It's hard to imagine an attorney general so lacking in integrity that he would devise a plan specifically to help an institution evade the law in awarding its perks. It's also hard to imagine that this same attorney general doesn't realize what that action means with respect to all the people who work for the state and who rightfully, on the basis of the a-g machinations, feel they have the right to take advantage of the same loophole, although there actually isn't any such loophole.
The interesting thing regarding this matter – the "domestic partner" caper at UK – has to do with the November election of a new attorney general. The sitting, conniving A-G Greg Stumbo, hoping for a spot – lieutenant governor – almost automatically leading to the governorship, ran on the wrong ticket, notwithstanding the mega-millions of dollars financing it, and lost out big-time, since he would have been a shoo-in if he had run for reelection and then tried on his own to nail the top spot.
As it is, either republican Stan Lee or democrat Jack Conway will be the incoming a-g. Lee, of course, is already indelibly on the record as opposing the "domestic-partner" perks at the universities, and has solid legal grounds for having declared them unconstitutional. Conway very publicly agreed with Stumbo's original opinion that both UK and UL were in violation of the constitutional amendment passed by three-to-one in 2004.
So…it would seem that Conway would take exception to Stumbo's kiss-off of the law with regard to the perks. Maybe…but more likely maybe not. According to the Louisville-area publication The Bridge of June 1, this is Conway's take: "Attorney General Stumbo has also provided some guidance to our distinguished universities on how they may proceed in the future." Does Conway join Stumbo in his current hanky-panky, or will he be a strict-constructionist attorney general. If not, he will join Lieutenant Governor Steve Pence, who said, according to the Louisville Courier-Journal of 24 April 2007, "You have to let the universities make decisions like that," when UL did its thing earlier regarding "domestic partners."
The a-g campaign could well turn on this issue. Stan Lee should make it the prime issue, noting that he could be expected to not only follow the letter of the amendment but also respect the fact that the vast majority of Kentuckians are responsible specifically for that law. Conway is already at a disadvantage in this area, if only on the basis of the quote above. Regardless of how he or anyone else feels about the "domestic-partner" perks, the law is the law is the law, and he must declare himself with respect to ALL of the law, including the extraordinarily important "marriage amendment."
Stumbo may well have sunk his chances to unseat Mitch McConnell in the 2008 Senate race on the basis of his obvious perverseness in this matter. Anyone – whether attorney general or anything else, but especially the state's chief law-enforcement official – who purposefully designs a method to circumvent the concrete establishment of a law is unworthy of any official position and – especially in Stumbo's case – should be held to account, even to the point of malfeasance in office and all which that entails.
And so it goes.
Jim Clark
No comments:
Post a Comment