Comments on: Districts, Parties, and the SBOE Ban http://www.politicalparlor.net/wp/2007/08/24/districts-parties-and-the-sboe-ban/ & Home of Lawn Mower Repair Thu, 20 Nov 2008 13:56:51 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.5 by: State Representative’s Office Raided » Doc’s Political Parlor http://www.politicalparlor.net/wp/2007/08/24/districts-parties-and-the-sboe-ban/#comment-18177 Sat, 16 Feb 2008 14:10:44 +0000 http://www.politicalparlor.net/wp/2007/08/24/districts-parties-and-the-sboe-ban/#comment-18177 [...] Some Republicans had heard from the highest levels that the investigation into the 2-year college program would touch at least one of the two Republican legislators employed by two year colleges. Greeson (of Ider) is one, the other is Rep. Blaine Galliher who is employed by Gadsden State Community College. [...] […] Some Republicans had heard from the highest levels that the investigation into the 2-year college program would touch at least one of the two Republican legislators employed by two year colleges. Greeson (of Ider) is one, the other is Rep. Blaine Galliher who is employed by Gadsden State Community College. […]

]]> by: First Look at Cullman County’s HD 12 » Doc’s Political Parlor http://www.politicalparlor.net/wp/2007/08/24/districts-parties-and-the-sboe-ban/#comment-9134 Mon, 10 Sep 2007 17:17:26 +0000 http://www.politicalparlor.net/wp/2007/08/24/districts-parties-and-the-sboe-ban/#comment-9134 [...] Last week we took a look at the districts of the 13 state representatives employed by the two-year college system and considered if they represented a pick-up opportunity for the other party if the legislator left the House. Who knew our just-for-fun-peek could become relevant so soon? [...] […] Last week we took a look at the districts of the 13 state representatives employed by the two-year college system and considered if they represented a pick-up opportunity for the other party if the legislator left the House. Who knew our just-for-fun-peek could become relevant so soon? […]

]]> by: Helen http://www.politicalparlor.net/wp/2007/08/24/districts-parties-and-the-sboe-ban/#comment-8624 Mon, 27 Aug 2007 19:15:53 +0000 http://www.politicalparlor.net/wp/2007/08/24/districts-parties-and-the-sboe-ban/#comment-8624 I think the point of the issue is that conflict of interest needs to be acknowledged in all areas. I've heard about 2-year-system abuses since first moving to Alabama in 1980 and have been disgusted by the failure to address them; however, I worry about throwing the baby out with the bathwater in the zeal to clean up--these institutions have provided wonderful opportunities for many people in the state. And other taxpayer funded and private entities have contributed to favors done special interests at citizen expense. And how do we increase citizen pressure for greater transparency in government without just raising the level of cynicism? I think the point of the issue is that conflict of interest needs to be acknowledged in all areas. I’ve heard about 2-year-system abuses since first moving to Alabama in 1980 and have been disgusted by the failure to address them; however, I worry about throwing the baby out with the bathwater in the zeal to clean up–these institutions have provided wonderful opportunities for many people in the state. And other taxpayer funded and private entities have contributed to favors done special interests at citizen expense.

And how do we increase citizen pressure for greater transparency in government without just raising the level of cynicism?

]]> by: Jim http://www.politicalparlor.net/wp/2007/08/24/districts-parties-and-the-sboe-ban/#comment-8578 Sun, 26 Aug 2007 14:49:33 +0000 http://www.politicalparlor.net/wp/2007/08/24/districts-parties-and-the-sboe-ban/#comment-8578 SamfordDem, I think you're missing the point of this issue. It is not whether someone with an interest or job related to an issue can vote on it in the Legislature. There already are rules in place dealing with that. The issue is whether someone can hold two taxpayer jobs at the same time, and use one of those jobs to obtain or benefit his other taxpayer-funded job. The notion that privately employed citizens are similar to those on the state payroll is comparing apples and oranges. Also, the issue in this case appears to be a state board with oversight over these matters as the employer has an interest in limiting who it employs, in this case another state-paid employee. If that interest is upheld, it would appear the ban would remain. Other states have taken this approach, and have won the legal challenges based on the courts recognizing a greater state interest in creating such an employment ban. Now, opponents' best argument against this is to cast this as a voting issue, i.e. the state cannot limit who can serve in elected office. However, that issue has not always prevailed in other states. SamfordDem,

I think you’re missing the point of this issue. It is not whether someone with an interest or job related to an issue can vote on it in the Legislature. There already are rules in place dealing with that. The issue is whether someone can hold two taxpayer jobs at the same time, and use one of those jobs to obtain or benefit his other taxpayer-funded job. The notion that privately employed citizens are similar to those on the state payroll is comparing apples and oranges. Also, the issue in this case appears to be a state board with oversight over these matters as the employer has an interest in limiting who it employs, in this case another state-paid employee. If that interest is upheld, it would appear the ban would remain. Other states have taken this approach, and have won the legal challenges based on the courts recognizing a greater state interest in creating such an employment ban. Now, opponents’ best argument against this is to cast this as a voting issue, i.e. the state cannot limit who can serve in elected office. However, that issue has not always prevailed in other states.

]]> by: SamfordDem http://www.politicalparlor.net/wp/2007/08/24/districts-parties-and-the-sboe-ban/#comment-8558 Sun, 26 Aug 2007 01:37:13 +0000 http://www.politicalparlor.net/wp/2007/08/24/districts-parties-and-the-sboe-ban/#comment-8558 Nevertheless, the State Government still has the right to regulate private corporations and therefore can directly affect the financial situation of those corporations. Conflicts of interests are inherent when you have a legislature made up of private citizens, even if their legislative role is a full-time job, their fundraising represents a conflict of interests. Certainly, there have been a series of high profile egregious actions by members of the Alabama legislature employed by the state two year college system in the past few years, but this new rule cannot and will not hold up in any court of law. Laws should be passed to prohibit leglislators from voting in specific situations in which a conlfict of interest is apparent. This will likely become a federal case and I could very easily see it going before the US Supreme Court. No entity has the right to deny any individual a role in goverment solely based on their place of employment. Nevertheless, the State Government still has the right to regulate private corporations and therefore can directly affect the financial situation of those corporations. Conflicts of interests are inherent when you have a legislature made up of private citizens, even if their legislative role is a full-time job, their fundraising represents a conflict of interests. Certainly, there have been a series of high profile egregious actions by members of the Alabama legislature employed by the state two year college system in the past few years, but this new rule cannot and will not hold up in any court of law. Laws should be passed to prohibit leglislators from voting in specific situations in which a conlfict of interest is apparent. This will likely become a federal case and I could very easily see it going before the US Supreme Court. No entity has the right to deny any individual a role in goverment solely based on their place of employment.

]]> by: Susan http://www.politicalparlor.net/wp/2007/08/24/districts-parties-and-the-sboe-ban/#comment-8546 Sat, 25 Aug 2007 17:06:01 +0000 http://www.politicalparlor.net/wp/2007/08/24/districts-parties-and-the-sboe-ban/#comment-8546 Helen, This applies only to two-year colleges because the SBOE has no jurisdiction over the 4 year universities. I'm thinking that there is a reason there are far fewer employees of 4 year universities in the system. At Auburn it is widely understood that a faculty member running for the legislature will have to choose between the office and the job. As for private corporations, they are not funded with taxpayer money. There are ethics standards to prohibit legislators from voting on something on which they have a conflict of interest. I think this should apply to all taxpayer funded entities (like the federal Hatch Act), but the SBOE only has jurisdiction over the K-12 and 2 year colleges. Helen,

This applies only to two-year colleges because the SBOE has no jurisdiction over the 4 year universities. I’m thinking that there is a reason there are far fewer employees of
4 year universities in the system. At Auburn it is widely understood that a faculty member running for the legislature will have to choose between the office and the job. As for private corporations, they are not funded with taxpayer money. There are ethics standards to prohibit legislators from voting on something on which they have a conflict of interest.

I think this should apply to all taxpayer funded entities (like the federal Hatch Act), but the SBOE only has jurisdiction over the K-12 and 2 year colleges.

]]> by: Helen http://www.politicalparlor.net/wp/2007/08/24/districts-parties-and-the-sboe-ban/#comment-8529 Sat, 25 Aug 2007 05:44:23 +0000 http://www.politicalparlor.net/wp/2007/08/24/districts-parties-and-the-sboe-ban/#comment-8529 Can someone explain to me why the 2-year colleges appear to be the only focus? Shouldn't this apply to 4-year institutions, as well as other taxpayer funded entities. Is it ok for corporate employee/legislators to do the same, and whose interests are they representing--the people in their district or their employer? I'm thinking back 10 years when a sure-to-pass transit referendum was blocked by an employee of HealthSouth, which was associated with domed-stadium interests, only to be tossed into the MAPS proposal, which was defeated the next year. Can someone explain to me why the 2-year colleges appear to be the only focus? Shouldn’t this apply to 4-year institutions, as well as other taxpayer funded entities. Is it ok for corporate employee/legislators to do the same, and whose interests are they representing–the people in their district or their employer? I’m thinking back 10 years when a sure-to-pass transit referendum was blocked by an employee of HealthSouth, which was associated with domed-stadium interests, only to be tossed into the MAPS proposal, which was defeated the next year.

]]> by: Anonymous http://www.politicalparlor.net/wp/2007/08/24/districts-parties-and-the-sboe-ban/#comment-8513 Fri, 24 Aug 2007 21:45:59 +0000 http://www.politicalparlor.net/wp/2007/08/24/districts-parties-and-the-sboe-ban/#comment-8513 Morrison is another one that had his job before hand. Morrison is another one that had his job before hand.

]]> by: Danny http://www.politicalparlor.net/wp/2007/08/24/districts-parties-and-the-sboe-ban/#comment-8511 Fri, 24 Aug 2007 21:17:52 +0000 http://www.politicalparlor.net/wp/2007/08/24/districts-parties-and-the-sboe-ban/#comment-8511 Good question, Susan. All I know off the top of my head is that Hinshaw had his position before he was elected. I would not be surprised if many or most of them took their positions afterward though. Good question, Susan. All I know off the top of my head is that Hinshaw had his position before he was elected. I would not be surprised if many or most of them took their positions afterward though.

]]> by: Danny http://www.politicalparlor.net/wp/2007/08/24/districts-parties-and-the-sboe-ban/#comment-8510 Fri, 24 Aug 2007 21:16:13 +0000 http://www.politicalparlor.net/wp/2007/08/24/districts-parties-and-the-sboe-ban/#comment-8510 Anonymous, he did not say that the races were close. His point was that the races were close enough to suggest that the district's election for the seat would be competitive between both parties if there was not an incumbent running. Same thing with your example of the Governor's race. I would agree that Riley's victory with 57% (well, <a href="http://www.al.com/election/coverage/index.ssf?state" rel="nofollow">58% actually</a>) of the vote was not close, but it's close enough to suggest reasonably that Republicans don't have a lock on the race next time when an incumbent will not be running. Mooncat, no question in my mind that some (or many) of them would choose to run again. Anonymous, he did not say that the races were close. His point was that the races were close enough to suggest that the district’s election for the seat would be competitive between both parties if there was not an incumbent running.

Same thing with your example of the Governor’s race. I would agree that Riley’s victory with 57% (well, 58% actually) of the vote was not close, but it’s close enough to suggest reasonably that Republicans don’t have a lock on the race next time when an incumbent will not be running.

Mooncat, no question in my mind that some (or many) of them would choose to run again.

]]>