Comments on: Don’t Bore Me With Your Conflicts of Interest

By: lukeness

lukeness — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 20:10:19 +0000

All office holders should be required to invest only in Treasuries.

By: mlillis

mlillis — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 08:50:59 +0000

Hi Sunset. Thanks for the comments. And the purpose is this: With millions, sometimes billions of dollars in corporate windfalls often riding on the fate of specific legislation — and with lawmakers in a position to decide the fate of that legislation — well, you can see how quickly conflicts of interest might arise based on the personal investments of the lawmakers casting the votes. (This is particularly true of party leaders like Pelosi, who, by themselves, can decide if a bill merits floor consideration.) That's not to say that lawmakers are inherently crooked, or even that they should be forced to divest their corporate holdings. But they are inherently human, and therefore suffer all the temptations that the rest of us do, as numerous scandals prove. It's also interesting that we recognize these conflicts of interest in the judiciary branch (ie, judges must recuse themselves when they have investments related to parties appearing in their courtrooms), but not in the legislature. In this sense, the reporter's question yesterday, as I read it, was much less an accusation that Pelosi might vote her wallet then it was a condemnation of a system that would allow her the opportunity to do so. (And you'll have to ask the folks at the Politico if they consider themselves a serious publication. We're a different office over here.)

By: sunset

sunset — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 19:10:03 +0000

Please, what is your purpose in writing such egregious nastiness. Speaker Pelosie's response was, I believe entirely reasonable given the "when did you stop beating your wife" category of questioning?

I'm new to this site and would like to know. Does Politico consider itself a serious publication? Frankly this is an adolescent piece if I ever saw one and I wonder if there is any editorial discretion being applied.

By: lukeness

lukeness — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000

All office holders should be required to invest only in Treasuries.

By: mlillis

mlillis — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000

Hi Sunset. Thanks for the comments. And the purpose is this: With millions, sometimes billions of dollars in corporate windfalls often riding on the fate of specific legislation — and with lawmakers in a position to decide the fate of that legislation — well, you can see how quickly conflicts of interest might arise based on the personal investments of the lawmakers casting the votes. (This is particularly true of party leaders like Pelosi, who, by themselves, can decide if a bill merits floor consideration.) That’s not to say that lawmakers are inherently crooked, or even that they should be forced to divest their corporate holdings. But they are inherently human, and therefore suffer all the temptations that the rest of us do, as numerous scandals prove. It’s also interesting that we recognize these conflicts of interest in the judiciary branch (ie, judges must recuse themselves when they have investments related to parties appearing in their courtrooms), but not in the legislature. In this sense, the reporter’s question yesterday, as I read it, was much less an accusation that Pelosi might vote her wallet then it was a condemnation of a system that would allow her the opportunity to do so. (And you’ll have to ask the folks at the Politico if they consider themselves a serious publication. We’re a different office over here.)

By: sunset

sunset — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000

Please, what is your purpose in writing such egregious nastiness. Speaker Pelosie’s response was, I believe entirely reasonable given the "when did you stop beating your wife" category of questioning?

I’m new to this site and would like to know. Does Politico consider itself a serious publication? Frankly this is an adolescent piece if I ever saw one and I wonder if there is any editorial discretion being applied.