John David Dyche Sours On David Williams, Calls For His Ouster As Senate Leader.

It's time for a change
Written by John David Dyche

“Depart, I say, and let us have done with you! In the name of God, go!”

When Leo Amery, a respected member of the British Parliament, spoke these words in a 1940 debate on Neville Chamberlain’s government, they “ripped the air like bullets,” according to one historian.

Chamberlain clung to office although his appeasement policies had hastened a war he proceeded to poorly handle. Amery’s speech helped force him out. Winston Churchill ascended, and the rest is history.

Republicans in the Kentucky Senate need an Amery now. One of them must publicly declare about defeated gubernatorial candidate and Senate President David Williams what Amery did about Chamberlain. “We cannot go on as we are. There must be a change.”

Williams lost the governor’s race by over 20 percent despite Kentucky’s bleak budget picture, its unemployment rate higher than the nation’s, and a Democratic opponent with few first term accomplishments and no second term agenda.

“I was just too unpopular to be elected,” Williams explained. No one disagrees.

Yet Williams is determined to continue as Senate president. In that role he will remain the party’s public face and voice in a General Assembly session full of contentious issues and crucial 2012 campaigns. If Republicans permit this they will be thumbing their noses at voters.

After Republican congressional victories in 2010, Mitch McConnell, the party’s leader in Kentucky and the U.S. Senate, said Democrats could either “change course” or “double down on a vision of government that the American people have roundly rejected.” The same choice confronts Kentucky’s GOP as to Williams now.

Williams says the agenda he ran on is right for Kentucky. He interprets the election results as rejection of the messenger, not the message. But as long as he is the messenger the message will be either ignored or discredited by association.

For the sake of that pro-growth reform agenda, and to the dismay of many, this column and columnist consistently argued the case for gubernatorial candidate Williams. But Kentuckians have spoken, clearly and emphatically, and their verdict was a referendum against Williams.

He divided a party that must be united to win in a Democratic state. He drew no support from Democrats or independents. He could not raise money. He made deplorably demagogic religious remarks. If he is the personification of the party going forward the public will, with good reason, see it as a continuation of the gubernatorial campaign and view every legislative disagreement as sour grapes.

Williams offers various reasons why he should remain. They range from his improved physical, spiritual and intellectual strength to the lack of any able and willing successor.

Self-improvement is admirable, but insufficient for continued leadership after such a resounding electoral repudiation. And, as Charles de Gaulle trenchantly observed, “The graveyards are full of indispensable men.” Like with Lincoln and his generals, Republicans will not find the right new leadership until they seek it.

Others cite constitutional arguments against replacing a Senate president midterm. These need not come into play if the party’s desire for change is put to Williams in sufficiently plain terms. If he refuses to step down voluntarily, Republicans can confront any constitutional questions. Voters will applaud them for trying.

Few dispute that Williams is a man of ability and accomplishment. He deserves some gratitude for laboring long and hard in the Republican vineyard. His best chance of receiving it is to emulate Churchill, who concluded his distinguished political career by returning to Parliament’s backbenches. Williams can console himself that valuable public service is possible from there, too.

After over a decade of Williams’ take-no-prisoners style, Republicans need a replacement capable of making their political case in a more pleasant manner. Ronald Reagan and Paul Ryan provide past and present national models of principled, personable, happy political warriors respected even by their adversaries.

Statewide, think Agriculture Commissioner-elect James Comer, the GOP’s only 2011 election winner and the ballot’s top vote-getter. Stylistically, Comer is the “anti-Williams.”

Perhaps Kentucky’s press will never provide favorable coverage to a living Republican leader. The liberal urban newspapers will ultimately try to weaken any conservative showing potential. People understand this, but media demonization will at least be more difficult if Kentucky’s GOP leader relies less on intimidation and sarcasm than Williams has.

If last week’s gubernatorial debacle does not produce a leadership change, what will? Republicans deserve further defeats if they do not try to provide it. Is there an Amery among the GOP’s state Senate ranks with the credibility and courage to say so?

John David Dyche is a Louisville attorney who writes a political column on alternating Tuesdays in Forum His views are his own, not those of the law firm in which he practices. Read him online at www.courier-journal.com; email: jddyche@yahoo.com.

Editor's comment: while I agree that David Williams needs to be LESS of a bully as a leader, I do not agree with calls for his ouster.

I believe David Williams, as GOP leader, has made it possible for Kentucky to have a two party system of governance.