The Miami Herald
November 5, 2008 Wednesday
Broward County mayor reelected; new ethics commission gets the green
light; Broward's Democratic mayor, clerk of courts, supervisor of elections
and property appraiser all easily won reelection from voters, who also
decided to create an ethics commission.
Broward voters troubled by scandal instructed county commissioners six years ago to
enact tough new ethics rules, but they never did. On Tuesday, voters made sure
those long-sought rules finally will get written.
The new Broward Ethics Commission has one job: draft a code of ethics to regulate
commissioners' behavior. Then it ceases to exist.
''We can expect more of these local initiatives where government is either slow to
act, or refuses to act,'' said Anthony Alfieri, director of the University of Miami School
of Law's Center for Ethics & Public Service.
Voters in heavily Democratic Broward also returned to office several well-known
Democratic incumbents.
In the most closely watched race, Clerk of Courts Howard Forman soundly defeated
independent Beverly Kennedy, the wife of ex-court clerk Ed Kennedy, whom Forman
defeated in 2000.
Forman, 62, had touted his office's customer service in the face of Kennedy's
attacks.
''Obviously, people must have thought that I and my administration did a good job in
revitalizing the clerk's office,'' Forman said.
Supervisor of Elections Brenda Snipes, 65, easily fended off a challenge from another
independent candidate and local elections gadfly, Ellen Brodsky.
Broward Mayor Lois Wexler, 59, the only commission member with an opponent,
kept her District 5 seat by beating independent Russell Setti.
Commissioners John Rodstrom and Josephus Eggelletion ran unopposed, as did
Broward Property Appraiser Lori Parrish.
A patchwork of 10 ballot questions posed by Broward's Charter Review Commission
were also decided. The key one was the ethics commission initiative.
The single-purpose panel will have 11 members appointed by county commissioners
and the Broward League of Cities. They'll consider questions like whether gifts to
commissioners should be banned, or whether they can moonlight. The deadline for
presenting a new code to the county commission is March 2010. If commissioners
fail to adopt it, voters will get a chance to do so. Observers called the ethics panel a
welcomed-yet-flawed reform.
''The lack of a continuing enforcement mechanism threatens to undermine its general
purpose,'' said Alfieri, calling Miami-Dade's ethics panel -- with resources to
investigate and enforce code violations -- a better model.
Voters took to the polls with memories of the corruption case of ex-Sheriff Ken
Jenne, who was released from prison on Sept. 29. But it was some commissioners'
own prior behavior that has propelled the ethics issue.
In 2005, Eggelletion was fined for voting to award a trash-hauling contract to a
company he had lobbied for in Miramar in 2001.
Commissioner Diana Wasserman-Rubin was fined $15,000 last year for violating
state ethics laws by voting to approve grant applications for Southwest Ranches
written by her husband.
Voters also changed the charter to address the behavior of commissioners.
One change prohibits commissioners from interfering directly with county employees.
The second requires commissioners who declare a voting conflict to leave the room
and not participate in pre-vote discussions.
Times-Picayune (New Orleans)
November 5, 2008 Wednesday
The ethics board's homework
Changes in state ethics laws pushed by Gov. Bobby Jindal have catapulted Louisiana
to No. 5 in a national ranking of state government ethics, and that's something
worth celebrating. But reaping the new measure's full benefits will require active
enforcement, and in great part that will be up to the incoming members of the
state's Board of Ethics.
An entirely new board is replacing the members who resigned five months ago,
before new financial disclosure rules kicked in. The mass resignations left the
institution in a stalled position and created a large backlog of cases. Many politicians
and lobbyists will have to begin reporting their finances next year, and the agency so
far is not prepared to handle the avalanche of new data.
That means the new board and Chairman Frank Simoneaux have their work cut out
for them. They must work diligently to reduce the backlog and gear up the agency to
enforce the new financial requirements, as well as other new ethics rules.
One of their most important tasks will be hiring an effective administrator for the
agency. They should strive for a person with a stronger ethical backbone than former
administrator Gray Sexton. With the previous board's complicity, Mr. Sexton
resigned his administrator post in mid-2007 only to be immediately rehired by the
board for unspecified duties -- all in an effort to let Mr. Sexton evade new financial
disclosure requirements.
That was only one of several weaknesses at the board, which often overlooked
violations or waived fines. Administrative judges now will decide ethics cases, but it
will be up to the Board of Ethics whether to prosecute violators, and Louisianians
expect board members to be fair but assertive.
The state's improvement in national rankings is all good. But Louisianians supported
ethics reform because they want those new laws to be instruments to improve
government transparency and prevent corruption. That's the goal new ethics board
members should pursue.
The Patriot Ledger (Quincy, MA)
November 4, 2008 Tuesday
ROP Edition
Democracy inaction on Beacon Hill
The taint from the mushrooming corruption scandal enveloping state Sen. Dianne
Wilkerson threatens to wash over all who work on Beacon Hill.
But while some decry that all elected officials are being unfairly tarnished by the
developments, we see a troubling pattern of several related and unrelated
developments that cry for changes in the ethics laws and more transparency from
those we elect to conduct the public's business.
The 33-page FBI affidavit about how pressure was exerted to corral a liquor license
reads like a sausage recipe - very unappetizing. While Boston officials will have to
answer to their constituents how it all went down and who knew what, there are
some equally troubling issues raised that directly affect us on the South Shore and
raise questions about the process for legislation at the State House.
Two high-powered leaders from our region, Senate President Therese Murray of
Plymouth and Sen. Michael Morrissey of North Quincy, are easily recognized despite
not being named in the affidavit for their alleged roles in the Wilkerson affair.
While nothing criminal is alleged against the pair, their involvement and actions need
to be explained to their constituents. Hiding behind the claim there is an ongoing
investigation is an attempt to cover up.
According to the affidavit, Murray blocked two home rule petitions from passing at
Wilkerson's behest until the Roxbury senator received assurances the liquor license
she was seeking would be awarded.
While there is an understanding thatquid pro quosare the order of the day in
legislative horse-trading, the two measures being held hostage were Boston-specific
and had nothing to do with the liquor license, which was a local issue. How could that
affect a Plymouth senator?
As for Morrissey, he wrote the legislation to grant Boston 40 new liquor licenses,
including five that would be controlled by Wilkerson, according to the affidavit.
Again, how does that benefit or affect Squantum residents?
There are other troubling aspects of both Murray's and Morrissey's involvement that
don't necessarily reflect on them individually as much as it casts a cloud over the
process on Beacon Hill for getting things done: closed-door meetings, pressure-filled
phone calls, "arm-twisting" and "leg breaking" metaphors, to name a few.
House Speaker Sal DiMasi is entangled in his own ethics dilemma involving contract
favoritism for friends; a would-be successor, House Majority Leader John Rogers, is
under fire for paying fees from his campaign account to a banker/supporter who
used the money to pay the mortgage for a Cape Cod house they may or may not
jointly own; laws are made and agreed to in back rooms out of public view with little
more than rubber stamp roll call votes; the nonpartisan think tank MassINC released
a study that shows the governor, Legislature and courts do not release records under
the public records laws and those charged with enforcing the laws rarely are
successful.
The bottom line is the public is on the outside looking in, and information is carefully
crafted and rationed in small increments.
Gov. Deval Patrick has proposed a task force to develop ethics reforms. We hope it
expands to include legislative reform.
It's time to open up some of those nailed windows on Beacon Hill and change the
way we do the public's business. It's time to return to the days of open meetings and
public discussions; to put an end to influence trading for bill passage; to put some
meat in the public records laws.
In short, it's time for democracy to return.
Sun Journal (Lewiston, Maine)
November 3, 2008 Monday
What's in a PAC name?
They want to lower taxes on cars, get more state funding for schools and make
marijuana legal. But you wouldn't know it.
It is the season for political groups. These days their names are all over Maine,
behind the polls and the candidates, and on campaign signs, TV spots and
newspaper ads. But don't count on knowing a group's stand on an issue from its
name.
For example, take the "Citizens Who Support Maine's Public Schools." Sounds like
wholesome, parent-teacher bake-saley goodness.
Except, the group's actual focus is a tad more narrow and much more technical. The
group is a political action committee formed back in May 2004 to help the Maine
Municipal Association get the state to pay 55 percent of local education costs.
But the name "Lobbyists Who Support Having the State Pay 55 percent of Local
Education Funding" doesn't fit as neatly on a bumper sticker or a billboard.
That's the way it goes with a number of the 136 political action committees active
and currently registered with the state Commission on Governmental Ethics and
Election Practices. Many of the names are obvious: "Casinos No!", "Planned
Parenthood of Northern New England" and the "NRA Political Victory Fund."
Others are not quite as obvious, but could be guessed at, and make sense once
explained. Like the Maine Truck PAC. The group supports legislation and candidates
that make life better for truckers. Similarly, the Build Maine PAC speaks for
construction and building issues.
But when the others don't wear their causes on their sleeves, is it because of
vagueness or guile? The group "Maine Citizens for Patients Rights" has been in the
headlines enough over the last two years for most people to realize the group
supports the legal growing and selling of medical marijuana.
And what about "High Hopes PAC" or "Majority 101"?
And who would have guessed that "The Road to a Cleaner Maine" wants to lead the
way to lower taxes. That group was founded in August 2007 to promote lowering the
excise tax on automobiles.Right, or left
It's no surprise that most of the PACs registered in Maine are designed to help
Democrats or Republicans get into state office. For Republican candidates, there's
the "Leadership for Maine's Future" and "Experience Counts PAC." On the left, state
files list the "Business Minded Democrats" and the "Old School Democrats" alongside
"High Hopes PAC." All three aim to put more Democrats in state office.
And then there's "Responsible Action Yields Excellence for Maine" or "RAYE For
Maine." Turns out, that was a handy acronym for Washington County Republican
state Sen. Kevin Raye, when it was founded in 2004. Today, his PAC supports the
Republican Party. In the same vein, "Majority 101" was founded to help Brunswick
Democrat John Richardson win the speaker of the House job.
But issues, not individual people, have inspired entire categories of PACs as well,
some with clear intentions; some not so. For example:
Gambling: The "MaineCasinosNow.Com" PAC, founded in 2006 to promote an Oxford
County casino on this November's ballot, faces off with "Casinos No!," "No Slots For
ME" (founded to specifically oppose slots machines when it was founded in 2004)
and "Gambling With the Way Life Should Be" (which sprang up in 2006 to oppose
Washington County harness racing, but now sets its sights on the Oxford casino).
Education: Education has inspired a number of groups including: "Citizens Who
Support Maine's Public Schools," "Maine's Coalition to Save Schools" (trying to put
anto the state's mandate to consolidate school districts) and "Citizens for Higher
Education" (promotes bonds for public colleges).
Economic development: For poetically named "Shine the Light," which was founded
in 2006 by State Rep. Scott Lansley, R-Sabattus, the stated aim is to support better
economic growth for Maine. "Time for a Change," founded back in 2003, wants to
improve the state's business climate. And the "Clean House Political Action
Committee" and "Community Action Maine" both say they support candidates who
favor economic development.
Not unexpectedly, a handful of the registered Maine PACs are managed from out of
state. Act Blue Maine is part of the national Pro-Democrat Act Blue group and aims
to support candidates at all levels of government. It's managed out of
Massachusetts.
The state's United Auto Workers PAC Council speaks for the labor union members in
Maine, but gets its orders out of Connecticut.
And the National Federation of Independent Business/ME Save America's Free
Enterprise Trust is based out of Tennessee. That won't easily fit on a bumper sticker,
but it least its intentions are clear.
The Advocate
November 2, 2008 Sunday
Main Edition
One big step on long road
Perhaps it's kind of like the Bowl Championship Series, wherein one can win lots of
games and still not be No. 1. That's probably how coach Jindal and his team felt
when the latest rankings about ethics in state government came out.
In large part because of the legislative financial disclosure laws pushed by Gov.
Bobby Jindal and good-government groups this year, Louisiana vaulted to No. 5 in
the states in a ranking of its ethics laws. That's from No. 46 in the last rankings in
2002.
In the Ethics BCS, we should be No. 1. Even the ranking groups, two of them, say
that's the case, but one of them hasn't yet updated its ranking. The major ranking is
the Better Government Association, which bases its rankings in part on a conflict-of-
interest ranking by the Center for Public Integrity.
CPI's input into the Ethics BCS isn't published yet, but when it is, BGA officials said,
Louisiana will be No. 1.
It's worth celebrating.
"We are especially pleased that Louisiana's overall BGA ranking would in fact be No.
1 in the country, and our conflict-of-interest laws would be No. 1 also when BGA
accounts for updated CPI rankings and the totality of the sweeping ethics reforms we
put into law earlier this year," Jindal said.
Do rankings make Louisiana the most ethical state in America? No, don't take that
bet and expect to bank away your winnings in U.S. Rep. William Jefferson's freezer.
But we believe the improvements in ethics laws - some of them, we note, also
pushed and passed by former Gov. Kathleen Blanco - have established over time
that Louisiana is ready to turn the page on a history of cronyism and corruption.
We are far from the ideal. Witness the prosecution of Jefferson, the New Orleans
congressman accused of stashing bribe money in his freezer.
And the BGA rankings don't mean the No. 1 state has perfect ethics codes, but
rather the best of those so far passed among the states. To use a baseball analogy
for the Jindal Tigers, we're tops in the league, but we're not pitching the perfect
game yet.
Louisiana ought to continue over the next few years to push ahead on this front. The
Jindal administration had some bills with merit that were waylaid in the hurry of this
year's ethics special session. Issues involving transparency and open records in the
Governor's Office and elsewhere must be improved if Louisiana is really willing to
boast about being the best in ethics laws. Effective enforcement is an issue, too,
given drastic changes in the structure of the Board of Ethics this year.
We hope good-government groups that helped to push this issue last year and this
year will look at ways to do better. While most in government considered the Jindal
transition teams of fall 2007 to be window dressing, the ethics panel was outspoken
in favor of reforms. Maybe the governor should call those "wise men" back into
session and talk about a new, improved ethics agenda.
Jindal wants to use these ethics ratings to promote Louisiana as a good place to do
business. This will help, but the promise of follow-through will burnish this
championship crown.
The Clarion-Ledger (Jackson, Mississippi)
November 2, 2008 Sunday
Metro Edition
Agency lobbying is focus of probe
*State ethics group reviewing use of taxpayer funds to pay contracts
A state investigation is under way into the use of taxpayer money on state lobbying
efforts in recent years.
Lawmakers have scheduled a two-day hearing later this month to review the use of
contract lobbyists by state agencies - including Mississippi's public universities.
Senate Ethics Committee Chairman Merle Flowers, R-Southaven, said he could not
comment on the specifics of the investigation but said it is related to lobbyists and
the state College Board. The findings of the investigation begun in April will be
revealed during the hearing, he said.
The hearing comes just months after a legislative watchdog group issued a report
recommending changes in the way state agencies, including Mississippi's universities
and colleges, court lawmakers.
Nearly $350,000 was spent on contract lobbyists for three of the state's public
universities from 2003 to 2007, according to the Joint Committee on Performance
Evaluation and Expenditure Review.
Coupled with money spent by other state agencies - including the Mississippi
Department of Transportation and the Pearl River Valley Water Supply District -
about $1.3 million in taxpayers' money went to contract lobbyists during that five-
year term, the report states.
PEER recommends legislators prohibit state universities from using public funds to
hire lobbyists.
"If we have agency directors and executive directors making more than $300,000 a
year, why do we need contract lobbyists?"Flowers asked.
The PEER report's recommendation appears to agree.
"The use of a contractor to do what veteran, executive-level employees should be
competent to do constitutes a waste of the state's scarce resources,"the PEERreport
states. "The money used for contract lobbyists could be used for ongoing programs
and services."
Flowers said he found the use of spending on lobbyists inappropriate, particularly
when the state is facing budget cuts of 2 percent this year and 4 percent next year.
As it pertains to higher education, the money spent on lobbying could have gone
toward additional teachers, scholarships and services, he said.
"Our investigation is not an attack on the lobbying community or lobbyists," Flowers
said.
College Board spokeswoman Annie Mitchell said,"The board is currently reviewing the
report and looks forward to discussing the issue with its legislative partners later this
month."
The bulk of higher education contract lobbyist spending was attributed to Mississippi
State University's hiring lobbyist Camille Scales Young for five years. Young has
represented groups like the Mississippi Economic Council, Nissan North America,
Save The Children and Legends Gaming of Mississippi. She could not be reached
Saturday for comment.
The PEERreport shows MSUpaid her $297,808 over five years, but reports filed with
the secretary of state's office appear to contradict the amount. The lobbyist reports
show Young's compensation from MSUranging from $35,000 to $40,000 a year.
A section of the College Board's bylaws states that "no official, employee or agent
representing any of the separate institutions shall appear before the Legislature or
any committee thereof except upon the written order of the board or upon the
request of the legislature or committee thereof."
But another section of the bylaws states university presidents may authorize
subordinates to appear before lawmakers.
During the term that Young has been lobbying for MSU, the university has seen
several leadership changes.
This week, the College Board will select its preferred candidate to be MSU's fifth
president in 10 years.
Because of the self-reporting nature of lobbying in Mississippi, there could be some
disparities not only in who may authorize a lobbyist, but also between what
universities are reporting.
Some universities list in their lobbying reports the president as the school's only
lobbyist and reported no additional costs.
Some have private groups, like the Jackson State University Development
Foundation, pay for lobbyists.
At other schools - including the University of Mississippi - staff members are
designated as legislative liaisons. They are registered as lobbyists but report no
additional compensation.
"Iam not a lobbyist," saidOle Miss Chancellor Robert Khayat, who is among the
presidents not registered as a lobbyist. "Imade that decision when Ifirst took the
job."
The PEERreport found Ole Miss had paid $7,500 to a contract lobbyist one year.
Khayat said he did not want to challenge the committee's findings but said Ole Miss
would not be affected if legislators enact a law prohibiting universities from hiring
contract lobbyists.
Former state lawmaker Crowell Armstrong has listed himself as a lobbyist for Ole
Miss since 2005. Armstrong is an Ole Miss grad whose lobbying clients include the
Mississippi Circuit Clerks Association, Mississippi Furniture Association, Northrop
Grumman Ship Systems and Motorola.
For most years, Armstrong has worked on a volunteer basis, reporting no revenue
from Ole Miss. But in 2006, he reported $2,500 in compensation from the university.
The PEERreport does not indicate how it calculated the additional $5,000.
Khayat said the compensation Armstrong reported was apparently free tickets to Ole
Miss sporting events. Armstrong's payment did not appear on the university's
lobbying report for that year.
Armstrong could not be reached for comment Saturday.
The PEERreport also indicated that Delta State University hired Jackson-based
lobbyist Hayes Dent, whose clients include the Cigar Association of America, the
Board of Mississippi Levee Commissioners and the Mississippi Press Association.
Dent said he was "pretty sure" he was paid by the university's private foundation. If
so, the lobbying would not have been at taxpayers' expense. "The Legislature does a
great job of policing this sort of thing,"Dent said.
The Miami Herald
November 2, 2008 Sunday
North Miami Beach councilman wants lobbyists to register; The council will
decide Tuesday whether to institute a law that would require lobbyists to
register in city hall.
Fearing that people on the payroll of special interests are masquerading as ordinary
citizens, one North Miami Beach city councilman wants to require lobbyists to
register with City Hall
''I just think we need a little more transparency,'' said Councilman John Patrick
Julien, who proposed the measure at the council's Oct. 21 meeting.
The council will vote on the issue Tuesday.
''If someone is getting paid to speak on an issue, they should have to disclose that,''
said Julien, who declined to specify who or what had raised his suspicions but said he
had heard that at least a few private citizens had been paid by developers to speak
before the council.
Anyone who is paid to advocate for an issue before the city council or administrative
staff is considered a lobbyist. North Miami Beach currently does not require lobbyists
to register, although, many municipalities as well as Miami-Dade government do
impose such rules.
The proposed lobbyist registration was given preliminary approval at the Oct. 21
meeting.
Under the proposed system, lobbyists must file paperwork with the city and pay a
$150 fee.
If passed, the new law would allow officials and residents to file a complaint with the
Miami-Dade Commission on Ethics and Public Trust if they suspect someone is an
unregistered lobbyist, said City Attorney Howard Lenard.
Robert Meyers, executive director of the ethics commission, said he was not familiar
with North Miami Beach's ordinance, but such rules are generally helpful.
''It forces people to identify why they are speaking in front of a government official,''
he said.
Mayor Raymond Marin said he has no problem with a lobby ordinance, but said it is
unnecessary.
''It just means now [lobbyists] have to pay the city,'' Marin said.
Lobbyist Susan Fried, who works on behalf of Intracoastal Mall, said it is not
uncommon for cities to have such ordinances.
''We do what is asked of us,'' Fried said. ``But at the end of the day, what's the
point?''
The Salt Lake Tribune
November 2, 2008 Sunday
Utah voters favor ethics reform, abortion ban
Most Utah voters want legislative ethics reform. They also would support a ban on
abortion, according to a new poll.
The popular issues have come up over and over again in the election campaign. But
they may be more than a ploy for swaying voters - both issues are expected to be
addressed in bills being prepared for consideration in the upcoming legislative
session in January.
A recent Mason-Dixon poll commissioned by The Salt Lake Tribune shows that 66
percent of likely voters had concerns about ethics violations on Utah's Capitol Hill.
The same percentage said they support outlawing abortion, except in cases of rape,
incest or to protect the mother's life or bodily function. The proposed ban mostly
mirrors the position of the LDS Church, except it is has a stricter health-related
exception.
The survey of 625 likely voters statewide, conducted Oct. 23-25, had a margin of
error of 4 percentage points.
Will the sentiments reflected in the poll affect state House and Senate races?
"The number concerned about legislative ethics should trouble the majority party,"
said Kelly Patterson, a political science professor at Brigham Young University. "It
means the state Legislature is in the news for all the wrong reasons."
Ethics reform became a central focus for state Democratic campaigns this year.
"It's been an issue for us since 2006 when we had a door knocker for open and
honest government," said Wayne Holland, chairman of the state Democratic Party.
"It appears it has become more of an issue as certain activities have been exposed."
The seldom-used House Ethics Committee convened three times this year.
Rep. Greg Hughes, R-Draper, was cleared with a slap on the wrist for "unbecoming"
behavior. A complaint against Rep. Phil Riesen, D-Holladay, for leaking allegations to
the news media was quickly dismissed. And an ethics probe of then-Rep. Mark
Walker was aborted when he hastily resigned. Prosecutors still are investigating
possible criminal violations in that case.
State Republican Party Chairman Stan Lockhart blames these eruptions on the
minority party.
"The fact that they falsely accuse a legislator means there needs to be serious
reform," Lockhart said. "We need to figure out a way to prevent character
assassination by those who simply have a political agenda."
In late September, conservative GOP lawmakers announced abortion-banning
legislation they plan to introduce in January's general session.
The wedge issue also surfaced recently in the tight race between House Speaker
Greg Curtis and Democrat Jay Seegmiller. A GOP mailer implied that Seegmiller
would interfere with a parent's right to know if their minor child was getting an
abortion - a charge Seegmiller denied.
Both candidates are wary of the proposed ban.
"That kind of legislation would bring an immediate lawsuit because of Roe v. Wade" -
which could cost the state millions of dollars in legal fees, Curtis said.
Seegmiller said he would prefer to spend the state's resources on preventing
unwanted pregnancies.
If outlawed, women will still get abortions, but they would no longer be as safe, said
Missy Bird, executive director of Planned Parenthood Action Council.
"We all have the same goal - wanted children, healthy babies and moms, and fewer
abortions," Bird said.
The Boston Herald
November 1, 2008 Saturday
ALL EDITIONS
Source: Pol gets subpoena in probe; State lawmaker tied to lobbying inquiry
Already reeling from Sen. Dianne Wilkerson's bribery scandal, the State House
received another legal jolt with the news that a lawmaker has received a subpoena
as part of a probe into alleged illegal lobbying payments connected to a ticket-
scalping bill, the Herald has learned.
A law enforcement source confirmed last night that an unidentified state lawmaker
has been issued a subpoena in connection with a grand jury investigation into
Richard Vitale, an accountant and close friend of Speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi.
Sources said neither DiMasi nor House Ways and Means Chairman Robert A. DeLeo
received the subpoena.
According to officials, Vitale received $60,000 in fees from ticket brokers pushing a
bill passed by the Legislature that relaxed scalping restrictions. Secretary of State
William Galvin referred the Vitale payments to Attorney General Martha Coakley for
possible criminal prosecution, alleging that the money should have been reported as
lobbying fees. A Coakley spokeswoman declined comment last night.
Vitale's spokesman, George Regan, denied that the payments amounted to illegal
lobbying and defended his client's reputation.
``Mr. Vitale is an incredibly successful businessman and accountant who by
everyone's admission has had a stellar business career,'' Regan said. ``Beyond that,
I'm not going to comment.''
A spokesman for DiMasi declined to comment last night.
In addition to questions about the ticket-scalping payments, Vitale is one of several
DiMasi associates named in a report by Inspector General Gregory Sullivan that
raised questions about payments connected to a $13 million state software contract
received by Cognos, a subsidiary of computer giant IBM.
According to Sullivan's report, Vitale received $600,000 in fees from the Cognos
contract, while other DiMasi associates got substantial payments, including DiMasi's
former law partner, Steven Topazio, and lobbyist Richard McDonough. The payments
could violate laws prohibiting lobbyists from receiving ``success fees'' for getting
favorable legislation passed for their clients. A state ethics investigation into the deal
also is reportedly under way.
The Boston Herald
November 1, 2008 Saturday
ALL EDITIONS
Gov plans ethics reforms
Pointing to an outbreak of corruption in public offices, Gov. Deval Patrick announced
plans for a task force aimed at preventing future bribery and lobbying scandals on
Beacon Hill.
Patrick made the announcement three days after state Sen. Dianne Wilkerson was
arrested for allegedly accepting $23,500 in bribery cash during an 18-month FBI
sting.
``Several charges of unethical behavior by public officials over the last several
months are both personally upsetting and institutionally self-defeating,'' Patrick said.
Patrick's chief legal counsel is expected to round up a group of 10 to 11 bipartisan
task force members by consulting with lawmakers and ethics watchdogs such as Pam
Wilmot and former Attorney General Scott Harshbarger.
Patrick said the group will detail the reforms by January, and he hopes lawmakers
will act on them by February.
Patrick declined to say whether the the panel would eye recent allegations against
friends of House Speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi involving a computer contract with the
state, but did point to a Boston firefighter who was on disability while participating in
body-building competitions and employees at the Department of Conservation and
Recreation who stole metal work from the Hub's famed Longfellow Bridge.
``This is not about any one person or one allegation, but there are a whole host of
them that have been in the news,'' Patrick said. A DiMasi spokesman said he will
``fully consider'' the reforms.
The task force will seek to stiffen enforcement of lobbyist penalties and attempt to
decrease the number of local matters - often called home rule petitions - that go
through the State House.
Sen. Mark Montigny (D-Fall River) commended Patrick, saying, ``The level of
coziness (with lobbyists) is unacceptable, and the room for abuse is pretty wide and
deep.''
But other senators believe Patrick is creating the task force for political cover after
supporting Wilkerson despite her prior federal tax evasion conviction and a $10,000
state campaign finance fine in August.
The News & Observer (Raleigh, North Carolina)
November 1, 2008 Saturday
Final Edition
Cash flows; North Carolina has far to go before it can boast a
straightforward system of campaign finance
Round and round the money train goes, in tighter circles than a child's toy railroad.
North Carolina politics runs on campaign cash, and the throttle is wide open.
This week we've seen how labor union contributions, including $1.1 million from a
union newly affiliated with the State Employees Association of N.C. (which is not
itself a union) have stuffed the state Democratic Party's coffers. That helps Democrat
Beverly Perdue outspend Republican Pat McCrory 3-to-1 in their race for the
governorship (the state Republican Party has given McCrory $200,000, and
separately the Republican Governors Association has spent millions on ads).
The big money steams in. It's all perfectly legal -- providing the requisite i's are
dotted and t's are crossed -- and there's a case for having strong, well-financed
political parties. Yet the way North Carolina goes about its political fundraising is
deeply suspect. Ethics reforms in recent years, following the scandals that put former
House Speaker Jim Black in the clink, have yet to touch some troublesome practices.
Take, for example a curious custom, ably outlined on the Op-ed page Thursday by
Chris Fitzsimon of N.C. Policy Watch, that is common to our entrenched legislative
leaders.
Facing little or no opposition in their own races for re-election, these leaders
nonetheless raise big sums -- $1.06 million, to cite one example -- from individual
and PAC contributors. They then hand that money over to their party -- also
perfectly legal. Headquarters directs the money, in amounts that aren't limited, to
party candidates in close contests.
In other words, contributors to Candidate A wind up funding much of Candidate B's
campaign. In the process, contributors to A (who well know their money will be
passed along) get to register their generosity directly with A, the legislative power.
Meanwhile B, the grateful candidate, develops an improved appreciation of A's
legislative goals.
It's a formula for tight, continuing, personal control of a legislative body, and it is not
at all hypothetical. Senate President Pro Tem Marc Basnight of Manteo has rightly
been called the state's most powerful politician, and his is the $1.06 million gift to
the Democratic Party mentioned above.
Basnight's top lieutenants are players too. Senate Majority Leader Tony Rand gave
$373,000, and other honchos contributed lesser amounts. Over in the House,
Speaker Joe Hackney's campaign forked over $682,000. And proving that the
difference between parties is merely one of degree, Senate Minority Leader Phil
Berger has sent $181,000 to the Republican Party.
Some states limit how much a party can give its candidates. Holding such
contributions to $10,000 or $25,000 per seat, Fitzsimon suggests, "would at least
stop the $500,000 transfers that make a mockery of campaign finance rules." The
N.C. Coalition for Lobbying and Government Reform wants the legislature to impose
term limits on its leadership posts.
Publicly financed campaigns may be the ultimate remedy, but either of these
reforms, or both, would help put the brakes on a runaway money train.
THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS
October 31, 2008 Friday
BRIEFING EDITION
Board approves new policy
A divided Dallas school board approved a controversial ethics reform plan by a 5 to 4
vote Thursday night, giving a narrow victory to those who wanted to continue
allowing companies that have ties to trustees to do business with the district.
The final vote, which capped months of rancorous debate both on the school board
and in the community, was cast amid catcalls and loud complaints from some who
attended the meeting downtown.
In the end, however, the new ethics plan will require more disclosure from trustees
about any financial conflicts of interest, and will limit their ability to make money
through district work.
Under the plan, which was amended during the debate, the district will no longer
contract with businesses that have ties to school trustees that have a "substantial
interest'' in the work, which will be defined as more than $2,500 from a contract.
School board president Jack Lowe voted for the plan, along with trustees Jerome
Garza, Edwin Flores, Nancy Bingham and Leigh Ann Ellis. Trustees Carla Ranger, Ron
Price, Lew Blackburn and Adam Medrano voted against it.
Ranger urged Lowe to refrain from voting, saying that the contracts between DISD
and TD Industries, where he is chairman of the board, are at the center of the ethics
debate. DMN
Key provisions
The ethics policy adopted by the Dallas school board Thursday night contains several
key provisions:
-School trustees could continue to do business with the district as long as they don't
have a "substantial interest" in the value of the work.
-Substantial interest is defined as more than 10 percent of the value of the contract
in question, or $15,000 in income from a contract.