Creigh Deeds: $$$ Before Ethics

Just a remarkable peice up on the DCPost today regarding an ethics rules change for lawyers in the Virginia General Assembly.

RICHMOND -- The organization charged with regulating Virginia attorneys is pushing to erase an ethics rule that for a half-century has prohibited the state's legislators from being employed alongside lobbyists at the commonwealth's largest law firms.

The change, proposed by the Virginia State Bar's standing committee on legal ethics, could spark a bidding war among Richmond's leading law firms, which would be free to hire the speaker of the House of Delegates or the Senate floor leader even as their lobbyists prowl the halls of the General Assembly.

Not exactly the spirit of a "citizen-legislator."

Cheif among its proponents is State Sen. Creigh Deeds:

Pressure to eliminate the rule in Virginia was sparked in part by Sen. R. Creigh Deeds (D-Bath), who recently joined the law firm of Hirschler Fleischer P.C., a Richmond-based firm with a small lobbying presence. Without the proposed change, Deeds would be violating state ethics rules.

Deeds, who describes himself as a small-town rural lawyer, said his losing bid for attorney general in 2005 made it nearly impossible to keep his small practice alive. His plans to run for governor in 2009 will require a more stable income, he said. But he said there will be a firewall between himself and the firm's lobbyists.

"For me to be able to continue the political journey, I had to find some stability. I had to do something," Deeds said in an interview this week. "If I thought I were doing anything unethical, I would step away from it."

Deeds and other advocates of the rule change, including the chief ethics counsel for the bar, say the long-standing rule needlessly restricts the activities of law firms and lawmakers. They say lobbyists and sitting legislators can coexist at firms as long as they adhere to existing state laws governing conflict of interest

Ooooooh, sorry Sen. Deeds.  We didn't mean for ethics and keeping some wall up between lobbyists and legislators intereres with your "politicla journey."  That means, of course, his BLINDING ambition and the fact that he doesn't have enough cash to keep up with either Brian Moran or Mark Warner--nevermind Bob McDonnell or Bill Bolling.

First off, how can you NOT see the incredibly conflict of interest that exists if a lawyer-legislator works for a lobbying firm that does any kind of business at the state level.  It would be one thing if he were a fedearl lobbyist working in Washington.  And what about delegates and senators who aren't lawyers?  Doesn't waving this rule grant undo power onto legislators who are lawyers?

"This is very shocking," said Sen. Ken Cuccinelli II (R-Fairfax). Del. Brian J. Moran (D-Alexandria) said the change would taint all members of the legislature in both parties.

"I think they should reconsider," Moran said. "It would damage all of us in the legislature to have that potential stink or conflict."

You just KNOW your idea is bad if you can get Ken Cuccinelli and Brian Moran to unite in opposition too it.  Virginia is blessed to have a legislature that, despite its partisan rancor, is pretty ethical.  There aren't a whole lot of embarassing scandals like the ones in our federal government, and we need to keep it that way.  Even if the rule is too tough, its better than being too lenient.

But I guess Creigh Deeds just wants to be governor SO bad, to hell with ethics, right? 

UPDATE~!~!~! Riley adds his thoughts here:

HELLOOOOOOO…….. The rules are still in place….. State legislators are still prohibited from being employed alongside lobbyists under the rules currently in effect…… Let me repeat, “Without the proposed change, Deeds would be violating state ethics rules.” The key word here is “proposed” as in “not yet in effect” or ”nothing has changed”. And even though an opinion that could clear the way for him to practice in such a firm was issued in late January, he joined the firm in October.

Deeds said he joined the firm in October with the understanding that a request would be made to the state bar about the rule.

Not good enough. And this man wanted to be our Attorney General? Now he wants to be our Governor? Nice way to start out a campaign with admitting to violating ethics rules.

Kilo wraps it up nicely. And let me remind you. . . BRIAN MORAN said this:

I THINK THEY SHOULD RECONSIDER. IT WOULD DAMAGE ALL OF US IN THE LEGISLATURE TO HAVE THAT POTENTIAL STINK OR CONFLICT

SO . . . in the words of the great Brian Moran, "it" would damage everone and put a stink on the place. Well, Creigh Deeds ALREADY is doing this! What I want to know is how the left can ignore this. How many toupee's would NLS have flying if it were Ken Cuccinelli proposing this? The man wants to run for governor and he's trying to manipulate the system from the inside to help those he works for on the outside. How much more clear cut can you get? And I wonder where the state senate candidate from 34th Senate district feels about this, himsef another "lawyer-legislator?" Its official, his new name is Creigh "Dirty" Deeds.

Comments

Interesting you mention the GA's partisan rancor in negative connotation, then proceed to only add to that. Nevertheless, the WaPo has no idea what they're talking about here.
The Bar decided to work on this almost 2 years ago and on their own initiative...well before Creigh started working for this new firm.

I also think its humorous how Sen. Tommy Norment says he opposes it. His law firm, Kaufman and Canoles, practices in front of state boards and agencies. This ethics opinion would make it so that they can keep doing it! I guess he's looking for a new job.

[Not Susan Allen]

This is just a blatent, thoughtless smear job. Senator Creigh deeds is an ethical thoughtful politician who managed to get the redistricting bill passed, when others simply failed. If Deeds was is so unethical, why is he well respected enough to earn bi-partisan support and praise? Disappointing piece.

[Riley, Not O'Reilly]

What part of "Without the proposed change, Deeds would be violating state ethics rules." don't you understand, NSA? The proposal hasn't been enacted yet, therefore Creigh Deeds is in violation. It isn't like he couldn't hook up with a different law firm that didn't have a lobbying component. This one just happened to be willing to line his pockets in preparation for a run for Gov. in '09. And the opinion issued in Jan. that could clear the way for him to take such a job comes a little late given he joined the firm in Oct.

Not exactly the paragon of ethics here.

[Chris]

Not good enough NSA. As Riley points out, its a violation and Deeds is already doing it! And then he is trying to change the rules from the inside to help a firm he works for on the OUTSIDE! How is that ethical? Tell me? Even Brian Moran agrees!

[Bob]

The WaPost article is pretty poorly researched. If you actually READ the ethics opinion in question here, you'll find it states that "in looking at rules 1.7, 1.9, 1.10, 1.11, and 8.4, the Committe opines repeatedly that some specific act of misconduct is required for a violation, rather than just the public service alone." In other words, there would have to be some impropriety on Creigh's part for him to be in violation of ethics rules, even before the bar's opinion. For a bunch of people who are constantly whining about the biased liberal media/Washingon Post/anybody else that disagrees with you, you sure are taking this story at face value. There are so many factual errors in it it's hard to take it seriously. And of course Moran is going to make some asinine comment about how terrible this "ethics issue" is, he's scared of Creigh running against him for Governor.

[Spank That Donkey]

Great Post, Chris!