Behind The Scenes of The DPG’s Ethics Complaint Against My Good Friend, Speaker Glenn Richardson
by Bill Simon
Rumors have it that Chairman Bobby Kahn’s designated “hatchet-man”, Emil Runge had quite the problem two weeks ago when he was directed by Kahn to deliver the complaint against Speaker Richardson.
Runge reportedly delivered a copy to the House Ethics Committee Chairman, Rep. Joe Wilkinson. Wilkinson patiently informed Runge that his committee wasn’t the “Joint-Legislative Committee on Ethics” but the “Ethics Committee” for legislation.
Runge reportedly dropped copies in nearly every office he could find open, including the State Ethics Commission (which does not hold jurisdiction over “conflicts of interest” matters) and then, finally, Runge managed to deliver a copy to Senator Eric Johnson’s office. Johnson is co-chair of the Joint Legislative Committee on Ethics (“JLCE”).
Now, rumors are that the Committee will consider the allegations claimed by Kahn and the DPG. This includes the possibility of issuing subpoenas for depositions and such.
HOWEVER, according to what has been reported about the contents of the complaint, it offers no proof at all to back-up the allegation(s).
So, the onus on the JLCE will be to set some standards now on exactly what types of allegations they will investigate.
I know from my experience with filing complaints with the Ethics Commission, you cannot just “allege” a violation of the law…you have to back it up with a cite of the specific law, along with some kind of proof that the law has been violated.
If the JLCE decides that a complaint written by any Tom, Dick, Harry, and/or Bobby could just allege something without any kind of proof contained within the complaint, then the JLCE will open the door to its wide-open position for all kinds of complaints to be written and thrown to the committee to get involved in.
It’s one thing to use the State Ethics Commission for political vindictiveness or gain over an opposing party, but even the most insidious complaints filed must have some proof to back up an allegation, even if the allegation turns out to be inaccurate.
January 15th, 2007 at 9:23 pm
Bill,
Sort of like reporting murder just because there’s a lot of blood on the floor?
I’d hate to think the burden of proof would say … fall on O.J. Simpson … to get the murder of Niccole investigated?
He’d have to file a report with photographs, tissue samples from the body, a certified copy of birth records, photo ID of Niccole, avadavats from a doctor that the death was not natural, notes from three members of the clergy to back up that it was not the very hand of God that slit her throat open?
So if it is common knowledge, we still need to meet a laborious technical standard that sex with a lobbyist violates some codified standard of behavior?
I could be crude and say her sexual favors were not worth the $50 minimum gift reporting standard?
January 16th, 2007 at 8:48 am
Please, let’s NOT follow the example of the Atlanta Police Department and just bursting in with no knock and firing questions/depositions at someone based on the POSSIBILITY that someone is just making-up a political story in order to gain a political point.
The Ethics Commission deals in rules of evidence in order to open an investigation; so should the Joint Legislative Committee on Ethics.
January 18th, 2007 at 10:35 am
Rule No. 1
“If the trailers rocking, don’t come knocking.”
January 18th, 2007 at 10:35 am
Rule No. 2
“Don’t ask. Don’t tell.”
January 18th, 2007 at 10:38 am
Rule No. 3
“Abstinence. Just say No.”