As Election Day approaches and the nation’s media become more and more focused on the presidential race, it’s important not to forget about the other offices to be decided this November. In particular, Alabama voters should be aware of the election for their congressperson.
Next month, Alabama voters will decide between the Democratic Daniel Boman and Republican Robert Aderholt for Alabama’s 4th Congressional District. And although the question of character in politics can be a slippery one, in this instance, Alabamians need to take a close look at the moral background of their candidates.
First of all, some background information. Robert Aderholt is the incumbent in this race and has served in Congress for 15 years. During this time, Aderholt has accrued a voting record that includes, among other things, opposition to clean air bills, support for the sale of American oil overseas, tax breaks for immensely profitable oil companies, and relaxing the restrictions on the mercury released by Alabama factories.
However, voters should be equally concerned about Aderholt’s appropriation of congressional funds. Aderholt is currently under investigation for the chronic misuse of congressional travel stipends. Investigation by the House ethics committee has revealed that Aderholt has spent federal funds on gifts for his wife, unapproved travel expenses and other expenditures that cannot be determined because Aderholt “does not keep receipts.”
Boman has a slightly more unusual career. In 2010, he was elected to the Alabama House of Representatives as a staunch Republican – unsurprising, considering his immensely conservative constituency. However, he had many ideological disagreements with other Republicans in the House.
During discussion of a controversial education bill in 2011, Boman formally switched parties.
“During this current session I have seen this legislative body pass bills that I feel adversely affect what my people back home want, need and deserve. … I will never choose the Party over the people again,” Boman said.
What’s remarkable about this switch is that it clearly had little to no political impact and alienated Boman from his constituency. It did not remove the Republican supermajority in the House. Boman did it because he thought it was the right thing to do, even though it was politically insane.
Maybe you feel that the bill Boman was protesting was good, and maybe you don’t take issue with Aderholt’s pro-oil policies. But the point is Aderholt has a history of taking whatever he can get from the political system, whereas Boman has jeopardized his own career to preserve his political integrity.
As a Democrat, Boman isn’t likely to be elected in Alabama. But it’s worth a shot.
