|
|
» 1A » Sports » City | Region » Health | Family » Communities » Free Time » Weekender » Faith | Values » Inside | Out » A la carte » Arts + Life |
HeraldLeaderPhoto.com
 | |
 | |
| »
View slideshows by Herald-Leader photographers including The Week in Pictures Sports Staff Portfolios and more! | |
|
 |
A flare-up between Senate President David Williams and House budget committee chairman Harry Moberly Jr. brought accusations of unethical activity and name-calling on Friday. It also may have yielded, as an unintended consequence, an agreement from leaders in both chambers to let the public view the traditionally closed-door budget negotiations.
The squabble began Thursday evening when Williams, R-Burkesville, told reporters that Moberly, a Richmond Democrat who is the chief architect of the House's version of the state budget, might be unintentionally violating state ethics laws by advocating for his employer, Eastern Kentucky University, during the crafting of the state spending plan.
"I believe if anyone filed an ethics complaint against Harry Moberly now, that he would be in violation," of opinions issued by the Kentucky Legislative Ethics Commission, Williams said.
He accused Moberly of standing up in closed-door budget negotiations and advocating for building projects at EKU.
"I've been at the conference table ... many times when he has stood up to have things added for Eastern Kentucky University in the budget," Williams said. "That's just the way it is, and if he doesn't get what he wants in the budget, nobody else is going to get what they want in the budget."
On Friday morning, Moberly called Williams' statements a "pack of lies" and said he has never violated the ethics laws governing lawmakers.
Moberly said it is Williams who "skates on the thin line of ethics all the time" and said Williams has "devolved into an egomaniacal dictator."
Since Williams is "lying" about what happens in budget negotiations, Moberly said he and others would push to conduct this year's meeting, scheduled for next week, in the open.
House Speaker Jody Richards pledged to make a motion to hold the meeting in public. Later Friday, Williams said no motion will be necessary because he intends to conduct the meetings in public. However, Williams warned on Thursday that holding the meetings in public could significantly lengthen the process and make it more likely that lawmakers can't reach agreement in time to vote on the budget by April 1.
Both chambers must give final approval to the two-year, $19 billion spending plan by then if they want the ability to override any vetoes by Gov. Steve Beshear.
Williams also suggested that Moberly should take some time to calm down, given that he also had harsh words for Beshear and Supreme Court Chief Justice Joseph Lambert last week after they complained about the House's version of the budget.
"He needs to go home and take several deep breaths," Williams said.
The dispute between Moberly and Williams stems from changes made in the Senate earlier this week to a House bill that would overhaul state ethics rules.
In particular, the revised bill would prohibit a lawmaker from voting on a bill that names their employer. Thus, Moberly couldn't vote on a budget bill that provides funding to EKU.
Although Williams said he doesn't believe Moberly has intentionally violated any ethics laws, he accused Moberly, a vice president at the public university in Richmond, of improperly helping craft his employer's agenda, then advocating for it through legislation -- namely the budget.
"If you're the No. 2 person at a university, no one could logically believe that you haven't participated in developing a legislative agenda for the university, such as projects, funding levels or those sort of things," Williams told the Herald-Leader.
Moberly, who said he's actually third in EKU's hierarchy, denied that he's participated in any discussions about the university's legislative priorities with the school's officials. "My job is an internal position. I do not make external policy. There is no inherent conflict and, if there was one, David Williams would have brought it up long before now," he said, adding that he rechecked his status with former judge Anthony Wilhoit, the ethics commission executive director.
In fact, the ethics commission issued an opinion on Jan. 7, 2004, that allows lawmakers who work for public universities to not only vote for a budget that sends money to the college they work for, but also to serve as a leader of a budget committee.
Wilhoit said in an interview that the law specifically makes an exception for lawmakers who serve on the faculty or staff of universities. Colleges that rely on public funding are much different animals than for-profit companies, he said.
There could still be instances where a university employee who is a legislator would have to avoid involvement on a bill.
"If Harry Moberly were dean of the college of arts and sciences and the bill called for raising the dean's salary, that would be a conflict," Wilhoit said. "We apparently don't have that situation here."
Therein lies the debate, said Williams, which is why the revised version of the ethics bill aims to apply the same rules to all employers: public universities, non-profit organizations and private corporations, alike. He said the legislative ethics commission has seemed to issue "conflicting" advice at times.
"We're trying to codify and give direction to the Legislative Ethics Commission so that they don't do these sort of multitude of opinions," he said.
Moberly contends the change was made to the ethics bill as an attempt to punish him for refusing to hear in his committee Senate Bill 1, which would dramatically alter the state's testing system for school children.
"He's humiliated by me killing that bill," Moberly said.
Coming up Sunday
Democratic presidential primaries highlight race and gender in national and state politics.
