DOCSLIB.ORG

Information to Users

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Information to Users INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the origmal or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor qualify illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Photographs mduded in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher qualify 6" x9" t>lack and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. Bell & Howell Information and Learning 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor. Ml 48106-1346 USA UMI 800-521-0600 UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA. GRADUATE COLLEGE SEX AND THE POLITICAL PROCESS: AN ANALYSIS OF SEX STEREOTYPES IN 1998 SENATORIAL AND GUBERNATORIAL CAMPAIGNS A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE FACULTY In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY By TERRY ROBERTSON Norman, Oklahoma 2000 UMI Number 9962947 UMI* UMI Microform9962947 Copyright 2000 by Bell & Howell Information and Leaming Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. Bell & Howell Information and Leaming Company 300 North Zeeb Road P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 © Copyright by Terry Robertson 2000 All Rights Reserved SEX AND THE POLITICAL PROCESS: AN ANALYSIS OF SEX STEREOTYPES IN 1998 SENATORIAL AND GUBERNATORIAL CAMPAIGNS A DISSERTATION APPROVED FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATION By ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The catalyst for this work was my belief in social justice, fairness in government, and a firm belief that in a democracy all people should be adequately and appropriately represented. Women, in this nation, have yet to achieve that goal. My genuine hope is that this work facilitates a broader understanding of the challenges women face when they run for political office and with that knowledge be able to penetrate the barriers that inhibit winning office. I would like to thank Dr. Lynda Kaid for her guidance and support in all aspects of this project. Without her insight and encouragement this undertaking would not have succeeded. She truly has become my mentor. Further, I acknowledge the assistance of Dr. Mitchell McKinney, Dr. Sandra Ragan, Dr. Phil Lujan, and Dr. Courtney Vaughn. Their continual support, knowledge, and perceptiveness added immensely to the project^s completion. In addition, I want to acknowledge my fellow graduate students for their support and unselfishness. Tara Crowell's support and unconditional friendship was a wonderful part of my tenure at Oklahoma. I also want to IV thank Kristen Froemling and Clark Callahan for being my partners in innumerable projects. In addition, I want acknowledge Mary Banwart for her intellect, drive, and inclusion into her many undertakings. Finally, I want acknowledge my wife, Sandra; children, Scott, Brad, auid Andy; as well as my parents, Jim and Irene Lingo for enduring graduate school with me over the past three years. Tcüale of Contents List of Tables........................................... x List of j^pendixes..................................... xii Abstract ...............................................xiii I. INTRODUCATION......................................... 1 The Intent of the S t u d y ...............................6 Rationale for the Study ............ 9 II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE.............................15 Theoretical Foundation...............................16 Political Gender Theory......................... 23 Feminine Style................................... 25 Parameters of the Study - The 1998 Campaigns....... 28 Explanations for the Lack of Success of Female Candidates.................................. 31 General Gender Stereotyping..................... 38 Political Gender Stereotyping................... 44 Gender and Political Advertising.................... 49 Negative Advertising............................ 54 Gender and Negative Advertisements..............56 Issue Presentation...............................59 Image Presentation...............................60 Gender and Media Coverage........................... 61 Media and Candidate Image....................... 63 Media and Debate Coverage....................... 64 Political Debate and Gender..................... 70 Media and Gender Inequity in Debates........... 72 The Dynamics of Sex and Politics — Research Questions.......................................... 75 III. METHODOLOGY........................................ 80 Rationale for a Mixed Methodology................... 80 VI Rationale for Mixed Method Design in Feminist Research........................................... 84 Overview of the Methodology......................... 89 Qualitative Method.............................. 91 Development of the Qualitative Study........... 94 Research Design..................................97 Interviews...................................99 Data Analysis.............................. 100 Final Stages of Analysis................... 102 Pilot Study......................................... 103 Participants....................................103 Results......................................... 105 Why Women Run .............................. 105 When Women Run ............................. 110 How Women R u n .............................. 113 Content Analysis.................................... 115 Content Analysis of Newspaper Articles......... 117 Content Analysis of Political Advertisements..121 Coding Procedures of Newspapers and Political Advertisements............................... 126 Data Analysis...................................129 IV. RESULTS............................................ 130 Quantitative Analysis of Issues in Mixed-Gender Campaigns - Political Advertising................132 Qualitative Analysis of Issues in Mixed-Gender Campaigns......................................... 135 Overall Qualitative Findings Concerning Gender and Issues ............................................ 141 Analysis of Issues in Mixed-Gender Campaigns - Newspaper Articles............................... 145 Analysis of Images in Mixed-Gender Campaigns - Political A d s ..................................... 149 Use of Negative Advertising........................ 151 Appeals Utilized in Political Advertising......... 153 vu Qualitative Analysis of Images in Mixed-Gender Campaigns ...................................... 154 Overall Qualitative Findings Concerning Gender and Images............................................ 160 Analysis of Images in Mixed-Gender Campaigns - Newspaper Articles................................165 The Content of Newspapers: Barriers that Inhibit Female Candidates.................................167 The Quantity of Coverage....................... 168 Representation of Candidate by Paragraph...... 169 Mentions of Candidate Gender................... 172 Candidate Quotations........................... 173 Favored]le eind Unfavorable Coverage of Candidates....................................173 Candidate Viability............................ 174 Newspaper Articles' Coverage of Gender and Political A d s .....................................175 Newspaper Articles' Coverage of Gender and Debate.............. 176 Slant of Coverage...............................178 V. DISCUSSION.......................................... 181 Gender and Political Issues........... 183 Gender, Issues, and The Media......... 191 Images in Mixed-Gender Campaigns - Political Commercials....................................... 198 Aggression and Action Orientation in Female Candidates....................... 200 Honesty and Trustworthiness in Male Candidates....................................203 Negativity and Candidate Image. ........... 207 Family and Children in Campaign Ads ........... 210 Images in Mixed-Gender Campaigns - Media Coverage .213 vui Media Barriers that Impede Female Candidates...... 217 Newspaper Coverage of Political Ads........... 219 Newspaper Coverage of Candidates' Debates..... 220 Slant of Coverage of Candidates in Debate Articles....................... ..220 What are the Factors that Lead to the Underrepresentation of Women in the Political Process ........................................ 221 Limitations and Future Research.................... 226 BIBLIOGRAPHY........................................ 230 IX List of Tables 1. Candidates/ Party, Outcome, euid R a c e ............. 305 2. Newspapers Utilized in Content Analysis .......... 306 3. Cross Tabulation Results of Gender Significant Issue Content in Political Commercials........... 307 4. Cross Tabulation Results of Issue Discussion In Political Commercials.......................... 308 5. Issue Mention in Newspaper Articles Covering Mixed-Gender Campaigns............................ 309 5. Cross
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Marylandinfluencers
    MarylandInfluencers f there was one place where the Democratic Party could take sol- ace on Election Day 2010, it was Maryland, a rock that broke part Iof the red tide sweeping the country. In a year where Republi- cans hoped to make gains across the board, Democrats proved their dominance in the biggest races, holding the governor’s mansion in a landslide, losing just a handful of seats in the state House of Delegates, and actually gaining ground in the state Senate. Any doubts about how deep blue Maryland is—particularly within the state’s heavily populated central corridor—were surely dissipated. Yet the next few years will be pivotal for both parties. Age and term limits are taking their toll on veteran officeholders, opening up op- portunities for ambitious Republicans and Democrats alike to make their mark. The blood sport of redistricting will play out as well. Here is our list of the Democrats and Republicans who are helping to make the decisions and start the important political conversations today in the Chesapeake Bay State—as well as some likely to play a bigger role in the future. Top 10 Republicans Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr. GOP voters for representatives who her husband. She may be ending her The only Republican governor in Mary- are fiscally conservative and socially conservative talk radio show on WBAL land since the 1960s was dealt a huge moderate. 1090-AM in Baltimore—a thorn in blow in November when his rematch Democratic sides for years—but she will with O’Malley ended in a landslide loss.
    [Show full text]
  • Meet Bill Brock
    This document is from the collections at the Dole Archives, University of Kansas http://dolearchives.ku.edu t;C::: CT I •'l • (T T ,, v . .._ ... ~._,,._, ~~- Page 1 of 43 OCT 12'94 17:19 No.025 P.02 BOB DOLE This documentID:202-408-5117 is from the collections at the Dole Archives, University of Kansas 11... n r ur; 1,..1,.11"11.1r<i:-::.::i F~E NO. : 410 296 8683 1 '"-" 1 • i:nr<.L http://dolearchives.ku.edu To: Suzanne Hellman Bill Ulrey From: Lori Kettiah Pam Kuechler Date: October 12, 1994 Subject: Talking Pointe for Senator Dole Attached are some recent articles on th~ campaign, an Ehrlich bio, and a comparison piece on Ehrlich and Browster. t~e 'f~ld ~ke Senator ~e; "'Nde 'rb! wf iAt tp t"lre .sU11tri2 c&:T afJ>r 0£ hav OS ISJ':1 i Qh \nR . Ao = one Republic~n Leader in the Senate, I know how important vote in the Houee ·or Senate can be. Much of the Clinton big government aqenda that has hurt emall buaineesea and middle class fArnil;AR ~8R passed-- or been defeated-- by one or two votes. During th& next two years, every vote in the House ls going to be ju1Jt. ftll: r.rit.ir.111. H•re are a few examples of where a handful vote8 would h~ve made a diff~rAnnA for Am•~,r.~~ tftY~~y~~~." --1993 Clinton Tax Hike•-· which rai&•d ineome tax•& for 13,000 social security recipients in this district, h.it everyone who drive• a car with hish•r 9ao taxee, •nd raised income taxec Qh~rply and retroactively for hundreds of small businesses-- poe•ed the Hou•• by one vote, 219 to 216.
    [Show full text]
  • MARYLAND Analysis
    64 State Pages MARYLAND Analysis STATE 20 Maryland, once ahead of the nation on gender parity in RANKING out of 50 elected office, is falling behind. In 1993, Maryland ranked out of 15 places higher — 5th in the nation — with a Gender GENDER PARITY SCORE 19.1 100 points ParityDid you Score know? of 20.0. A Gender Parity Score of 50 indicates a state has reached gender parity in elected office. Gender parity is defined as the point at which women and men are equally likely to hold elected office in the state. Maryland uses both single-winner and multi-winner 9.4 of 30 points (U.S. Congress) districts to elect state legislators. In 2013, the percentage seats held by women in two- and three-member districts 0.0 of 30 points (Statewide Executive Offices) (37%) was more than double the percentage of seats held 8.4 of 30 points (State Legislature) by women in single-winner districts (15%). 1.3 of 10 points (Cities and Counties) 19.1 of 100 points (Gender Parity being 50) Women in Congress Number of U.S. Congress seats held by women 114th Congress State History Senate 1 of 2 1 womanSenator senator.Barbara Mikulski (D) of Maryland announced she will not seek a sixth term, and will retire as the longest-serving House of Representatives 1 of 8 8 From 1979 to 1992 Maryland had at least three female Representatives in Congress. But since 1995, no more than one member of the state’s U.S. House delegation has been a woman.
    [Show full text]
  • Maryland Island Certificate of Ascertainment 2020;
    ~fafo of ~arulanh Qiirtifiraft nf J\srt rfainnrent nf ±4t ~ ltrfnrs nf Jrtsibtnf anb ~irt Jrtsibtnf nf fqt ~niftb ~tafts I, Larry Hogan, Governor ofthe State of Maryland, do hereby declare, pursuant to Election Law Article, Section 11-601 ofthe Annotated Code of Maryland, that at the General Election held in the State on Tuesday, the 3rd day of November 2020, the following named persons were elected to the office of Electors of President and Vice-President of the United States: Corynne B. Courpas Thelma T. Daley Gloria Lawlah Patrick J. Hunt Peter E. Perini Kathleen Matthews Kent Roberson Sheree Sample-Hughes Catalina Rodriguez Lima Sachidanand Hebbar AND FURTHER that the following is a result ofthe canvass made and certified by the Board of State Canvassers pursuant to law, showing the whole number of votes cast at the election for each candidate for President of the United States or each pair of candidates for President and Vice-President ofthe United States, the vote for each such candidate or pair being deemed a vote for the Presidential Electors nominated by the candidate or party pursuant to Election Law Article, Section 8-503, Annotated Code of Maryland. The Republican Party Electors were David Bossie, Ellen Sauerbrey, Nicole Beus Harris, Kathleen Smero, Shannon Wright, James Wass, James Crawford, Virginia Bigelow, Kimberly Klacik, and Ruth Melson. The Republican Party candidates for President and Vice-President, Donald J. Trump and Michael Pence, received Nine Hundred Seventy Six Thousand Four Hundred Fourteen (976,414) votes. The Democratic Party Electors were Corynne B. Courpas, Thelma T. Daley, Gloria Lawlah, Patrick J.
    [Show full text]
  • The Effect of Tea Party Activity on the 2010 United States Senate Elections
    The Effect of Tea Party Activity on the 2010 United States Senate Elections Patricia Ceccarelli A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of BACHELOR OF ARTS WITH HONORS DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN March 25, 2011 Advised by Dr. Michael T. Heaney ABSTRACT The tea party movement began in early 2009 in reaction to the stimulus bill. Throughout 2009 local and national tea party groups formed and held rallies around the country. A Republican won Ted Kennedy’s Massachusetts U.S. Senate seat with the help of the tea party movement in early 2010. Several GOP establishment candidates lost their primaries to tea party candidates. So, what was the overall effect of tea party activity on the 2010 U.S. Senate elections? Did voter enthusiasm lead to more wins by Republican candidates? Or did the movement push the candidates too far to the right and prevent Republicans from winning? Each of the 37 U.S. Senate races were coded in terms of level of tea party activity, expected lean of the race, and percentage of the vote won by the GOP candidate. The level of tea party activity was based off of tea party movement related endorsements and campaign contributions received by each candidate. A regression analysis produced statistically significant results suggesting that states with high levels of tea party activity earned significantly lower vote shares for Republican candidates, after controlling for races leaning toward the Republican candidate. In order to further explain these results, nine case studies of different races explored the organizing at the grassroots level of the tea party movement.
    [Show full text]
  • Maryland Politics and Government: Democratic Dominance / Herbert C
    maryland politics and government Politics and Governments of the American States Founding Editor Daniel J. Elazar Published by the University of Nebraska Press in association with the Center for the Study of Federalism at the Robert B. and Helen S. Meyner Center for the Study of State and Local Government, Lafayette College herbert c. smith and john t. willis Maryland Politics and Government democratic dominance university of nebraska press lincoln and london © 2012 by the Board of Regents of the University of Nebraska All rights reserved Manufactured in the United States of America f Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Smith, Herbert C. (Herbert Charles), 1946– Maryland politics and government: democratic dominance / Herbert C. Smith and John T. Willis. p. cm.— (Politics and governments of the American states) Includes bibliographical references and index. isbn 978-0-8032-3790-2 (pbk.: alk. paper) 1. Maryland—Politics and government. I. Willis, John T., 1946– II. Title. jk3816.s65 2012 320.9752—dc23 2011024769 contents List of Tables, vii List of Maps, ix List of Figures, ix Preface, xi one The Maryland Identity, 1 two A Maryland Political History, 18 three Contemporary Political Patterns, 50 four Maryland Public Opinion, 89 five Political Parties, Interest Groups, and Corruption, 108 six The Maryland Constitution, 134 seven The Maryland General Assembly, 152 eight The Maryland Governor and the Executive Branch, 176 nine The Maryland Judiciary, 207 ten The Politics of Taxation and Spending, 225 eleven “Pleasant Living” Policies and Politics, 253 twelve Maryland in the Federal System, 268 thirteen Local Governments in Maryland, 282 fourteen Maryland’s Future, 301 fifteen Further Reference for Maryland Study, 314 Notes, 321 Index, 363 tables 1-1.
    [Show full text]
  • Maryland Certificate of Ascertainment
    ~hde nf ~arylanh aI.ertifirat.e nf J\.sr.ertainm.ent nf ±4.e ~l.ednrs nf :Jr.esio.ent ano ~ir.e :Jr.esio.ent nf ±4.e ~nit.en ~tat.es I, Larry Hogan, Governor of the State of Maryland, do hereby declare, pursuant to Election Law Article, Section 11-601 ofthe Annotated 1 Code of Maryland, that at the General Election held in the State on Tuesday, the 8 h day of November 2016, the following named persons were elected to the office of Electors ofPresident and Vice President ofthe United States: Karen Britto Robert Leonard Hagner Mister Lillian Norris-Holmes Wayne Rogers Lesley Israel Claudia Martin Susan Ness Salome Peters Courtney Watson AND FURTHER that the following is a result ofthe canvass made and certified by the Board of State Canvassers pursuant to law, showing the whole number of votes cast at the election for each candidate for President of the United States or each pair of candidates for President and Vice President ofthe United States, the vote for each such candidate or pair being deemed a vote for the Presidential Electors nominated by the candidate or party pursuant to Election Law Article, Section 8-503, Annotated Code ofMaryland. The Republican Party Electors were Antonio Campbell, Catherine Grasso, Richard Jurgena, Faith Loudon, Allyson McMahon, Jane Roger, Ellen Sauerbrey, Loretta Shields, Michael Steele, and Diana Waterman. The Republican Party candidates for President and Vice-President, Donald J. Trump and Michael Pence, received Nine Hundred Forty Three Thousand One Hundred Sixty Nine (943,169) votes. The Democratic Party Electors were Karen Britto, Lesley Israel, Robert Leonard, Claudia Martin, Hagner Mister, Susan Ness, Lillian Norris-Holmes, Salome Peters, Wayne Rogers, and Courtney Watson.
    [Show full text]
  • 29 October 1998 Greenbelt News Review
    An Independent Newspaper Voting Is 1, Our Civic Duty * Vote * November3 e 7AM-8PM Volume 61, Number 49 15 Crescent Rd., Suite 100, Greenbelt, MD 20770-1887 Thursday, October 29, 1998 Governor's Race a Real Contest; Candidates in State, Local Other State Posts Are Shoo-ins Contests Show Optimism by Wendy Turnbull Hoyer (D) and Robert Ostrom by James Giese prove the business climate in ticular the large sums of money Elections in non-presidential (R), businessman and former The hottest contest in next Maryland, although the state provided for new schools and years often generate little public county attorney, to represent the Tuesday's election is the race for economy, as well as the nation's, education, including bringing interest, with low voter turnout 5th Congressional District. The Governor of Maryland. Polls has been doing quite well during technology into the classroom the norm. But this year's mid­ power of incumbency will likely have been showing incumbent the incumbent's first term. She and getting back to basics. He term election could prove other­ prevail. Hoyer is expected to be Governor Parris Glendening, has attracted a number of busi­ points to his concern for the en­ wise for Maryland, judging by reelected to a ninth term, despite Democrat, and challenger Ellen ness people to support her cam­ vironment, including his quick the considerable press and public Ostrom's attempts to highlight Sauerbrey, Republican, running paign and, in particular, action to deal with the problem attention to the heated gubernato­ Hoyer's close working relation­ Glendening's former economic neck and neck.
    [Show full text]
  • MCW 2020 HOF & WOT Their Legacy, Our Future
    Maryland Women’s Hall of Fame and Maryland Women of Tomorrow 2020 Induction and Awards Ceremony Valiant Women Their Legacy, Our Future Thursday, March 19, 2020 4 p.m. Ceremony Conference Room East 6 p.m. Reception Conference Room West Miller Senate Office Building Annapolis, Maryland Presented by Maryland Commission for Women The Women Legislators of the Maryland General Assembly, Inc. Maryland Department of Human Services The Foundation for the Maryland Commission for Women, Inc. Maryland Commission for Women 51 Monroe Street, Suite 1034 Rockville, MD 20850 301-610-4523 www.marylandwomen.org The Maryland Commission for Women was first established in 1965 and was set in state law in 1971. An office in the Department of Human Resources, the Commission is a 25-member advisory board whose duties outlined in its enabling legislation include: study the status of women in our state, recommend methods of overcoming discrimination, recognize women’s accomplishments and contributions, and provide informed advice to the executive and legislative branches of government on the issues concerning the women of our state. Commissioners are appointed to four-year terms by the Governor, with confirmation by the Maryland State Senate, and serve without compensation. Officers Yun Jung Yang, Chair Yun Jung Yang, Esq., Chair, Montgomery County Tawanda A. Bailey, First Vice Chair, Frederick County Carole Jaar Sepe, Second Vice Chair, Frederick County Commissioners: Tammy Bresnahan, Anne Arundel County Bonnie Nelson Luna, Wicomico County Deborah L. Cartee, Anne Arundel County Brenda J. McChriston, Howard County Gloria Chang, Montgomery County Ishrat N. Memon, Howard County Maureen Colburn, Montgomery County April Nyman, Anne Arundel County Amanda L.
    [Show full text]
  • 2013 Program and Honorees
    2013 Induction Ceremony Presentation of Honoree Plaque Maryland Women’s Hall of Fame 1 Induction Ceremony Presentation of Honoree Plaque 2013 Maryland Women’s Hall of Fame HONOREES Helen Delich Bentley Nominated by Gloria Lawlah, President Women Legislators of Maryland Foundation Jean B. Cryor (Posthumously) Nominated by Judith Vaughan-Prather, Executive Director Montgomery County Commission for Women Dr. Charlene Mickens Dukes Nominated by Oretha Bridgwaters-Simms, Vice Chairman, Board of Trustees Prince George’s County Community College Honorable Ellen R. Sauerbrey Nominated by Honorable Kathy Szeliga, Ladies in Leadership Linda A. Shevitz Nominated by Susan Shaffer, President Mid-Atlantic Equity Consortium, Inc. Beatrice Tignor, Ed.D. Nominated by Oretha Bridgwaters-Simms, Vice Chairman, Board of Trustees Prince George’s County Community College MARYLAND COMMISSION FOR WOMEN The Maryland Commission for Women, was created in 1965 and established as an independent agency by an act of the Maryland General Assembly in 1971, is a 25 member diverse group of citizens appointed by the Governor, with the advice and consent of the Senate from among persons interested in the improvement in the status of women. The Commission’s membership represents the geographical regions and diversity of the state. Members are appointed for terms of four years. The Commission is housed in the Maryland Department of Human Resources under Secretary Theodore Dallas. MISSION The MCW advises government, advances solutions, and serves as a statewide resource to expand social, political, and economic opportunities for all women. VISION All Maryland women have full social, political, and economic equality. COMMISSIONERS Patricia Cornish, Chair Lynn Fitrell, Vice-Chair Mythili Bachu Patricia Omana Tanesha Boldin Patricia Owens Darlene Breck Betsy Ramirez Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • ALABAMA: GOVERNOR DON SIEGELMAN (D) Vs
    ALABAMA: GOVERNOR DON SIEGELMAN (D) vs. REP. BOB RILEY (R) DEMOCRAT REPUBLICAN Gov. Don Siegelman Rep. Bob Riley www.siegelman.com www.bobrileyforgovernor.com CM: Josh Hayes CM: Sam Daniels Press: Jim Andrews Press: Leland Whaley Media: Shorr & Assoc. Media: Alfano Productions Saul Shorr Kim Alfano Polls: Hickman Brown Polls: Market Research Institute Harrison Hickman Vern Kennedy Money Raised: $4.2 million (as of 9/30) Money Raised: $3.4 million (as of 9/30) Last Race (1998) Pop. Vote Vote % Don Siegelman (D) 760,155 58% Fob James (R) 554,746 42% Race Outlook: TOSS-UP Thanks to budget problems, an ethics investigation and charges that he’s funneled state contracts to friends and campaign donors, Gov. Don Siegelman is fighting to keep his job against Republican U.S. Rep. Bob Riley. Recent polls have consistently shown the two in a statistical dead heat, however, as recently as May, Siegelman was down 8 points to Riley. Clearly, this is not good for a first-term governor who won his last election by 16 points. A mid-September University of Alabama-Birmingham poll had Riley up 45-43% while an early September University of Southern Alabama poll showed Riley ahead 44-41%. Riley has hammered away at Siegelman’s ethics problems which include fees he’d received from his law firm while running the state (after an investigation, he was cleared) and giving state contracts to political cronies without bids from others. One of Riley’s ads boasts that he wants to “end corruption,” he’s “an honest leader,” and he kept his term-limits promise; another features an endorsement from his wife - Siegelman has stayed afloat by attacking his challenger on a variety of issues.
    [Show full text]
  • Maryland Historical Magazine Patricia Dockman Anderson, Editor Matthew Hetrick, Associate Editor Christopher T
    Spring 2014 MARYLAND Ma ry la In this issue . nd Historical Magazine Hi st “Wirt—or Wart?”: John Neal’s Feud with Baltimore’s Literary Elite or ic by Peter Molin al Ma “She Spurns the Northern Scum”: Maryland’s Civil War Loyalty in gazine Mass Culture and Memory by David K. Graham Circling the Square: The City Park and the Changing Image of Annapolis by Michael P. Parker The Rhetoric and Reality of English Law in Colonial Maryland—Part II, 1689–1732 by Jeffrey K. Sawyer Research Notes & Maryland Miscellany The First University of Maryland: The Fight for and Formation of Higher Education in Maryland’s Early Federal Period by Joseph C. Rosalski Vo l. 109, No . 1, Sp ri ng 2014 The Journal of the Maryland Historical Society Friends of the Press of the Maryland Historical Society The Publications Committee continues its stalwart support of Maryland Historical Society books with the funding of two titles during this season of com- memorating the sesquicentennial of the Civil War and the bicentennial of the War of 1812. Ross J. Kelbaugh, Maryland’s Civil War Pho- tographs: The Sesquicentennial Collection, is a vast photographic record of the people, places, and events surrounding the war. It is also the largest collection of original Maryland-related Civil War photographs ever published. Donald R. Hickey’s 187 Things You Should Know About the War of 1812 is a concise and informative introduction to the often complex issues surrounding that conflict, presented in an engaging question-and- answer format. These books are numbers five and six of the Friends of the Press titles, continuing the society’s mission to bring forth the best new Maryland history.
    [Show full text]