We like to think of Colorado as an oasis of good government, far removed from the trials and tribulations of Congress. But two state legislators proved recently that poor judgment knows no bounds when it comes to financial temptation.
Monday, they offered mea culpas.
The worst offense belongs to Sen. Deanna Hanna, D-Lakewood, who made an abject apology Monday for demanding campaign funding “reparations” (her word, not ours) from a special-interest group that endorsed her opponent in 2004. Senate Democrats had already launched an ethics investigation – only the second in the chamber’s history. Republican leader Andy McElhany called for her resignation.
Hanna, upset that the Colorado Association of Realtors endorsed her opponent after the Jefferson County arm of the group said they wouldn’t endorse anyone, sought $1,400 from the group last year, the amount they had given her opponent.
After receiving only $400, she wrote a follow-up letter obtained by the Rocky Mountain News that read, in part: “My reparations request stands. It is my hope that you will make our relationship whole again.
“There are going to be some very important issues ahead of us.”
Tony Soprano couldn’t have said it better.
After the letter was made public, Hanna insisted she had done nothing wrong, until Democrats organized an investigation. She was right to drop the “I did nothing wrong” nonsense and apologize, even if it took a week. The fact-finding probe will determine whether that was enough.
Her actions diminished the chamber. Hanna read on the Senate floor Monday: “… To my constituents and all citizens of the state, I ask for your forgiveness for what was a grave misjudgment.”
Colorado elects part-time “citizen” legislators, some of whom may run afoul of the law from time to time simply because they don’t understand the complexities of the process. But demanding payment from a group, and then offering veiled threats such as “there are going to be some very important issues ahead of us” is beyond the pale.
“You have a choice,” she wrote to the group. “So do I.” A high school civics class knows that’s not how our democratic process works.
And then there’s House Minority Leader Joe Stengel, R-Littleton. There was no complexity in his episode, just poor judgment.
Like all lawmakers, Stengel was paid a $30,000 salary for 120 days’ service during the 2005 legislative session. Then hard-working Joe billed taxpayers $99 a day per diem for each of 240 extra days of work – including every Saturday and every Sunday, only clocking out for the seven state holidays.
He even billed the state a per diem for days he was vacationing in Hawaii, telling the News he made work calls every day.
Surely Stengel worked many of the off-days, but every single one? (When he was preparing for his bar exam? When he was out stumping against Referendum C?) We’re guessing many lawmakers made work calls on off-days and didn’t bill taxpayers – common sense should rule the day.
Stengel, known for his fiscal-conservative rhetoric when it comes to government spending, collected almost $24,000 for those extra days, more than any other lawmaker. He defended the practice until Monday afternoon, when he properly joined the contrition line, saying he was reimbursing the state for $891 for the days he was on vacation and taking the bar exam.
He called it “bad judgment” to have claimed the days. Indeed. His reimbursement was an important first step. Then Stengel said he would introduce legislation eliminating per diems for leadership – one giant leap too far. Other leaders and future leaders shouldn’t be punished for Stengel’s misstep, or because of the criticism he received.
Instead, Colorado lawmakers should write clear guidelines on when it’s appropriate to claim per-diem expenses. Stengel now says the current rules are “far too ambiguous.” He’s right. They’re open to interpretation and impropriety.
But rather than scrap them entirely, he should join House Speaker Andrew Romanoff and clarify the rules. Monday, Romanoff floated the idea of capping the number of days a leader can claim; requiring lawmakers to spend at least four hours a day working on the people’s business; and documenting their work.
Finally, we learn of an “overzealous” staffer in Rep. Angie Paccione’s campaign office who offered up an “introduction” on the state House floor as a prize for raising money for the Democrat’s congressional bid. Lawmakers routinely introduce constituents on the House floor as a way to honor them, but it’s an honor that shouldn’t go to the highest bidder.
The above cases underscore the need for clarity and honesty in political work.We expect much from our elected leaders, and we encourage them to approve tight ethics rules to guide their efforts.
