June 6, 2005, 7:30 P.M.
[Ed. note: This is a revision and update of an earlier post.]
Double Standard: Last week the New Hampshire State Legislature's ethics committee recommended that former House Speaker and Bartlett Representative Gene Chandler be expelled from the Legislature for using his elected office to collect personal gifts from State House lobbyists and other donors, some of whom do business with the state. The recommendation came in a report by the ethics committee which investigated Chandler’s personal fundraising activities. The report comes eight months after Chandler was first accused of breaking state law and ethics guidelines through his practice of throwing annual fundraisers to help cover his personal expenses. He has since pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge for failing to file annual lists of contributors with the Secretary of State. He paid a $2,000 fine and must perform 100 hours of community service. Chandler chose not to run for another term as House speaker last December because of the allegations, but he remains a state representative. Unfortunately, despite the ethics committee recommendation, he remains one today.
The question of whether or not Chandler could remain as a representative was decided by the full House in a vote last week. By a margin of 172 to 189, the house narrowly voted to reject the ethics committee’s recommendation of expulsion, and instead chose to publicly censure Chandler. The last time a New Hampshire legislator was removed from office was in 1913, and that was for taking bribes.
Speaking to reporters shortly after the release of the report, Ethics Committee Chairman, and former Senator Ned Gordon said Chandler's role as House Speaker warranted a strong punishment. Gordon was quoted in the Monitor as saying: "A person in a leadership position has some responsibility to make sure they set an example for other members of the Legislature," Gordon said. "To simply say, 'I was not aware of the law,' is not an excuse." Chandler had maintained that he was not aware of the reporting requirement. The wrongdoing stems from Chandler's failure to report the names of donors to his annual "Old Fashioned Corn Roasts” to the Secretary of State as the reporting law requires. Chandler held the annual events to raise money for personal use. According to the Monitor, the corn roasts carried $10-per-person entry fees but bigger donations were common, with some lobbyists and businesses giving Chandler as much as $1,000. Chandler had said he didn't know that both state law and the Legislature's ethics rules required that he report details of who was giving him money. He also said he did not know that ethics guidelines prohibit lawmakers from taking gifts worth more than $250 from people with business before the Legislature. The total amount raised through the corn roasts was about $64,000, which certainly ain’t chicken feed.
Chandler attempted, unsuccessfully, to convince the ethics committee that his criminal conviction, which carried a $2,000 fine and 100 hours of community service, was a sufficient sentence. The committee thankfully rejected this argument citing the authority of the legislature to set a higher standard for its members. The committee report says “To have the leader of the institution claim ignorance of [the ethics guidelines] creates even more cynicism and distrust of the process." It goes on to say, “the violations create an aura of suspicion as to other public officials, an erroneous and unfortunate assumption, given the hard work done by all other members of the Legislature.
If nothing else, the receipt of tens of thousands of dollars in cash gifts from those having a great stake in his legislative action should have raised a red flag sufficient to create an ethical concern. To the contrary, in his testimony, Rep. Chandler made clear that he thought it was legal, and that made it permissible. The ethics guidelines establish a higher standard, and the members of the public expect and deserve more." The committee decision to expel Chandler was unanimous.
It is unconscionable for someone who has served in the State House for over 20 years and who has held leadership roles, including Speaker of the House, to remain in the face of this type of behavior. Chandler knew that what he was doing was wrong and he does not deserve to take up a seat in the legislature, no matter how popular he is back home. Anything short of expulsion under these circumstances suggests that this type of unethical and illegal behavior is acceptable to a majority of the Senate and that is disturbing. They should be paid more, no doubt, but Gene knew the deal when he signed on.
Apparently the current House Speaker, Doug Scamman, does not agree. Scammon reportedly told the Monitor that he would bring the recommendation before the full House at last Wednesday's session, but he would not support expelling Chandler. I had hoped that the rest of the house would agree with the committee, and would send Chandler packing. But apparently, Chandler is seen as a good guy (and political ally) and his colleagues therefore forgave his transgressions, citing his long years of service and the fact that he was reelected by his constituents even after the news of his illegal activities broke. He reportedly received applause after the censure. The same body that claimed the moral and ethical high ground in its fight with former New Hampshire Supreme Court Chief Justice David Brock, failed to hold its own member to the standards to which it claims to hold others.
Ralph Rosen was the only member of the Laconia delegation who supported the expulsion. Good for you, Ralph. I am disappointed with the rest of our delegation because this was an opportunity to send a message that the legislature’s rhetoric regarding the ethical conduct of its members is more than talk, and that the people of New Hampshire deserve better. There can be no acceptable explanation for refusing to expel Chandler, and I doubt that there is any explanation other than party loyalty. If that’s the case we should be able to expect that our delegation will parlay that blind political support into some advantage for their constituents, if they are even thinking about us.
Like Tom DeLay, Gene Chandler has obviously become too comfortable in his office and he has forgotten who he works for, just like Tom Delay.