibility, a dedication to life, a pro-business attitude and respect for Judeo-Christian values which this once-free nation was founded on? This is really a no-brainer. GOOD GRIEF AND GOOD NIGHT! Amen, Bill
Bob
October 2nd, 2012
9:32 am
eaglenationrising, October 1st, 2012,
@ MKS: You forgot about the Republicans welcoming nearly every Dixiecrat (Democrats opposed to integration) walking in the 1960s. In other words, if you were a Democrat that was against integration and basic human rights of all Americans, you became a Dixiecrat and then became a Republican. FACT. ” Really ? Dems repeat this lie quite often but your facts and reality do not match. For example, our neighbor, SC, did not have the confederate flag displayed until democrat governot fritz hollings put it up as pushback to the civil rights movement. He was then elected for a long time to the senate as a democrat, fact !. Then look at GA, the dixiecrats were a large portion of the dem party in the 60’s and if your fact was a fact then the dixiecrats would have given the repubs the state 40 years prior to that happening. Ga got it’s first repub gov in 2000 or 2002, if your facts were correct the state would have flipped along time ago. Show us the southern dixiecrats that held federal office that switched. Other that strom Thurmond, maybe one other, where were the party switchers ? People that were against civil rights remained in the dem party and I can name several that did not switch and stayed in the dem party until they retired.
Native Georgian
October 2nd, 2012
9:52 am
Wanna know why most blacks vote Democratic? Simple, most racists are Republicans.
Party-switching is pure DISHONESTY no matter which party you’re leaving/entering. I guess it’ll force people to actually start looking at the candidates/issues and stop simply voting along party lines. Imagine that.
Will
October 2nd, 2012
10:32 am
When will republican voters wake up and quit voting for democrats who changed to republican, not because of ideology, but for the sole reason of getting elected?
Do you think we will ever have a republican governor or will we continue to have democrat governors who switched parties in order to win?
GaBlue
October 2nd, 2012
12:17 pm
Will @ 10:32,
To be fair, given the history of our state, the “Dixiecrats” and their trickle over to the “R” side while holding the same values and doing what they’ve always done, it’s not easy to tell anymore who is the best person to represent us and our values under the Gold Dome.
The REAL problem is, people get caught up in national party politics (i.e., same-sex marriage, which has already been forever banned in this state, and is therefore irrelevant), and pay NO attention whatsoever to what this slimy buncha crooks in the General Assembly actually DO.
Georgians don’t trust the snake pit of public servants, but they don’t bother to get involved and demand accountability, either. Sad.
Cobbian
October 2nd, 2012
12:35 pm
Worries me to think that some of those who changed party affiliation did so just to keep power. I don’t think career politicians really serve this country – they become tools of the party bosses and lobbyists.
eli
October 2nd, 2012
12:56 pm
Cobbian,
Their job is not to serve the country, it is to serve their district. If they do a bad job they lose reelection, if they do a good enough job they win it.
That is how republicanism works. Unfortunately, most of the time, voters are too ill informed to decide how to vote so they use the party labels as a crutch.
Rick Crawford was stupid in making this statement before the election. His district is not exactly filled with intellectuals. He should have switched parties after the last election. Now he is going to lose simply because he will not have an (R) next to his name on the ballot and knows it.
honested
October 2nd, 2012
1:47 pm
eli,
I wonder if the genius ‘Bob’ is one of those ‘not exactly intellectuals’ as you so elegantly stated?