You know, before Dave Kearsley got 20K from some rich dude. Here is the letter to the editor from the Sentinel we linked to a few days back. Is it me or is it ironic? I'm never sure-irony is so tricky.
* LETTERS * FORUMS * GJSENTINEL.COM Influence peddling is offensive
I received a call June 25 from Daily Sentinel reporter Mike Saccone and was asked to comment on Commissioner Janet Rowland’s plans to create a public relations firm. Mike’s call was my first confirmation of this. Although no names for the source of this story were mentioned, some people may have the impression that I somehow started this debate and that it is inappropriate. I would like to set the record straight. Perhaps Janet raised the issue herself at this time, to inoculate herself from future criticism. Whereas she has let it be known before the election what she is planning, the voters can’t complain later. The Sentinel pointed out Commissioner Meis did the same thing before he was first elected. The law is quite specific about what constitutes an actionable conflict of interest. In essence, an official would have to trade a specific favor for proven compensation to break the law. Dennis Herzog’s June 27 “From the Newsroom” blog entry is correct in stating there is nothing wrong on the surface in opening a PR firm. The questionis: Would this be ethical conduct? The fact that Janet would be an influential public office holder would not be lost on potential clients to her PR firm. It would cause me to wonder whose interests she is putting first. Special interests find many clever and legal ways to buy favor. I find this influence-peddling to be offensive. (emphasis added -ed.)
In Janet Rowland’s case, Republican voters can decide for themselves on Aug.12 what they think is right. Mr. Herzog is correct, it is my job as the Republican candidate to point out this choice. It is why I am running against her.
David A. Kearsley Mesa
This entry was posted on Monday, June 30th, 2008 at 5:02 pm
