Monday, July 26, 2010
Politics Henry's Attack Ad Raises Legit Question
Posted by Jeff Woods on Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 1:53 PM
OK, so we were ready to really hate this scurrilous Henry campaign attack ad. Then we saw that frightful headline flash across the screen. Yikes!
"Ethics Cloud Hangs Over Squeaky Clean Yarbro"—Nashville Scene
Now, we remember why we hate Jeff Yarbro so much. Just kidding. Actually, Henry's ad makes a good point (if we do say so ourselves). It never claims Yarbro himself lobbies for Big Oil, nuclear waste firms and nursing homes. Yarbro doesn't lobby. But his lobbying/law firm certainly does, and Bass Berry represents all those corporate evildoers. The ad raises legitimate questions about the potential ethical conflicts that would arise if Yarbro wins this election. As we observed in the Pith post that Henry's ad cites, Yarbro would operate under an ethics cloud from Day One.
In that post, we also called Henry a slightly befuddled, old white-haired dude. Guess that'll be the headline in Yarbro's next ad.
Yarbro is trying to deflect the ad by claiming it's false. He says he never represented BP. Did too! Henry adviser Mike Kopp says in response. But this back-and-forth is beside the point. The issue is not whether Yarbro himself personally represented one business or another. Yarbro's firm represents lots of corporations that do business before the legislature. If he's elected, would he vote against the financial interests of his employer? He should quit Bass Berry.
Comments (28)
Showing 1-28 of 28
This Henry "attack ad" is a prime example of the kind of tired, old politics that this voter from the 21st District is exhausted of. Henry isn't willing to debate the issues, but will try to distract voters with some kind of weird guilt by association charge? Seriously? That's just sad. This ad is truly unbecoming of Senator Henry - and rather ham-handed and ineffective to boot.
like
dislike
So by that logic, half the practicing lawyers in Nashville are ineligible to run for office. That argument strikes me as rather thin.
Anyway, it's a non-story:
http://blogs.tennessean.com/politics/2010/…
Hate to say it but the Tennessean scooped you on this one by actually getting a statement from Yarbro.
That makes me laugh, Lady Beale. The Tennessean scooped Pith! Ha! As I said, it doesn't matter whether Yarbro ever represented BP personally. He works for a firm that did. Bass Berry is perhaps the state's biggest lobbying/law firm. Should he continue to draw a Bass Berry paycheck while voting on bills in the legislature that directly affect the firm's earnings? We might as well go ahead and put Dick Lodge in that seat. Mike Stewart quit Waller Lansden when he was elected to the House. Yarbro should pledge to do the same.
"Bass Berry is perhaps the state's biggest lobbying/law firm. "
How are you quantifying that Jeff? From what I can tell, they have about 12 or 13 clients and two lobbyists registered with the Tennessee Ethics Commission. Maybe that's the biggest firm, I don't know, hard to tell...seems a little light to me though.
I think part of the equation(sp?) is that:
Yarbro has said hes pro union but his law firm has a group dedicated to "union avoidance" and has raised over 10,000 from lawyers and PACs specializing in that field.
Yarbro says hes pro healthcare but he has personally represented NHC who, as the Scene pointed out, was behind the Kill Old People Cheap bill.
Yarbro says hes pro consumer but he gets his pay check from one of RJ Reynolds law firms, you know the people behind the legalize ponzi schemes, destroy the consumer protections act bill.
He says hes against guns in bars but again he draws a paycheck from a firm that represents firearm manufacturers.
Woods, I think pointing out Mike Stewart is correct here. As much as we want to take Yarbro at his word, when Dick Lodge comes into the office and Jeffrey's pay check is on the line, which way will he vote?
What's your point, Sean? A dozen clients isn't enough for you? You think it's OK for Yarbro to keep working for Bass Berry if he's elected?
Good points, Easy. How come Yarbro found it so easy to raise money? Bingo! Bass Berry! Of course, we're just speculating that Yarbro's a bizpig. We know Henry is.
My point is that it just seems that two lobbyists and 13 clients (many with the same interests) doesn't seem like a juggernaut of a lobbying firm.
If he recuses himself from matters that Bass Berry is lobbying him on, or declares a financial interest, yes. Perhaps he would be able to get a job at a firm that has no lobbying ties, that would be great, but do I think he should guarantee that he'll leave unless another job is lined up? No, not really.
I got into this whole "guilt by association" thing over Mike Stewart and I'm not eager to go back into it, but all I'd say is that with large law firms like just because one lawyer is doing something doesn't mean the other lawyer has a vested interest in it.
"when Dick Lodge comes into the office and Jeffrey's pay check is on the line, which way will he vote"
You are assuming that Lodge and Bass Berry would be willing to commit extortion or bribery all for one vote?
Bass Berry has been paying Mr. Yarbro's salary for the last year while he's out campaigning. What does that amount to expect a $200,000 contribution to his campaign? What else is Bass Berry willing to do?
You are willing to cut this guy a lot of slack, Sean. Stewart doesn't agree with you. He quit Waller.
I havent look much into it but on Jeff's last disclosure, he took money from these guys's out of state PAC(http://www.butlersnow.com/). They are pretty much on the wrong side of every issue. They even brag about defending Conoco against global warming lawsuits and "Butler Snow’s Labor and Employment team has decades of experience in assisting employers in many industries in preventing the causes of unionization and successfully resisting union organizing"
Its one thing if Jeff is taking money from local union busting lawyers(everybody has friends they aren't proud of), but when an out of state PAC that gives 70% of its money to Republicans chooses a Democratic state senate race in Tennessee to play in, it makes you wonder what they see in Jeff.
That's fine, and I'm sure Eric Stansell disagreed with me when I defended Mike Stewart against Pith's attacks on him. I'd certainly agree that it would be better PR for Yarbro to leave Bass Berry if elected, simply so that he isn't smeared with every dealing they have once he's in office. But do I think someone can ethically work for a company like Bass Berry where less than 1% of their law firm engages in the practice of lobbying? Sure, so long as he doesn't vote on those matters being lobbied.
But its not just those issues that are being lobbied for. If Bass Berry makes millions off litigation for a company but doesn't technically have a lobbying contract with them, it still raises ethical issues, especially for a firm that has such a far reaching network of clients.
So, for the sake of the argument, what size law firm is acceptable for a legislator to work in to not have ethical issues?
According to Tennessee Ethics Commission registrations
Bass, Berry & Sims lobbies for:
American Express Co.,
American Petroleum Institute,
Asurion Insurance Services, Inc.,
Brown-Forman (wine, sprits),
Coventry Health Care, Inc.,
DCI Donor Services (organ, tissue donors),
Dell, Inc. (computers),
Direct TV,
Dish Networks,
Dialysis Clinics,
Doral Dental (manager of TennCare dental services),
Express Disposal (solid waste disposal),
First Acceptance Insurance,
Gaylord Entertainment,
Kaplan Higher Education Corp (for profit education),
Mountain States Health Alliance (hospitals),
Psychiatric Solutions, Inc. (psychiatric hospitals),
Studsvik,Inc. (nuclear power technical services),
Tennessee Bankers Association,
Tennessee Electric Cooperative Association.
ALSAC (St. Jude's Hospital charity).
I think it has less to do with size than style. A legislator at a business law firm like Bass is going to constantly be in a situations where bills directly affect his clients. A criminal defense attorney will face very few issues I think, probably somewhere in between is a trial lawyer. In fact I think there is a Republican house member trial lawyer who recuses himself on tort reform issues.
The other issue is that I wouldn't be as worried about an anti-union Republican that worked for a "union avoidance" firm like Bass Berry, because his or her stated beliefs line up with his clients.
Jeffrey, on the other hand, has repeatedly taken campaign positions in direct opposition to his employer, their clients and many of his campaign funders. This creates, as the Scene put it, an "ethical cloud" over dozens and dozens of legislative issues
I don't believe Mr. Yarbro picks who he wants to defend in court. Mr. Yarbro is still young and most likely at the bottom end when it comes to selection. You wouldn't judge a public defender for defending a murderer. Why are you judging Mr. Yarbro for doing his job for his firm.
Working at Bass Berry is nothing like being a Public Defender, in fact its pretty rediculous to think so. Every accused criminal has a constitutional right to a competent defense, Mega-Corporations have no right to a "union avoidance" lawyer. While the government must provide criminal defense attorneys, no one is forced to work at Bass Berry especially if the goals of the firm and their clients are in direct opposition to the publicly stated beliefs of a given lawyer.
Ummm.....Dick Lodge is a major contributor to Senator Henry. Blows that theory all to hell.
Hey Woods, where's a good Massey Energy quote when you need it?
The difference is that Dick Lodge represents less than 1% of Henry's campaign funding and 0% of his income. Dick Lodge is the leader of Bass Berry's government relations practice and has a strong influence over 100% of Jeff's income.
Sen. Henry is old and tired and he is using old and tired techniques because he doesn't have a good Democratic record to run on, and because he knows he is beat by the young upstart.
Wow. Really good to see the Scene buy into the whole "guilt by association" thing. I once saw Henry fill up at the BP station on Harding Road. By this logic, an ad that says "Henry Keeps BP Afloat While Oil Pours Into Gulf" would be legitimate, especially if accompanied by a grainy, stop-motion video.
And Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday, for that matter? Are you guys on sabbatical leave or what?
The really sad thing about this headline is that it gives Senator Henry's simply negative and misleading ad. a really sinister cast. There is no 'ethical cloud' over Yarbro; he has not done anything unethical, nor has he been alleged to have done anything unethical. There are no charges 'pending'.
Sure, if he is elected, you, your paper and the public are entitled to pay close attention to Yarbro's actions and votes on the alert for conflicts of interest that are real and not imaginary or hypothetical.
Whether Yarbro remains in his present employment or not, or promises to change it, is not a campaign issue. Guilt by association is bad enough when made where some real activity has occurred; it should not be stretched into the Alice in Wonderland of 'what ifs'.
Your headline incorporated into TV and circulars out this weekend from the Henry campaign is a smear on Jeff Yarbro's good name and his clean conduct of this campaign.
Take it back, Woods/SCENE.
(submitted earlier but not posted)
So I guess if Yarbro ended up having to vote on a piece of legislation that impacted one of his firm's clients he couldn't just recuse himself and not vote on that bill?
Happens all the time. Not sure why Woods isn't entertaining that idea instead of trying to force Yarbro to quit a job that feeds his wife and kid, especially when there is absolutely no evidence of Yarbro himself doing any lobbying.
