@MataHarley

Well I would like to know how such a bill was racked up in the first place over a dozen or so complaints. No doubt with lawyers etc. Imagine if there was a mass co-ordinated attack on Palin with hundreds or thousands of stupid complaints. I’m sure Alaska would then think twice about stream-lining such ethic complaints then – not just for her but those who become Governor in the future. I’m not a lawyer but with a criminal cases not all complaints all get to final stage where it is tried in court.

E.g the UK The police aren’t obliged to fully investigate every complaint they receive. They will filter it. Those they investigate may get passed to the CPS – Crown Prosecution Service – who will decide whether it is worth prosecting and so forth.

Whilst the media and bloggers etc have an important part to play – all I’m saying is that we can’t rely just on them to be the filter. For example – there already was a big mangifying glass on Palin and even with her fans and detractors – those complaints managed to rack up $2 million+. So patently it’s not working – more needs to be donet to stop such cases getting to such a stage.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

INRE Celtic Diva’s complaint (such a laugh, that name is….) on the logo, there was never any question she had “done” that, Gaffa. It was only on Alaska wide TV as she was the official starter of the race.

They would not know if there was financial repercussions that were in violation of that law… ala did Sarah get paid to wear the jacket of her husband’s snomobile sponsor… until they investigate.

But let’s say she did… How high is that on the criminal and ethics scale? Will the state mandated fine even pay for the investigative costs???

However, she didn’t, and there was no nefarious back money deals for the state to recoup costs with fee, fines or penalties.

Now one idiotic complaint was real cheap… the one with the coward who wouldn’t use their real name and used the British episodic, Emmerdale, character as the complainant. That was thrown out rapidly with minimal cost. Not because of the particular charge “appearing” frivolous. They can’t do that (nor should they prejudtge). But it was canned because there was no one named Edna Birch in Alaska, and the complaint filers wouldn’t step up to the plate. Otherwise they would have embarked on where ever that path lead them.

As I said… how do you avoid wasting money for investigations without wasting money to investigate?

Like or Dislike: 0  0

@MataHarley

For instance – one of the frivilous complaints I believe was about Palin having some sponsorship logo appearing on a jacket she wore at some event. Now a judge COULD order an investigation to see whether Palin had done a thing – but ideally the judge should shortcut this process thinking even if Palin did such a thing there is no law or break of ethics here – so no case to answer and therefore no investigation needed. Judges have to use a degree of common sense and interpretation of laws as laws or ethic codes cannot conceivably cover any minute possibility. Judges have to use their wisdom to spot such cases which are plainly ridiculous and cull them.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

So Gaffa, how does anyone “throw” out a complaint prior to “racking up costly bills” without investigating… thus “racking up costly bills”?

Like or Dislike: 0  0

@Mataharley

All I am saying – it would better if the system was capable of weeding out such frivolous complaints itself at an earlier stage so as to avoid racking up costly bills. As an example – in the UK (and no doubt US) there is a welfare system. Now if someone claimed Incapacity Benefit then I wouldn’t want the ONLY way for those who cheat the system to be caught out by those around them. Also they should require to have a doctor check their current medical health. So on the case of frivolous claims – it would be good if a judge could throw out any frivolous claims early on.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Gaffa, INRE your “points”

1: It’s already obvious that those with “ill intent” continue regardless. Witness the additional two complaints against Palin… at the taxpayers expense… *after* her resignation. It should *also* become obvious their intent is not to remove what they believe is a “corrupt” governor, but to destroy her on the national political stage. This is because she enjoys the same cultish power that Obama has. They are out to destroy any possible competition. THis has been an Obama tactic since his first rash of lawsuits, using the courts to remove any competitor in the primary for his first IL Senate run.

2: It will not put off those with genuine ethic complaints if we expose those filing frivolous complaints. But they will rethink the validity, as they should. If you need an example of those, go back and read the Alinsky Perfected series.

3: The failure of the system is due to humans and subversive misdeeds and agenda. As long as humans inhabit the planet, this is a risk… just as laws do not stop criminals from committing crimes. Media and new age communicies (i.e. blogs, Twitter, FB) are perfect tools to turn the Alinsky tactics back onto those who abuse systems and incur costs to the rest of the citizens. The “4th estate” is meant for exactly that purpose. Problem is, the traditional media is bound by favors and lack of ethics… and because of their own political beliefs, which diminish their ethics, do not do the job tasked to their profession.

Therefore, not tricky, nor unusual at all.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

@MataHarley

What I would suggest is exactly what I am trying to do… expose those who are abusing the system as political hacks in order to destroy their repution and reveal their ill-intent publicly. The flack should fall on those filing the frivolous complaints, and not their target

Hmm tricky. For a start I think those particularly with ill intent would continue regardless. Secondly it might put those with genuine legit ethic complaints. Thirdly – that seems a failure of the system to cope if it has to rely on media & bloggers to do such exposes.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Every state has it’s own method of ethics oversight, Gaffa. And I’m not suggesting the ethics complaint system is a bad thing. I’ve heard some bloggers suggest that perhaps there should be a cost to filing a complaint to prevent such abuse of what is meant to be a system of oversight. Unfortunately, that means only those with expendable means have any recourse. That doesn’t work.

The story is not that the ethics complaint system is obsolete, but that those with a political agenda to destroy Palin on the national political stage are using and abusing the system – and the Alaskan taxpayer – to file frivolous harassment. Just as the American judicial system is fraught with such abuse, it’s now become a political weapon. But at least with the judicial system, there is legal recourse to recoup the costs of defense. Not so in the ethics complaint systems. That cost is absorbed by the taxpayers as the costs of running the State government.

What I would suggest is exactly what I am trying to do… expose those who are abusing the system as political hacks in order to destroy their repution and reveal their ill-intent publicly. The flack should fall on those filing the frivolous complaints, and not their target.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

@MataHarley

So how does it work in other States? Is Alaska particularly susceptible to such ethic claims or can any American put in ethic claims against their governor? What would you suggest would be a better system?

Like or Dislike: 0  0

As an elected official, you can’t sue those who make false claims thru the ethics oversight system, suek. They can continue to file – at the Alaskan taxpayer’s costs – regardless of whether the claims are frivolous or not. In addition, Palin has had personal lawsuits filed… including those tho filed complaints.

As a private citizen, she can counter sue for libel, harassment, or any other legal grounds to those that abuse the system. She can also cite those those who attempted to damage her reputation with the ethics complains as evidence in a personal lawsuit.

It has to do with whether an elected official has legal recourse to ethics claims or not. They do not… nor should they. However as one posted put in… “the free ride” is over.

Like or Dislike: 0  0