34 South Main St., Attleboro, MA - Directions - (508) 222-7000
Home News Sports Features classifieds milestones services photos tvlistings cars jobs realestate subscribe
News

GOP hits Patrick 'posturing' ethics




Gov. 'grandstands' on ethics reforms
On the day he signed an ethics overhaul bill, some local lawmakers accused Gov. Deval Patrick of grandstanding on the issue as he seeks to bolster his resume for re-election next year.

Patrick, who signed the bill Wednesday, had demanded passage of the ethics package, as well as transportation and pension reform measures, before agreeing to a 25-percent sales tax increase in the state budget that took effect Wednesday.

"I think it was a lot of gamesmanship," said state Rep. Betty Poirier, R-North Attleboro. "It was an empty kind of threat."

State Rep. Jay Barrows, R-Mansfield, agreed, saying the move was done with eyes towards next November.

"The governor is politically posturing for his re-election," he said. The bill toughens state ethics standards by banning lobbyists from giving gifts to state lawmakers, banning lawmakers from accepting gifts of "substantial value" and sharply increasing the penalty for bribery from three years imprisonment and a $5,000 fine to 10 years imprisonment and a $100,000 fine.

It also strengths the state's lobbying, ethics enforcement and campaign finance laws.

State Rep. Steve D'Amico, D-Seekonk, disagreed with his colleagues, saying Patrick's veto threat was not posturing, but, given the governor's re-election aspirations, any move he makes will be given that connotation.

"I think anything he does at this point, some people are going to see it that way," he said.

He added, however, the governor's pledge was not the impetus for the reform bills. The issues were on lawmakers' minds from the very beginning.

"That was the plan from Day 1," he said. "But it never hurts to have someone holding your feet to the fire."

Poirier agreed with D'Amico, adding it was the Legislature that first mentioned making the reforms before raising taxes.

"We were the ones saying that we need to reform before we got revenue," she said. "(Patrick) adopted our mantra."

The bill was enacted after the Statehouse was rocked by the indictment of its third consecutive House speaker, Salvatore DiMasi of Boston, the arrest of Sen. Dianne Wilkerson of Boston on bribery charges, as well as the arrest of another senator, James Marzilli of Arlington, on public lewdness charges.

Lawmakers touted the ethics package at a bill-signing ceremony on the Statehouse's Grand Staircase. "My hope is that with the passage of this ethics law, we will restore the public's confidence in government," House Speaker Robert DeLeo said during the bill-signing ceremony.

Patrick said he hoped the law "raises the level of expectations inside the building to what the public is entitled to expect from us."

The bill also increases the state Ethics Commission's power to investigate and prosecute violations, creates a statewide grand jury to make it easier to investigate political corruption and requires ethics training for state and municipal workers and elected officials.

It maintains the current limits for donations to political campaigns - $200 a year for registered lobbyists and $500 for everyone else - but eliminates "special committee" arrangements between state political parties and elected officials.

That change came after it was revealed Patrick had an agreement with the state Democratic Party allowing donors to give him $500 while donating up to $5,000 to a special fund called the Seventy-First Fund. (Patrick is the state's 71st governor.)

In 2008, the fund contributed more than $288,000 in "in-kind contributions" to Patrick, picking up the tab for consulting fees and technology expenses.

The bill would still allow individual donations of up to $5,000 to state political parties.

Barrows said the bill does not solve what he sees as the major cause of recent ethical scandals - the overwhelming majority that Democrats hold in the Legislature.

"The only way we're going to see real reform is if we get some balance, if we get a real two-party system back in this state," he said.

Democrats "are pounding their chests, saying 'Look what we did,'" he said. "Show me something real, show me something I can take to the bank."

Associated Press material was used in this report.

 


*Member ID:
*Password:
  Forgot Your Password?
 
View Comments » 15 comment(s) « Hide Comments

s-plumb wrote on Jul 2, 2009 4:26 PM:

" attman63: They honestly think we don't have a clue. For the most part they were the kids in school who weren't noticed or got picked on. Once elected they started getting lots of mail and phone calls. People now call them mame or sir. They're now important; better than the common folks. Now times are now changing, but they don't understand, so they keep "playing politics", like it was a generation ago. "

attman63 wrote on Jul 2, 2009 3:39 PM:

" If we demand litte or nothing, that is what we will continue to get from these scumbags. Tax increases and corrpution are a penalty ON US for our own complacency.
As far as the Conservatives, why are they pointing fingers instead of just saying flat out that raising taxes is bad? They are being petty instead of appealing to our smart-ness.... "

s-plumb wrote on Jul 2, 2009 2:16 PM:

" Is this a Freudian slip or what "Show me something real, show me something I can take to the bank." They all want money! "

s-plumb wrote on Jul 2, 2009 1:26 PM:

" ricknkim: Don't tell me Pa on Little House wasn't real...:) "

s-plumb wrote on Jul 2, 2009 1:25 PM:

" We are all part of the problem. We need to rely on ourselves more so we do not give another human power over us. Of course, generational hind-sight is 20/20, and after-all, we have paid a life-time worth of taxes, and feel entitled to much more than basic services. Somewhere along the line this cycle has to be broken. Unfortunately, the collapse of our economy may be the only way out. Let's hope there's another way. Regular Mr. Cheery, huh? "

ricknkim wrote on Jul 2, 2009 1:19 PM:

" Not sure "Farmer Joe" and "General Store Jack" EVER really represented the common man in any significant numbers. Overwelmingly, the representation has been, and is, by the rich/elite, even back in coach/buggy times. The theory was for "for the people, by the people" but in reality it has been millionaire Kerry's, Kennedy's and the like from our founding days (with common folk being the minority) with the theory "they know not what is best for them (public) and we few do (Kennedy and company)". "

realist wrote on Jul 2, 2009 12:42 PM:

" s-plumb -- that's what they had in mind for a legislature since the Romans. Unfortunately WE keep voting for these people. Maybe if they put a none of the above option on the ballot. Everyone feels that the problem is the other legislators, not their guy. "

s-plumb wrote on Jul 2, 2009 12:40 PM:

" Sorry, in this particular case, Farmer Joe et al, goes to Capital Hill. I'm still waiting to here back from Betty Poirier; been nearly 2 months. "

s-plumb wrote on Jul 2, 2009 12:15 PM:

" What part of "we don't trust either party" don't these folks understand?
The concept of representation has been turned upside down for a long time. Farmer Joe was supposed to go to Washington and represent his community. When he was finished his neighbor, who ran the general store did the same. Who goes to school to be a senator or congressperson? It's not what the framers had in mind. "

1333 wrote on Jul 2, 2009 11:28 AM:

" Tallyho57
If the Republicans stole secret documents from the Library of Congress (Sandy Berger) or put cash from a bribery in thier freezer (William Jefferson), or insults Military tradition (Barbara Boxer) just to name a few, would that justify the republicans doing the same? "

Realist wrote on Jul 2, 2009 10:23 AM:

" kevin h. -- How could I have forgotten Patrick's property tax relief lie? "

kevin h. wrote on Jul 2, 2009 10:19 AM:

" Tallyho is from Bizzaroland. You don't even know the difference between taxes and fees. Romney could only do what the OVERWHELMINGLY Democrat legislature wanted. You are WAY off base!
p.s. The governor does not control property taxes, no matter what your Democrat liar buddy Patrick promised. "

Realist wrote on Jul 2, 2009 9:46 AM:

" tallyho57 -- you're kidding aren't you? What about all the grandiose promised Gov Tax and Spend made while running. 1000 new police officers, wonderful changes in education, attracting jobs. All the while he knew the economy was on a down swing and his goals were unsupportable. "

tallyho57 wrote on Jul 2, 2009 8:39 AM:

" Poierier, Barrows and the rest of the Republican incompetents are kidding, right? Last I remember, a fellow Repub of theirs named Mitt Romney made these grandiose statements about not raising taxes, and then the Utahan governor or ours slipped through the largest increase in fees in state history. Don't believe me? Check out the fee lists at Attleboro City Hall, or look at your property taxes, or look at your state license fees. Everything went up under Romney. Way up! I don't remember those frauds like Poirier, Barrows, Ross and Brown raising any stink then, do you? At least Patrick has the courage to raise these issues publicly, instead of saying one thing like Romney did and then doing another --- like Romney did. What is it with these Republicans, from George W down the line. Is it in a Republican's DNA that they have to lie, mislead, distort and scam the public when holding public office? "

kevin h. wrote on Jul 2, 2009 7:42 AM:

" Patrick is a liar. "