Just as I figured (and said), people are wising up to the situation Colorado Secretary of State Scott Gessler brought to the forefront when he said he’d work a second job. But as always, there are the wise – and then there are otherwise. (h/t Mark Levin)
When I help or support a candidate, as I did with Scott Gessler, I pretty much leave them to their own devices once elected and let them do the job they were elected to do. Like with some council candidates locally, my interaction with those I supported goes to about zero, or close to it, after the election. The same thing occurred with Scott, who became a friend before I knew he was a candidate, but I haven’t had contact with him since his victory party – and definitely haven’t talked to him about this particular issue.
I try to advise people I support not to make it easy for the opposition to pile on. In Scott’s case, he had a bunch of leftwing loons just waiting in the wings for any misstep. They thought they had one with this “moonlighting” situation, from the radical leftwing group ProgressNow, to liberal advocacy group Colorado Ethics Watch, to leftwing blog Colorado Pols (the strikethroughs are there because those groups want you to believe they aren’t what they really are), to our own merry band of losers who would stalk Scott locally. Problem is, as I said, not only was there nothing wrong, illegal, or unethical about what Scott proposed doing – it’s now opened the doors for a healthy discussion about pay levels for elected officials.
Latest to jump into the fray is Boulder County District Attorney Stan Garnett and his guest opinion in the February 2, 2010 Times-Call. To be clear, Mr. Garnett is a Democrat (not a Democratic, linguistically that would make no sense) and the Times-Call is supposedly some GOP outpost of thought. Yeah, I know constant thinking and rational readers of this blog don’t need these reminders, but I need to occasionally point out these obvious things for those that read and respond to this blog that have metal plates in their heads.
Anyway, Mr. Garnett basically wrote that Scott Gessler did all other elected officials a favor by bringing up an issue that is long overdue – even at the risk to his own (Gessler’s) career. Specifically, he said “Moreover, those most informed on the issue, the statewide elected officials, usually say little for fear of appearing self-serving” and then he went onto “three reasons why public officials should be paid adequately“.
Within those three reasons, he echoed the comments from a TC Line that I reposted about not just having the rich run for office. People can argue what “adequate” and “rich” are, as those numbers are continually shifted downward from the highest level of government, but it’s pretty safe to say that Mr. Gessler has proven he isn’t “rich” (otherwise why would he need the second income?) and people like Stan Garnett and others are acknowledging that some elected offices are under-compensated, in other words not “adequate“. It’s good to see an elected official of Mr. Garnett’s position to agree with what appears to be a barometer of opinion after all – the TC Line! Either that or some of our leftwing loons think Mr. Garnett is in lockstep with those that know nothing about anything – hey, it’s their words, not mine. Just glad to echo them for you, you wouldn’t know about their idiocy any other way, happy to be of service.