Forum       PDF

Connerly Fires back

I have become accustomed to ad hominem attacks from the Left. But Michael Brendan Dougherty’s article (“Connerly Cashes In,” Sept. 22) fails every standard of fairness that we assume exists in journalism. The author called me and claimed to be writing a column about our initiatives and the status of signature-collection firms. He gained access under a false pretext. His column is replete with inaccuracies and is one of the worst hatchet jobs I have ever seen leveled against me. For example, anyone who believes that Al Sharpton does what he does for $4,000 annually is a fool. We did not start “Super Tuesday for Equal Rights” with ten states; it was five, and four of those are still in play.

We spent, perhaps, five minutes out of maybe an hour and a half of interview time discussing my income, and he downplayed the significance of this issue. Had I known that this was his focus, more time could have been devoted to giving him the facts. My firm, Connerly & Associates, has never been a registered “minority contractor” or benefited from sole-source minority contracting preference programs. We were not idle during the years that he claims nothing was being done. ACRI/ACRC has more than two staff members. Our opponents will not agree that nothing of significance has occurred as a result of our efforts. My personal income was greater before I got involved in this issue than it is now. So this issue is not my vehicle for personal wealth accumulation. Finally, I do what I do because of my beliefs, not as a tool of the Right.

Ward Connerly
Sacramento, Calif.

Michael B. Dougherty replies:

While Mr. Connerly and I did discuss his ballot initiatives, we talked about his compensation at length—about 25 minutes of a 40-minute conversation. I did not misrepresent myself, and I acknowledged the sincerity of Mr. Connerly’s beliefs in my piece.

The figure for Al Sharpton’s salary comes from National Action Network’s tax forms, listed in the same manner as Mr. Connerly’s salary of $300,000 on ACRI’s tax forms. What Sharpton earns as a preacher or media figure is not relevant when discussing nonprofit compensation.

As of this writing, Mr. Connerly’s organization’s website, SuperTuesday 2008.org, states that “ten states are being considered” in his campaign, not the five he claims. Only two ballot initiatives are sure to be on the ballot for November. The other two that Mr. Connerly describes as “in play” are unlikely to clear legal challenges.

Mr. Connerly says that his personal income was greater before he took on nonprofit work. Strictly speaking, this may be correct. But has Connerly & Associates, which is still run by Mr. Connerly’s wife and employs another Connerly relative, lost business while Mr. Connerly has been doing nonprofit work? I considered his household income beyond the scope of this piece.

Regarding the status of Connerly & Associates, in a 1995 San Francisco Chronicle article, Suzanna Espinso Solis reported that Mr. Connerly’s company “received more than $1 million in state business during the past six years by signing up as a minority contractor.” She wrote, “Connerly… acknowledged that his firm participated in the ‘repugnant’ race-based program, but he denied that it was affirmative action.” Instead, he described the program as a “policy that requires that every contract ... include participation of at least 15 percent of minority businesses and 5 percent of women.” If there was nothing wrong with this, why does Mr. Connerly call it “repugnant”?

I stand by the reporting in the piece. If I have any regret, it’s that I didn’t give more credit to the work done by Connerly and others to overturn Michigan’s affirmative-action policies. That was a particularly difficult battle—and an important one. 

__________________________________________