Democratic party seeks to redefine itself | The State

Often, to be a Democrat in South Carolina is to accept defeat.

Sometimes, defeat is accepted before the race begins.

No Democrats are running in two of the nine statewide June primaries. Democrats failed to find candidates to run for state treasurer or adjutant general.

In today's South Carolina, where Democrats often finish in second place, it's increasingly hard to recall that in 1986, S.C. Democrats held all nine statewide posts.

As S.C. Democrats convened in Columbia Saturday to build enthusiasm for their candidates, some contemplated how the consummate underdog party could turn the tide and create a true two-party state in South Carolina.

Such a shift would be better for all South Carolinians, some Democrats argue.

"You want a vigorous two-party system to encourage gentlemanly debate about issues," said Andy Brack, publisher of statehousereport.com, who unsuccessfully ran as a Democrat in the 2000 1st congressional district race. "The best ideas often come out of the compromise. That's what the framers of the Constitution had in mind."

A NEW APPROACH

What's needed, according to Columbia attorney Dick Harpootlian, who served as chairman of the S.C. Democratic Party from 1998 to 2003, is aggressive fundraising and an even more aggressive approach toward the GOP.

"You've got to get up every morning and go at (Republicans)," Harpootlian said. "And you've got to raise money 24 hours a day."

In 1998, a Harpootlian-led Democratic Party raised and spent $2 million to get voters out. That year, Democrat Jim Hodges defeated GOP incumbent Gov. David Beasley and Democrats held four of nine statewide seats.

It's been a downward spiral for Democrats in the years since, leaving some to wonder if Democrats are doomed to a permanent minority-party status. Democrats currently hold one of those nine statewide seats, superintendent of education.

The time is ripe for another resurgence, Harpootlian said, because of a series of state budget cuts while Republicans were in charge and a series of S.C. Republican scandals including the 2007 indictment of state treasurer Thomas Ravenel and the disappearance of Gov. Mark Sanford last summer.

"The Republican Party is a joke," he said. "But that message has not been conveyed to independent voters in a coherent and cohesive way."

For starters, Harpootlian thinks the Democratic Party should put about $25,000 into radio spots in key markets, driving the message home.

"We need to have already been doing it," he said. "There's been a lack of effort by the (Democratic) Party of acquiring the resources to win in November."

Carol Fowler, chairwoman of the state Democratic Party, said she likes the idea of a radio campaign and it could be part of the party's election strategy. But, she concedes, political contributions to Democrats, and all other parties, are down.

"People in the past who have written $1,000 checks are now saying, 'I can only give you $250,'" Fowler said. "We're having to rely on smaller contributions."

A PERCEPTION PROBLEM

Another challenge is candidate recruitment, according to Rep. Gilda Cobb-Hunter, D-Orangeburg.

"You've got a lot of good people who would make excellent public servants but they don't believe they can win as a Democrat in South Carolina," said Cobb-Hunter, one of the House's most powerful Democrats. "Because Democrats are perceived as the party of color."

Too many working-class whites wrongly view Democrats as the exclusive party of African-Americans and liberals, she said.

The seeds, planted decades ago with the Southern Strategy, are still bearing fruit, she said.

"It was an organized, planned Republican effort that the Democrat Party was not a party that understood or shared white people's values," Cobb-Hunter said of the GOP strategy.

"And what we Democrats did for all of those decades is allow the Republican Party to continue to sell that line and define us - to call us tax-and-spend liberals, to say we had no family values, to define us as the party of color."

Some Democrats are working to create an S.C. Democratic identity, including Phil Noble, head of the S.C. New Democrats.

He recently sent out 100,000 e-mails to Democrats across the state, asking them to list their top five priorities for the party. "The party needs to say to voters, 'Here's what we believe in, one, two, three, four, five,'" Noble said.

So far, over 500 Democrats have responded to Noble's e-mail.

Education is on the top of many of their lists.

"If we don't fix education in this state, then nothing else matters," he said. "It's also the one area where Democrats have credibility, where we poll better. We should build on it."

Fowler predicts creating a new identity will be difficult.

"To the extent a party defines itself, the more successful it is," she said. "But there is so much diversity in the Democratic Party it's hard to put it down to a few words that everyone would agree with."

Republicans say Democrats have defined themselves - by their votes at the State House and their affiliation with national Democrats in Washington.

"As long as they stand for bigger government, higher taxes, redistribution of wealth or whatever Obama is calling it these days, it's not going to sell in South Carolina," said Joel Sawyer, interim executive director of the S.C. Republican Party.

Sawyer also doubts that appeals to working-class whites will change the Democrats' chances.

"South Carolina is a state where people from any socio-economic class want to be empowered with more of their own money and more freedom to make their own decisions," Sawyer said. "The Democrat alternative is turn it over to government and they'll fix it for you."

REAPPORTIONMENT

Democrats may get a chance to shift the odds in their favor when reapportionment takes place sometime after the 2010 census.

Some Democrats contend it was a redrawing of district lines in 1994 that stripped Democrats of their control in the House and later in the Senate.

"In a lot of ways, Democrats on the state level are always playing catch-up because of reapportionment mistakes made almost 20 years ago," Brack said.

In 1994, an unusual coalition of black Democrats and white Republicans struck a deal that created more majority-black districts and more GOP-safe districts - at the expense of white Democrats who had controlled the Legislature since Reconstruction.

Long-term, the new lines proved a huge boon for Republicans who eventually gained majorities in both chambers.

Cobb-Hunter, a House member during reapportionment, disagrees with Brack's interpretation. "The Democrats lost power not through the elections of 1994. We lost power when all of the Democrats switched parties (to the Republican Party) so they could retain the power they had," she said.

Brack and Cobb-Hunter are both hopeful new lines will be drawn soon that will make districts more competitive.

"What Democrats really need to do is draw competitive districts instead of safe districts this time around," Brack said. "They need to be willing to give up some of the safety in some districts so they can get their foot in the door and have a chance in some of these Republican-dominated ones."