Hey, there! Log in / Register
Two indicted over Cahill fundraising
By adamg on Mon, 09/19/2011 - 4:05pm
Treasurer Tim's former chief of staff and the former state probation commissioner were indicted today on charges they organized a campaign fundraiser for Cahill in 2005 in return for a job at the Massachusetts State Lottery for the commissioner’s wife, state Attorney General Martha Coakley announced.
Scott Campbell, 40, Cahill's chief of staff, was also charged with concealing the identity of donors to Cahill's failed gubernatorial bid last year. Campbell and ex-probation head John O'Brien were also charged with soliciting funds for the Cahill campaign despite a state law that prohbits unelected state employees from doing so.
Innocent, etc.
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
I guess my great grandparetns were . . .
. . . "corrupt" when they got jobs in civil service for working on campaigns and so forth. I just didn't know how much they were criminals until these days.
This stuff is souring me more and more and more . . . And I gotta wonder . . . just where some people think they come from and where they think they are going. . .
And all those people who
And all those people who didn't get those jobs because they weren't connected? How does a supervisor maintain discipline when all the people working under him got their jobs through pull with pols? Patronage corrupts the entire workplace. If you got your job because you know someone, why can't you take the afternoon off because you know someone?
Remember the woman who died in the dirty public swimming pool that had just been inspected? How do you think those inspectors got their jobs? No doubt they're someone's relatives too.
You know what?
There are places where this sort of nonsense and patronage games have been illegal for a very very long time. Places where politicians are not even allowed to plaster their names all over everything because it is considered to be using public money to campaign. Places where being somebody's brother would get you excluded from the candidate list, not rushed to the top.
Nepotism and cronyism are not acceptable in a free society. Just because "its the way things used to be" doesn't make it right. Political machines are poisonous to democracy.
I agree that public employment should be a meritocracy
but is the law being enforced universally, or is this a selective prosecution? Also, the euphemistic idea of "social capital" has always figured pretty heavily into private sector hiring as well. As they say, it's not what you know, but who you know.
Should some sort of exams be developed for most (all?) forms of public employment? I certainly wouldn't mind if that happened, but right now there's a lot of discretion for hiring managers and "connections" are still huge. The process is hardly transparent. If a politician hiring somebody for being a political supporter is actually illegal, I think Coakley and the Globe might have a little more digging around to do. One could start by comparing state and city payrolls to OCPF filings. I'm pretty sure this stuff is much more widespread than a prosecution of these two unlucky schleps would suggest.
I met a guy who worked over
I met a guy who worked over at the Charles st jail years ago. Everyone had to hold signs and give money for the Sheriff at election time or else. Guys in a union who couldn't be fired would never get a promotion if they didn't go along. When someone does you a favor and hires you, you have to do them a favor when the time comes. It's like the undertaker in the Godfather. In an atmosphere like that, the object isn't to do your job the best you can - it's suck up to the boss and buy his favor, and get taken care of.
One guess
I'm guessing is that it can be very hard to prove that someone was hired because of who they know. Sure, we may all know what's going on, but proving it can be difficult, if not impossible. You need people to talk, which is hard. Then, when they do talk, they say "I don't remember".
Welcome to Massachusetts!
If you don't know somebody somewhere, then you're pretty much not getting a job anywhere. The field really is irrelevant. Politics, marketing, broadcasting, editorial... you name it, everyone's connected.
I'm surprised I somehow got hired a a company where I didn't know anybody and wasn't a Northeastern (CEO's college) alum...
Ok
- my family has always been in this state- and I never got a job because I "knew someone". Every job I've had I got by applying and interviewing - like the vast majority of people in this state. My first post college job was at a financial house- that I got after temping there for a year- (oops- maybe that was "knowing someone" huh?) And then all the others were the same.
But you know what- I don't begrudge anyone who got a job because of a friend's or relative's help- because that is how humans who care about other people behave. There is no fantasy land meritocracy that some people seem to think exists.
So frickin tired of these stupid reductionist petty whiney memes that get tossed around like gospel truth. It's bullshit.
while patronage is certainly a problem in massachusetts...
... i got a job with the state, and i knew *nobody*. what did i do? i built up an impressive resume in my field. i went back to school and got an advanced degree. and then i applied for every job posting that i thought was a good fit, for over a year. i took a pay cut to work in state government, and i worked my way up over the years.
i am not saying that everybody who works here got here through the ol' american dream of hard work and perseverance. but that's how i got here. and i have hired a half dozen people on the same merit.
not everybody is a crook. there are a lot of folks out there who deserve to be where they are.