I read with great interest, the Journal report, link, on the off, now on again, revisit of the County's new and apparently feckless ethics ordinance.
County Commissioner Michael Brasher wanted to discuss problems with the ordinance but was voted down by a majority of Commissioners who voted to kick the can down the road. They represented that they did so in order to fold new commissioners into the discussion. That argument becomes more specious the longer you think about it.
"The right time to do the right thing is always right now." unkCounty Commissioner Michael Wiener, who voted for the delay, has changed his mind. According to the Journal;
"He doesn't want the public to think he opposes opening up the ethics process."He would like to open the discussion, in part so he can amend the ordinance to strip whistleblowers of their anonymity.
Does he really not grasp the extent of the retribution and retaliation whistleblowers suffer? Or, does he want to put an end to whistle blowing altogether?
Wiener is worried that the system is too easy to abuse; that "gadflies" will file frivolous allegations to embarrass county officials. (emphasis added) "We have a right to confront our accusers" he argued.
He is right of course, but only later in the judicial process. According to the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution;
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to ... be confronted with the witnesses against him..."The amendment speaks clearly to the opportunity to confront one's accusers, but only during criminal prosecution; not as a tool to discourage people from reporting the public corruption and incompetence they witness.
Those who seek public office place themselves in a position open to scrutiny. They betray their office in their attempts to limit that scrutiny in any way, whether it be by exposing whistle blowers to the full weight of retribution and retaliation, or by calling those who would pay attention to their public service, "gadflies".
photo Mark Bralley
No comments:
Post a Comment