Stretching Conflicts to the Point of Absurdity

According to a lawsuit filed yesterday in Alaska by five Republican lawmakers to halt an investigation into Gov. Palin's dismissal of the state's public safety commissioner, elected politicians cannot investigate the actions of other elected politicians if they have a political bias, such as giving a campaign contribution to their party's presidential candidate.

This is based on a press release on the suit from the Liberty Legal Institute, which is co-counsel in the suit, and an article in today's New York Times

These lawmakers apparently believe (or wish others to believe) that other lawmakers cannot investigate a governor's actions if they are not entirely impartial. Have you ever met a politician who was entirely impartial toward another politician?

It's interesting that an organization devoted to protecting First Amendment rights is willing to undermine the right to give campaign contributions (which such organizations consider free speech) by having this change the individual's status in such a serious manner.

It should be made clear that the Legislative Council voted on July 28 to begin this investigation, at a time when no one even dreamed that Gov. Palin would be running for Vice President. And it should also be made clear that no suit was filed until she became a candidate for Vice President.

And since these legislators are taking conflicts into new territory, it should be mentioned that one of the legislators bringing the suit was, according to the Times article, appointed by Gov. Palin, and is an elder in her church.

I should also mention that the suit includes other grounds for the legislators' goal of stopping the investigation, but most of them involve impartiality.

It makes a mockery of conflicts of interest for legislators to bring suits such as this. Conflicts should not be political footballs, and they should not be stretched to the point of absurdity. But have you ever met a politician who could resist playing with political footballs or stretching things to the point of absurdity?

Update (Sept. 21): According to a column by Clarence Page in today's Chicago Tribune, the investigation was approved by Gov. Palin and was approved unanimously by the Alaska legislature. There was no opposition to it until Gov. Palin was nominated as Vice President.

For another recent example of taking conflicts to the point of absurdity, an attorney for a group sponsoring a tax-capping ballot proposition in Nevada has accused a judge (who determined the proposition could not be placed on the ballot) of a conflict because his wife, who retired from teaching five years before, works a few hours a month as a reading consultant and thereby could be harmed by a decrease in tax money to her school district.

Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics

---