Contact Us

.

« The Funk better make darn well sure he's got a stellar V-day gift | Main | KS lawmakers vote to abolish franchise tax »

February 12, 2007

Comments

KCArmchairPundit

Eventually this whole f*** you attitude Shields has towards the US Attorney's office is going to bite her in her considerable butt. It's amazing it's taken this long.

arewethereyet

The only strategy she has left is to brazen it out. The truth will not set her free.

Blogotics

As usual she wants special treatment "do you know who I am" philosophy. Hey Katherine, Martha didn't cooperate with the Feds and look where she ended up because they wanted to make an example of her. If she had cooperated from the get go rather than bristling up and trying to impose her will on them she probably wouldn't have done any time in prison. Shields once again proves to everyone, but not herself why so many people dislike her. Wake up Katie and Philbo and smell the indictment.

John W.Burns

Once upon a time there was a couple known as Philbo and the Toad. For twelve years Philbo and the Toad thought they were King and Queen. They did what they wanted and didn't care who they trampled on. Then one day a handsome young prince came along and replaced Philbo and the Toad. They were King and Queen no more. But Philbo and the Toad still considered themselves King and Queen. But in fact everyone disliked them and wished they would just go away. Philbo and the Toad eventually got in trouble with the local sheriff when they tried to sell their house for a ridiculous amount of money. They stood in the town square day after day and accused the sheriff of conducting a political toad hunt. Philbo and the Toad eventually went to prison. The moral of this story: Its not a good idea to tweak the sheriff's nose. The End.

Greg Logan

There is a line on page seven of the U.S. Attorney's response that accurately summarizes the Shields' approach to politics. It reads, "Neither candidates for public office nor elected public officials enjoy a special status that gives them license to circumvent the rules..." Throughout her tenure, Shields continually flaunted the rules and did things in her sneaky, underhanded way. And to this day Shields still thinks the regular rules do not apply to her. A more self-absorbed, arrogant person would be hard to find. Its seems she's about to get her due. Good work Dave Helling. The U.S. Attorney's response was very informative.

i guess what goes around... comes around ehh katherine???

K Shields

Hey, what about me? (falling to floor flailing hands and feet on the floor) its all about me, me, me and don't you forget it!

Perhaps Philbo and Katie would have been well advised to have read Mr. Burn's bedtime story and abosrbed its lesson before running their yaps. Burns' story had me chuckling out loud, it was just too short though.


U.S. Office of Special Counsel
1730 M Street, N.W., Suite 218
Washington, D.C. 20036-4505
U.S. OFFICE OF SPECIAL COUNSEL SEEKS DISCIPLINARY ACTION IN HATCH ACT CASE AGAINST SHERIFF OF JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - 1/17/06
CONTACT: LOREN SMITH, 202-254-3714, lsmith@osc.gov

WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC) has filed a complaint for disciplinary action against Tom F. Phillips, the Sheriff of Jackson County, Missouri. OSC’s complaint, filed January 17, 2006, with the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), charges Phillips with violating the Hatch Act by asking several Jackson County Sheriff’s Department employees, all of whom were his subordinates, to appear in a political commercial on behalf of Claire McCaskill when she was a candidate for Missouri Governor in 2004. The complaint also charges Phillips with violating the Act by asking several subordinate employees to attend his 2004 re-election campaign fundraisers/events.

Requesting subordinates to appear in a partisan political commercial and requesting their attendance at his campaign events violates two separate provisions of the Hatch Act—the prohibition against use of official authority or influence for the purpose of interfering with or affecting the result of an election and the prohibition against coercing or attempting to coerce employees to contribute anything of value, including personal services, to a person for a political purpose.

Phillips is covered by the Hatch Act because his principal employment is in connection with programs that are financed, in whole or in part, by federal loans or grants.

According to the complaint, Phillips approached four of his subordinate employees on August 29, 2004 and asked them if they would appear in a political commercial on behalf of McCaskill. He also requested another subordinate to come into work on this date so that she could open her office blinds to assist with the lighting for the commercial. The subordinate agreed and was rewarded with four hours of double overtime. The complaint further alleges that on the following day, Phillips asked another subordinate employee to ask other Jackson County Sheriff’s Department (JCSD) employees to appear in another taping or filming of Claire McCaskill political commercial. The subordinate did as Phillips asked, and three JCSD employees appeared in the commercial wearing their official JCSD uniforms. The complaint additionally alleges that Phillips asked several of his subordinate employees to attend his re-election campaign events/fundraisers, and accepted their uncompensated volunteer services to promote his re-election campaign by having these subordinates “work the polls” on Election Day.

Special Counsel Scott Bloch said, “One of the main reasons for the original Hatch Act was to prevent political coercion and influence by supervisors in the public workplace. This case shows why the law is still relevant even today. The workplace should not be a place for partisan political activity, and violators will be prosecuted.”

The Hatch Act restricts the political activity of individuals principally employed by state, county, or municipal executive agencies who have duties in connection with programs financed in whole or part by federal loans or grants. A covered employee may not use his official authority or influence to interfere with or affect the result of an election, or coerce or attempt to coerce covered employees to contribute anything of value to a person for political purposes. When the MSPB finds that a State or local employee has violated the Hatch Act and that the violation warrants removal of the employee, the employing agency must dismiss the employee or forfeit a portion of the federal funds, equal to two years’ salary of the employee. The employee may also not be reappointed to a state or local position in that state for the following eighteen (18) months.

The U.S. Office of Special Counsel is an independent investigative and prosecutorial agency. Among other functions, it investigates and prosecutes complaints alleging violations of the Hatch Act and provides advisory opinions regarding the Act’s requirements. For more information about OSC, please visit our web site at www.osc.gov or call 1-800-872-1855.


The comments to this entry are closed.