Chris Bell Endorses Auditor's Plan
By Damon McCullar
Chris Bell put out a press release today endorsing the state auditor's plan to restrict the Comptroller's office from receiving political contributions from entities with pending business in her office. The DMN ran this story last this week and I'm just getting around to putting my two cents in on it. Greg wrote something about this as well on Sunday. The Chris Bell Blog also has some information on the results of the audit.
This latest revelation of ethical shadiness in the Capitol is just another symptom in the culture of corruption that haunts our state government. Gov. Perry's administration has had no problem with the "revolving door" that they installed in the governor's mansion. Case in point is Perry's former Chief of Staff, Mike Toomey. After leaving the Perry administration, Toomey immediately and unabashedly became a corporate lobbyist for CIGNA, Liberty Mutual, pharmaceutical giant Merck and Co., Texas Association of Health Plans, United Healthcare, U.S. Oil Recovery L.P., Texas Gas Service, Texas Land and Mineral Owners Association, Philip Morris, and the Associated Builders and Contractors of Texas.
Now the culture of corruption is spreading to other state-wide offices. The best thing that Carol Strayhorn had going for her was that she was seemingly a person of integrity. However, her bid for governor has been marred by the specter of quid pro quo from such giants as Ryan and Company where they "don't just react to Texas tax changes." They "engineer them."
Fortunately Texans have a real reform candidate to look to. If elected, Chris Bell has promised to make the state government transparent and accountable to the peopl. While on the Houston City Council, he was successful in dismantling the "revolving door" that was installed in city hall. I have every confidence that he can do the same thing at the Governor's Mansion.
Posted by Damon McCullar at September 14, 2005 11:34 PM
| TrackBack
Most likely his consultants know she will lose the primary but they expect John Sharp to announce, so attacking her makes it easier to attack him over the already alleged "quid pro quo" of his firm's donations to her campaign and the reduction her office gave his firm's clients in their tax protests. But they overlooked the fact that the 40% that may vote for her in the primary probably won't vote for him as a result. Assuming he wins the primary.
If making campaign contributions to political candidates whose office you do business with were a crime, half this state would be in jail. There's a message there somewhere. Sooner or later everyone will get the message.
And some Democrats may vote for her in the primary. Some Democrats, including some "mover and shaker" Democrats, are already making contributions to her campaign. The magic of the internet. Now you can pull up campaign finance reports. Shame they only have to file every six months. Often after an election you find some very interesting things on those reports. Like Democrats making a lot of contributions to Republicans. And Republicans making a lot of contributions to Democrats.
The explanation is always that it's just business. Indeed. Sounds more like business as usual to me. Bill White did one better. He had a fundraiser after he was elected mayor of Houston. To give those who had contributed to his opponents the opportunity to contribute to him as well. Access for all. If you pay for it.
