Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] [MLUG][POLITICS]That Crazy Feinstein

["Jonathan King" <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

On 5/2/07, Mike Miller <EMAIL:PROTECTED> wrote:
> On Wed, 2 May 2007, Vern Green wrote:
>
> > Since Mike is fond of just posting links and not really giving any
> > follow-up.. How about this one?
> >
> > http://thehill.com/david-keene/feinsteins-cardinal-shenanigans-2007-04-30.html
> >
> > Or  this one
> >
> > http://www.metroactive.com/metro/01.24.07/dianne-feinstein-0704.html
>
> Sometimes articles speak for themselves.  Nothing wrong with that.
>
> If they can show that she did what they are claiming she did, she should
> be removed from office, probably to a jail cell.  If the following is true, it is
> very troubling even nothing worse is proven:

I don't have time to look at the articles themselves, but public
financial disclosure rules are pretty hairy, as are conflict of
interest rules. The stuff described below would definitely not work
for most federal employees, but you would also be asked right off the
bat to divest the interest. I don't think the same rules are in place
for officeholders, however, except in the executive branch. But, even
there, the rules we have do very little to obviate the appearances of
conflict of interest. Dick Cheney's stake in Halliburton (including
deferred income) is almost certainly completely legal because the way
the rules are currently written. (In particular, some or most of the
deferred income is slated to go to charity, which is clearly
preferable to receiving the money, but which creates the possibility
of generating income indirectly through tax write-offs, plus it's easy
to see how somebody who is very committed to the charity they are
giving to would act in such a way to maximize the effective donations
they would make to that charity...the whole situation is a swamp.)

>     In her annual Public Financial Disclosure Reports, Feinstein records a
>     sizeable family income from large investments in Perini, which is based
>     in Framingham, Mass., and in URS, headquartered in San Francisco. But
>     she has not publicly acknowledged the conflict of interest between her
>     job as a congressional appropriator and her husband's longtime control
>     of Perini and URS--and that omission has called her ethical standards
>     into question, say the experts.
>
> I don't want Senators and Congressmen or their close relatives on the
> payrolls of military contractors or "reconstruction" companies.  We should
> all be very concerned.

This is certainly not a good idea, but I am guessing that it would be
difficult to rule this as illegal which is why the (un-named; *always*
watch for this) experts merely point out that it is likely unethical.
But so is negotiating a huge pay raise for your girlfriend in the
middle of implementing your anti-corruption policies. Yet, the world
spins on.

jking

_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion