Jackson Free Press

On June 6, the Democratic primaries in the 2nd Congressional District will be up for grabs. Three candidates are facing off in the race, including political whack-a-mole Dorothy "Dot" Benford, who pops up every election cycle. But the two most significant personalities battling for the chair are state Rep. Chuck Espy and the Democratic incumbent Bennie Thompson.

Both men want to better the Delta region, a largely black portion of the state and one of the poorest in the nation. Both want to encourage business and better the schools. In fact, if you're looking for variation, you need to think party politics.

The 13-year incumbent is all about partisanship. He's very much a liberal Democrat with no predilection for smiling tolerantly at the other side. The 58-year-old grew up in a time when many whites were open with their disdain for blacks and their desire to lock them out of society.

Thompson saw firsthand the mass exodus of Dixiecrat separatists from the Democratic Party when Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act of 1964 to form a foundation of the modern GOP.

Johnson predicted, even then, that he'd signed the South over to the Republican Party, and Thompson was there to bear witness to the lemming rush as poor whites fled to a party that continues to demand they vote against their economic interest every year—giving incredible tax breaks to their rich bosses who then pack up their jobs and ship them overseas for more profit.

Thompson recognizes the aging faces in today's Republican Party from the old Democratic Party of 30 years ago and holds no love for them.

Thompson had the cajones to stand against the invasion of Iraq, openly decrying President Bush and Congress for making a terrible mistake. He was open about this when most Democrats were tucking their tails or joining the mob.

But many critics consider Thompson vengeful and biting, with a long memory. Thompson even eschewed an endorsement of blue-dog Democrat Ronnie Musgrove in the 2003 gubernatorial race, telling The New York Times that year that "(Musgrove) has a long way to go to get the excitement back to where it was four years ago."

Thompson's long years in office have also produced snuggly relationships with parties unpalatble to progressives. In 2005, a lobbyist love-child rolled out of the U.S. Department of Labor, allowing the DOL to warn Wal-Mart before it would bounce in for any surprise visits regarding child labor, and it gave the company a 10-day grace period to comply instead of assessing instant fines for violations. When angry progressives introduced an amendment to the 2006 fiscal year labor appropriations bill that would have stripped funding from the DOL, Thompson was one of the "Wal-Mart 22," a small band of Democrats who voted against it.

To be fair, Thompson is torn between union supporters who hate Wal-Mart's anti-union practices and the fact that Wal-Mart is one of the few companies bringing new jobs to the impoverished Delta.

But Thompson also gets big money from Exxon-Mobil, one of the oil drilling giants who have made record profits while Americans struggle to drive to work on high gas prices. When asked if America would ever manage to be fully independent from foreign oil through renewable energy sources, Thompson said he doubted it. Was that Thompson talking or Exxon-Mobil?

Chuck Espy describes himself as a moderate whose biggest campaign selling point is his "willingness to work with Republicans." Whereas Thompson is openly suspicious of the conservative set in Washington, Espy's history in the state Legislature shows a quiet personality willing to work in the background with people.

"Chuck comes to me privately expressing his views, and I think that's a good trait, instead of getting up on the floor of the House and eviscerating you," says Rep. Steve Holland, D-Plantersville, who frequently works with Espy. "Usually Chuck's approach is 'I want to share with you how this might affect my people or my district,' or 'I want you to understand that if you did this it would help my district.' He's always thinking about his people, but he's not one to dive headfirst into drama."

"In short," Holland says, "he ain't me."

Though Espy comes off as a good facilitator, he has no national political experience. In interviews, 31-year-old Espy is a starry-eyed dreamer who was unable to detail his plan for bringing better education and fresh business to the Delta beyond getting back on the U.S. Congress' Agricultural Committee (recently abandoned by Thompson in favor of the Homeland Security Committee—which has grown in significance, as of late), cutting taxes and insurance rates for businesses, hiring an economic development coordinator and working "with all the members of the congressional delegates as a team to rebuild the state."

The challenger believes that the highly partisan atmosphere of a Republican-dominated Washington will not interfere with his plans to be a voice for his region, despite the Republican habit of locking Democratic voices out of debates, including Thompson's. A recent drug-prescription bill, now unpopular with a majority of the American public, got no real fight from Democrats in 2005 because Republicans knew their minority voice wasn't needed to pass it.

Espy wants to fund a pilot program installing two reading facilitators in two Level 1 schools in the Delta. He hopes the program will prove a good example and coax extra cash down from Washington and up from Jackson for a similar statewide program. Espy's willingness to dip into his own pocket for the program is admirable, but his argument hammers with an empty echo against American political priorities. Appropriations committees are already well aware of the benefits of such programs, even as they routinely short-change education funding every year.

The challenger's lack of experience manifests in other ways as well. Thompson will hold the chair on the Homeland Security Committee if Democrats take the House in November—and recent polls show this is a strong possibility. This could open incredible doors. Thompson says he's already looking to get a bio-medical facility related to Homeland Security to Jackson, near the UMC hospital. If Espy takes the seat, however, he walks in with little more than a desire to sit on the Agricultural Committee. It could be a long haul from there.

Espy reveals himself to be a right-leaning moderate in the U.S. congressional race, even though his conservatism may not have been apparent as a state representative. Espy has garnered much support from Republicans in the area, and Thompson's campaign claims the political action group Citizens for Better Representation are encouraging Republicans and people with incomes over $50,000 to vote for Espy in the Democratic primary. Certainly, if you believe Greenville Republican leader Clarke Reed's assessment that Republicans are jumping behind Republican candidate Yvonne Brown instead of Espy, then you're being snookered. Republicans were happy to cross over and vote in the Democratic mayoral primaries in Jackson, and they'll be more than happy to do so in the Second Congressional District—or in any primary where a Republican has no real opponent. Note to Mississippi Democratic Party Chairman Wayne Dowdy: If you haven't lined up a left-leaning pseudo-Republican to run in the next statewide primary, then you're obviously not taking home a valuable lesson here.

A quick peek at Espy's campaign finance reports shows names like conservative powerhouse Billy Mounger. "I think Espy is a better choice over Thompson any day," says North Jackson resident J.F. Sanders, a Republican who also supported mayoral candidate Frank Melton in the 2005 election.

Some of Sanders' beliefs may actually be in line with Espy's. Let's run down a checklist where the two candidates part ideological ways, as revealed in recent interviews.

Abortion:

Espy: Against all forms of abortion, including the "morning-after pill," considered by some to be just another form of birth control.

Thompson: I'm not a woman, and it's not my business to choose for one.

The Iraq War:

Espy: Wishes we'd had more information before we went into it, but we're there now.

Thompson: Didn't approve of it then. Don't approve of it now.

Bush's honesty with America in leading up to the war:

Espy: Bush was honest but inaccurate.

Thompson: Bush lied to us.

Impeaching Bush:

Espy: No. Impeachment is wrong.

Thompson: Hang 'im high. Hang 'im high.

Was the recent tax cut for the rich a good idea:

Espy: Needs more information.

Thompson: Of course not. Did you get back $800 this year from it? Your boss did.

Offshore tax havens for U.S. companies:

Espy: They should have access to them, but make the U.S. a better competitor for their location.

Thompson: If they get U.S. support and protection, they need to pay U.S. taxes.

If you're looking for a right-leaning newbie with no seniority or status, a higher opinion of Bush than most Americans right now and a potential enemy of Roe vs. Wade, with cozy connections to local Republicans and a willingness to schmooze across party lines in Congress, Espy is your guy.

If you're looking for a well-oiled partisan with lobbyist links, but a suspicion of the current administration and the Congress of Newt Gingrich, and you don't think Republican ties will mean squat after Democrats retake Congress in November, then Thompson is more likely your fellow.

Previous Comments

ID

79819

Comment

Great article, Adam. You folks are good. all of you. What can anybody else say. They're as different as night and day. Only unfair play with the help of Republicans can defeat Benny.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2006-05-18T13:21:41-06:00

ID

79820

Comment

My worry is that this is exactly what will happen. District 2 went 54/43 in the Thompson/LeSeuer race; it's 64% black and 36% white. A little bit of Republican crossover voting, plus all that Republican crossover money, will hand Espy--and his Republican backers--the seat. Everyone who lives in District 2 and cares about the future of this state should show up on June 6th and vote for Thompson, regardless of party, regardless of ideology. One vote out of 435 in favor of abortion probably won't make a difference; losing our seat on Homeland Security definitely will. Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2006-05-19T01:47:31-06:00

ID

79821

Comment

And let me add: At least if Yvonne Brown got elected, she'd be welcome in Republican ranks. Chuck Espy is making a career out of stabbing other Democrats in the back, so he's not going to play well in the Democratic ranks, and he's still a Democrat in name, so he won't play at all in the Republican ranks. What we'll end up with is someone who has no position of influence on either side of the aisle. There's no point to that. Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2006-05-19T01:50:16-06:00

ID

79822

Comment

tom, chuck espy is a good Democrat and i believe that when he is in Congress he will vote nearly every time with the Democratic leadership.chuck's running for congress in a race with an incumbent is not stabbing anyone in the back.it's democracy.the reason the office was stuctured by the founding fathers to require elections every 2 years is so that we would have races and choices like this,not so it becomes the property right of an incumbent.chuck will represent us in congress in a dignified way (i have yet to hear one of his colleagues in the mississippi legislature say anything about chuck other than kind words). and i am sure that once elected he will establish himself among the members of the U.s. House in due time. uncle mike served in the house and there are many still there who hold him in high regard.i know that chuck has friends and acquaintences who served in the clinton administrtion and i believe that association with bill and hillary will serve him well. mark my word the day after chuck secures the nomination every prominent Democrat will come down to campaign with him. you can bet your bottom dollar that hillary will be among the first to show while the homeland security committee is an important committee i am sure ther are other members from districts with more realistic threats of terror who could serve ably. we need chuck on the agriculture committee more.we need a different style of leadership: we need a generation shift. vote for chuck

Author

chimneyville

Date

2006-05-19T08:55:41-06:00

ID

79823

Comment

Thirteen years is a long time, but the Delta is still one of the poorest regions in the country. "...U.S. Congress’ Agricultural Committee (recently abandoned by Thompson in favor of the Homeland Security Committee—which has grown in significance, as of late)..." I believe Agriculture is a more pressing issue for the Delta than Homeland Security. Potential enemy of Roe vs. Wade?.. I'm voting for Espy!

Author

Kendrick Johnson

Date

2006-05-19T08:56:23-06:00

ID

79824

Comment

What did Uncle Mike deliver to the poor folks of the delta during his years in congress or heading the agriculture committee?

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2006-05-19T09:04:46-06:00

ID

79825

Comment

And since uncle Mike with all his alleged significance, connections, and prominence delivered basically nothing to the poor folks of the delta during his tenure in congress and as head of the agriculture department, why would any intelligent person of any race expect "Chuck the Novice" to deliver anything? He isn't any Obama, or the likes. I don't blame him for wanting an important job. Tell him to do something noticeable or worthy on the job he has before trying to move up. A real legacy is serving and benefiting others instead of self.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2006-05-19T09:17:38-06:00

ID

79826

Comment

Family name, youth and a nice countenance does not a congressman make. I don't see anything else that Espy has to offer the 2nd District. I agree with Ray Carter that he should do something significant in the legislative job he currently holds before trying to move up.

Author

tomac

Date

2006-05-19T09:47:08-06:00

ID

79827

Comment

ray it is hard to believe that you truly hold such a low estimation of mike.heck when he was a freshman he was the principal author of the bill along with pryor of arkansas to establish the lower mississippi development authority,which clintio first chaired and spawned numerous initiatives including empowerment zones. and although this might sound trite he caused the congress to desiganate a day in june as national catfish day.he had to secure sponsorship signatures from half the congress to convince the committee chairman to allow it onthe floor espy used this to enlist senator stennis to work with the armed forces to put catfish on the menus for the mess halls and commissaries. mike also caused catfish to be declared a crop for disaster loans. mike was a champion for poor people and i cant catalogue everything but somebody liked him because he got elected three times. dont be too hard on chuck's experience. bennie was a county supervisor before he ascended where he spent most if his time gravelling roads and operating bush hogs.

Author

chimneyville

Date

2006-05-19T10:41:37-06:00

ID

79828

Comment

I'm just trying to justapose uncle Mike's real legacy to the criticisms Chuck make of Bennie for not bringing home enough bacon. I realize big farmers and business folks benefited some from Mike's term in Washington DC. I simply don't beleive Mike ever really cared anything about poor folks in Mississippi or elsewhere. I never saw any visible evidence that he did. We don't need another uncle Mike named Chuck. Tell the truth Chimneyville and shame the devil! I believe you think I should be impressed by the accomplishments uncle Mike made only for uncle Mike. I'm not.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2006-05-19T11:04:58-06:00

ID

79829

Comment

well ray we need to just disagree and leave it at that

Author

chimneyville

Date

2006-05-19T11:17:57-06:00

ID

79830

Comment

I don't have a dog in this fight as I don't live in the 2nd District, but I believe Thompson should be reelected, if only because I believe there is more than a strong chance that the House will revert to the Democrats this fall, making it important that we have as many senior Democrats in position as possible. Now is just not a good time to vote in someone who, based on listening to him on Tisdale's show last Friday, doesn't seem to have substantive ideas or a real record of accomplishment as a legislator other than name recognition. And although I am a former supporter of term limits and not happy about the recent lawsuit filed by Turnage, I don't think Espy is the right choice to replace an experienced congressman like Thompson. It would be nice, however, if some of Bennie's staunchest allies could list a few of his accomplishments other than "he's a great guy". But anyway, I'm urging my friends and family in the 2nd district to come out and support Bennie.

Author

Jeff Lucas

Date

2006-05-19T11:50:44-06:00

ID

79831

Comment

I would add that I've been involved in a couple of infrastructure projects that Thompson help to fund, so I know of at least a couple of major accomplishments of his.

Author

Jeff Lucas

Date

2006-05-19T11:53:12-06:00

ID

79832

Comment

Some of his accomplishments are stated or mentioned in one of his commercial. He helped some Delta towns like Mound Bayou get money for a new water system of some sort and for street paving, I believe. I will pick up some literature from his camp so as to better or more accurately provide some of his accomplishments for others to see. I live in Pickering district unfortunately and haven't kept up too specifically with Bennie's doings in his district. I would move if it weren't where I partially grew up and attended school. In other words, it's home. I happen to know there are many things a congressmen can't actually do in lots of these little towns which is why I'm confounded by some of Chuck's criticisms of Bennie. He won't do any better either. Of course, the thing that impresses me the most about Bennie is his gall and determination to treat everybody the same. This along was enough to get my vote and support when I lived in Greenville for 2 years. I doubt this had ever happened in that district before him.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2006-05-19T12:42:11-06:00

ID

79833

Comment

The Delta is one of the poorest regions in the state and so is the state one of the poorest states. The progress Bennie has made has been remarkable, I think Bennie should be allowed to finish nuturing the baby he has started to groom in the 2nd Congressional District. Question? Has Chuck ever worked on projects with Bennie or has someone told him not too? My only gripe with Chuck is that he is not running his campaign. I fill almost disgusted with the platform that he has taken. He is straying away from the roots and the same people that looked upon him to bring about a change and some youth to MS Black Politics. The only platforms I have heard him speak on are those of the traditional older voter afraid of change. What has he done to bring his peers meaning ages 25 to 35 (democrats) to the voting booths. I havent been impressed enough to give a damn and Im a 27 year old voter. He could easily win my vote with the use of his own platform and not Uncle Mikes. Dad. or some other guy

Author

UrbanMogul

Date

2006-05-19T13:45:05-06:00

ID

79834

Comment

Like you, Ray, I haven't lived in the 2nd for some time, but I always voted for Bennie because I felt he had the best interest of the District at heart. Plus, he strikes a good balance against the conservative Mississippi delegation. I voted for him based on the Delta projects I worked on and had knowledge of his involvement in funding, plus his stance on farm subsidies and social security. It always bothers me when you have campaign volunteers who try to sell you on the candidate but can't tell you much about him other than to scare you about the "other guy". That's partially why I think LeSuer (sp?) was able to give him such competition a few years ago, because Thompson wasn't keeping his folks informed about his works. And he can't "fix" the 2nd District...it took decades to keep it at the bottom and it would be difficult for anyone to uplift it in a short period of time, especially without help from his colleagues.

Author

Jeff Lucas

Date

2006-05-19T13:58:52-06:00

ID

79835

Comment

Was the recent tax cut for the rich a good idea: Just curious, but why was this question slanted this way? While I'm guessing that the majority of Rep. Thompson's constiutents make < $29,000, which half of all US taxpayers find themselves - this bunch contributes only 3.5% of all revenue into the coffers. Are we, from his response to this loaded question - to understand that even though someone pays almost nothing into the system, they should get a big "something" back?

Author

mudbug

Date

2006-05-22T07:06:14-06:00

ID

79836

Comment

Uh, because it was "recent tax cut for the rich." And it affects us all. And I don't get "this bunch" at all. I'm sensing some disturbing slant there, now that you bring it up. You clearly have your own "slant" on this, which is fine, but the question was a good one, and straightforward without playing games of hiding what something really is because the right-wing PC "bunch" doesn't like it being called what it is.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-05-22T08:41:28-06:00

ID

79837

Comment

No ma'am - no slant at all. It's always puzzled me how this comes out this way, and "on both sides of the aisle", when it suits them. The numbers from the IRS webpage show that less than 4% of all ind. tax payments come from the lowest wage earners (>29K); where 96% of this kitty is paid in by those above 29K. I've just never seen a salary of that range as being "rich". I believe over 50% of that same total revenue comes from taxes out of the 94K and up group. So, my confusion with questions worded that way stems from how are we defining, "rich"?

Author

mudbug

Date

2006-05-22T16:03:37-06:00

ID

79838

Comment

I might be a little slow, but I get there eventually. You took me to task for choosing to use the word "bunch" to describe 50% of US taxpayers? If you see some agenda in that word, okay - this is your website, and you call the shots....but I don't see any slant, or special perspective to the word. I guess I should've used the same word to describe the 'bunch' at the top - those one percenters of all taxpayers --- that pay 35% of all individual tax revenues. Is this the "rich" that's condemned, when speaking about tax cuts? They paid the lion's share of taxes, correct? But, the question in to the candidates didn't stop at "What do you think about Bush's tax cuts?" and allow each to either add this 'talking point', or not. Just my 2¢ worth....

Author

mudbug

Date

2006-05-23T09:53:22-06:00

ID

79839

Comment

Mudbug, you referred to an entire electorate in a poor region of Mississippi as that "bunch." I think that's a weird thing to do and taints anything else you say on the topic for me personally. That would be true whether I own the Web site or not. It's not like I'm banning you for it. Otherwise, you've said nothing to dispel the fact that Mr. Bush's tax cut was designed to benefit the wealthiest Americans. We call a spade a spade, and don't give a damn about silly political correctness, which these days the right spews much more than the left. Sorry if that bothers you so.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-05-23T10:05:24-06:00

ID

79840

Comment

mudbug, the argument against tax cuts for the rich, relative to tax cuts for the poor, is that there is a minimum baseline income that is necessary in order to avoid food insecurity, inaccessibility to health care, and total loss of discretionary income. If you make less than $20,000 per year, it's very difficult to function comfortably in this economy even in Mississippi, and we have one of the lowest costs of living in the country. We also need to look at the relative effect of tax cuts at various income brackets on the economy. As you point out, only 4% of income tax earnings come from people making less than $29,000/year. So if we got rid of their income tax entirely, we'd only lose 4% of our revenue. Seems to me that if we're going to cut taxes in a challenging economic climate, particularly if our objective is to encourage spending (since lower-income people will generally end up spending most of their income on food, housing, and so forth while higher-income people can afford to save more money), tax cuts should be targeted specifically at the poor and working-class. Bush's tax cuts are more-or-less even across the board, which means that the federal budget loses a LOT of money from rich Americans and an unnoticeably tiny amount of money from poor Americans. So if we look at the tax cuts as a spending initiative, and that's exactly what they are, then who is the money being spent on? Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2006-05-23T10:24:43-06:00

ID

79841

Comment

"...disturbing slant" Am I being called a racist, or prejudiced? If so, you would be incorrect in that regard. I choose to live in South Jackson - and exist happily as one of the few non-black households in the entire area. I work half the year in West Africa, hand-in-hand with around a hundred nationals. In fourteen years there, not once has anyone accused me of having a bigoted bone in my body, or having any racial prejudice. But I use a phrase that you feel is "weird" and get this? Sheesh.... I used unclear terms. Clearly, I've done a less than effective job of asking my original question, and getting an answer. We disagree on the tax cuts, agreed? Still and all, each candidate answered the question as they saw fit, and Espy's "I need more information" on that was a dodge; Rep. Thompson's "... Your boss did" was in line with how the question was proposed. Nothing more than that, ok? JMO.... Thanks for the response, Tom. I agree the tax cuts could be seen as a 'spending initiative' but, it doesn't do much good without the feds initiating a spending decrease - or, a stoppage altogether. Sadly, the ink in Bush's veto pen, has gone dry from a lack of use.

Author

mudbug

Date

2006-05-23T15:59:28-06:00