« Wizbang Weekend Caption Contest™ | Main | Abu Musab al-Zarqawi Dead (Again) »

Following the money in New Hampshire

A sordid chapter in New Hampshire politics is now closed, but the stench lingers.

Gene Chandler is the former speaker of the New Hampshire House of Representatives. He was forced to give up his speakership when it was revealed that he had taken, over the years, over $64,000 in cash from lobbyists, corporations, and "friends" from the North Country of New Hampshire, but failed to mention that in his financial-disclosure forms. Chandler pleaded guilty to violating state law, and was fined $2,000 and given 100 hours of community service.

Once the legal matters were settled, then it was the House's turn to address the ethics rules violations. Their options were anything from no action to explusion (Chandler had already resigned his speakership).

First up, the House voted on whether to expel Chandler. That failed by a 189-172 vote. Next, they voted on whether to "censure" him. That one passed, by a vote of 274-86.

(A brief aside: the New Hampshire House has 400 members, making it one of the largest deliberative bodies in the world. Further, its members are paid $100/year, meaning that Chandler took in the equivalent of 640 years pay, and was fined 20 years pay.)

I thought Chandler ought to have been expelled. Even if he didn't see it that way, by taking in that much money and not reporting it, he gave the impression that access to him (arguably one of the most powerful men in the state government) was available for a fee. And even if he was expelled, he could run again and rejoin the House. Hell, he's already been re-elected once since the scandal broke.

But the House decided to take it easy on him.

(Author's note: it's become common practice in mainstream media accounts that when a lawmaker is in legal trouble, Republicans get their party affiliation mentioned, while Democrats do not. In an attempt to provide balance for this trend, I am refraining from mentioning which party to which Chandler belongs. But here's a hint: he's only acting like a jackass; he doesn't make a habit of wearing little drawings of them to declare his party membership.)

Comments (1)

He should have stuck with b... (Below threshold)

He should have stuck with being the Duke of Earl.






Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links


Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login

Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy