Not those kinds of gifts
WUNC radio aired an interesting report this week on state legislators attending Carolina Hurricanes Stanley Cup finals games (in luxury suites, no less) at the invitation of special interests.
Don't new ethics rules on gifts prohibit that kind of stuff? one lawmaker was asked.
Not really, he said. They're meant for coffee mugs and other trinkets.
In other words, not really good gifts, like hockey tickets.
Comments (4)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
When they get serious about ending corruption they will return to the original law which stated that giveing anything of value to any government official constitues bribry. Then they can prosecute as per law and lock up the lobbyist and those government officials who take bribes. Wonder how many would be left in Raleigh to govern? OOOPs I forget the main state prison is there and I suppose given their ability to twist rules they could govern from there. At least it would reduce cost of travel placed on taxpayers.
Posted on June 17, 2006 9:31 AM
I would look on attending a hockey game almost as I would a prison sentence, except for the availability of beer. But that's just me.
Posted on June 17, 2006 1:59 PM
To be fair (or just picky) none of the new ethics rules apply to this year's session. The ones passed last year go into effect Jan. 1 and the ones under debate this year are, well, are still under debate.
The particularly laughable bit form the Hockey arena was one legislator (Rep. Jim Harrell) who signed onto the voluntary "no gifts" registry, and still got comped into the hockey game anyway... by a group that has quite of bit of fish to fry before the general assembly.
Mr. Produce is right in that the only truly enforceable ethics and lobbying laws are those with bright line restrictions that legislators are hesitant to put on themselves.
Of course, I have had a few conversations over the years (some in academic settings, some not) as to whether ethical behavior can be imposed (by law or otherwise). At what point can we (or do we have to) rely on someone's basic decency vs. their fear of being prosecuted? The case of Mr. Harrell would suggest that the answer to that question is a bit thornier than anyone would like.
One post script: The House set their Monday meeting for 6 p.m. Monday night. Usually that meeting is at 7 p.m. Why an hour earlier?
Check your hockey schedule.
Posted on June 18, 2006 11:33 AM
MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE MEGSPASE
Posted on November 7, 2006 11:39 AM