DelCOG’s and PDD’s Joint Statement to Senator DeLuca
The Delaware Coalition for Open Government and the Progressive Democrats for Delaware have issued a Joint Statement on Senator DeLuca on the ongoing issue of “double dipping.” Feel free to join this statement by signing your name, or “pseudonym,” below in the comments.
The recent announcement from the State Attorney General’s office that they cannot release information and/or records as to when Senate President Pro Tem Anthony DeLuca shows up to work is simply unacceptable.
The words of Deputy Attorney General W. Michael Tupman are as true today as they were in 2006: “Just as the public has a right to know the salary paid to public employees, the public also has a right to know when their public employees are and are not performing the duties for which they are paid.”
Those words were true with respect to former State Representative Nancy Wagner, and they must be just as true with respect Senator Anthony DeLuca. Citizens have a right to know if he is being paid for two jobs while only doing one. We have the right to know how the other 10 state legislators, who also have secondary state jobs with state agencies, spend their time. We have this right because we, as a public, need to know if our elected representatives are performing their duties on our behalf ethically and effectively. We need to know that nothing is influencing their votes.
There is no security threat to anyone in providing that information. There is also no basis for denying their right to that information because the elected official is a merit system employee in his or her second job. That is really a distinction without a difference.
We request that Senator DeLuca and any similarly situated Senator or Representative voluntarily release that information, and waive the supposed protections a merit based employee receives under the law. Failing that, they should resign one of their positions. Because, quite simply, if we can’t have the records and the doors of government are being shut to the people, then Delaware’s legislators must be prohibited from having two state jobs.
We also urge the General Assembly to, once and for all, ban “double-dipping” on the part of all legislators and all state employees.
Signed,
Paul Baumbach, President, Progressive Democrats for Delaware
John D. Flaherty, President, Delaware Coalition for Open Government
C. Edward Brittingham, President, NAACP Delaware State Conference of Branches
Mark Blake, President, Greater Hockessin Area Development Association
Dave Bailey
Frieda Berryhill
Dan Bockover
Gemma Buckley
Jack Buckley
Rita Carnevale
Cassie Cathell
Paul Cathell
Valerie V. Cloutier
Mack D. Cochran
Susan Regis Collins
Richard Connell
Bonnie A. Corwin
Emily (Tuthill) Best Cramer
John Crowley
Alberta Crowley
Anthony J. De Marco
Avis W. DiBuo
Nick DiBuo
June Eisley
Jimmy “Chainsaw” Epps
Leann H. Ferguson
Jeremy Filliben
Gerry Fulcher
Catherine Gibson
Harry Glaze
Lynn Glaze
Phil Goldstein
Ken Grant
Karen Hartley-Nagle
Karen Heyman
Michael Heyman
Hardy Hoegger
Susan Howell
Rob Hurst
John Irwin
Al Jackson
Richard Kiger
Sandra LaBlanche
Philip Lavelle
Jerry Ledwith
Tanya Vaillancourt Looney
Stan Lucas
Christine Madden
R. Jerry Martin
Mike Matthews
Raetta McCall
David McCorquodale
Mickey McKay
John TC Megahan
Jason K. Melrath
Connie Merlet
Chuck Mulholland
Lois Myoda
Tim Myoda
Larry Nagengast
Bill Narcowich
Ed Osborne
Michelle Ostafy
Bill Pearson
Meyer J. Persow
Coralie Pryde
Robert Ruddy
Paul Sample
Tam Searle
Frank Sims
Cynthia L. Smith
Scott R. Spencer
Naomi Syken
Steve Tanzer
Chad Tolman
Jim Vandergast
Rosie Volpe
Katherine Ward
Pat Webb
Jack Wells
Frances West
C. Weymouth
Nancy Willing
Kent Woudstra
Kit Zak
Someone explain to me again how it is a conflict of interest for a state legislator to work for the state in some other capacity, but it is not a conflict of interest for a state legislator to work in the private sector? A state legislator is immune, somehow, from the interests of his or her private sector employer while in the General Assembly?
That’s a great point. Donna Stone was famous for flamboyant conflicts. I’m sure there are many cases of rank misuse of public office for the private gain of legislators that never cause a ripple.
There are two concerns, one of which is also a concern with private sector jobs. The first concern is that there is fraudulent billing. For example, if the legislator is in a committee meeting while timesheets also have him or her at the other state job. The second concern is influence peddling / bribery, i.e. giving the legislator a paid job in exchange for his or her vote. And that concern exists whether it is a state job or a private sector job.
Between redistricting and this, Paul Baumbach is on fire today! Go, Paul!!!
Dana: According to an AG’s ruling when a state trooper wanted to run for office, he couldn’t because he works in the executive branch, setting up a constitutional conflict, rather than an ethical conflict. I have never been able to figure out why the Dept. of Labor, also a part of the executive branch, wouldn’t be covered by the same ruling.
Also, remember that the ethical complaint here is that DeLuca got this job AFTER his election; given the players who were in charge when he was hired, it smells an awful lot like the job was a reward. I think some people are OK with such employment when the job was held prior to the person’s election.
Your point about conflicts is a good one. Most people think ethics would dictate that whatever their place of employment, legislators should recuse themselves from votes on bills that would affect their own livelihoods. Our General Assembly, in its wisdom, takes the opposite position: Farmers are actually experts on farm bills, teachers are experts on education bills, etc., and therefore shouldn’t be barred from working or voting on such bills — they should actually take the lead! They explained this all for The News Journal sometime back in the ’90s.
Geezer, it was you that convinced me that state legislators should be employed only as state legislators and that we should pay them significantly more to make that possible. That would obviate these kinds of problems. I still think that is a good idea.
I would like to add my real name, but I do not want to put it in open comments. Is there some other way I can sign on?
Sure – use the “Got a Tip” feature at the tip of the page and state clearly that you want your name added to the list.
Dana: I still hold that view. I was giving the Delaware Way rationales for this state of affairs, and nobody should take them as an endorsement of their positions by me.
PDD worked hard alongside DELCOG and others on this statement about double dipping. This was IN NO WAY an individual effort.
Don’t be so modest!
Actually, he is telling the truth. As I was involved in drafting this joint statement, I can tell you that many different organizations were consulted in crafting it. And as you can see, many people, whether individually or on behalf of their respective organizations, signed on.
That is why is called a Joint Statement rather than a Statement from the PDD or Paul himself.
Bottom line, these people who are working both as elected officials and pulling in another state paycheck should all voluntarily submit their hours worked – that includes those who have jobs with the University of Delaware, Del Tech or DSU or our public school system etc.
I’d like to publicly make a few points and ask a question.
I’m a state employee and I ran for state representative, so I lived through some of these issues.
First, legislators are already paid a living wage. A rep makes about 50k a year, which is about what a teacher makes. In fact, 50k would have been a raise for me; about 14k more. So I don’t want to hear that we need to pay the legislators more money. They already make more than thousands of full-time state workers.
Second, there is nothing wrong with a state employee also serving as an elected state official. In fact, their experience as a state employee would give them a good perspective, which may allow him or her to make well-informed decisions.
Which leads to the other point. There is a reason why we have part-time legislators who have other jobs. The founding fathers understood that our elected representatives would be better informed and more accountable if they lived and worked among their constituents. It makes sense.
My question is this; why the suspicion that Sen. Deluca is working both jobs at the same time? Is there evidence that this is happening? Or is the suspicion based on the feelings that he must be doing something wrong? So far, I have not seen anything that comes close to real evidence that he broke the regulation.
When I was a candidate, it was a real struggle, to keep the two jobs separate. I couldn’t so much as answer co-workers when they asked how the campaign is going. The state regulation regarding political activities is worded so vaguely, that just by running, I put my career in jeopardy. This is also a major reason why I will not run again.
Please consider these facts before you all saddle up against state employees who are also elected officials.
–Jim
The only conflict of a farmer voting on farm bills or a teacher voting on education bills ect., is if they specifically stand to gain financially.
“the founding fathers understood….”
Blah, blah, blah. I get tired of the founding father worship. It really is a form of cultural idoltry. If the founding fathers were alive today and held the same views that they held over 200 years ago about minorities, women, and propertyless individuals, they would be widely reviled and rejected out of hand. And why? Because we have OUTGROWN their ideas. We have found many of their ideas to be deficient, useless for our needs and times, unjust, and insufficiently democratic. So we are supposed to kowtow to the founders about having a part-time legislature? Why? Don’t the people of Delaware DESERVE a full time legislature? If we had one, if we had one that reviewed the operations of government (I.e. provided oversight), we wouldn’t have prisoners going for years w/ unconstitutional health care or have a state hospital that maltreats its patients for years. Those things would be caught sooner than later. The founders couldn’t even imagine the demography of the 21st century much less anticipate its governmental needs.
Actually, Dana, I feel constrained to defend Thomas Jefferson on this point, who wrote repeatedly that, “The Earth belongs to the living,” and wanted each generation to have the opportunity to repeal or change pretty much anything.
And I’d point out–as an historian–that it is pretty damn idiotic to attribute lasting beliefs to individuals who not only had political careers spanning three and four decades, but who also lived in a time at which you could actually grow and change your beliefs. Again, witness Jefferson, the original strict constructionalist who nonetheless figured his way into buying Louisiana even though, sonofabitch, the power to do so was not explicitly granted in the Constitution.
Not accusing you of doing that last one, because I’ve never seen you do it. Just noticing that lots of folks tend to want to cherrypick this or that quote from this or that moment and make it the definitive Jefferson or Madison or Hamilton or even Lincoln position without any historical context.
Jim, good questions and perspectives.
First a question of my own..do you really feel that senator deluca is putting in 80 hours per week of work? For that is what we are paying for. Shouldn’t SOMEONE be authorized to find the answer to this question?
Second, how can ANY state employee properly supervise an employee who HAPPENS to also be senator pro temp ore, and thus can make/break your department?
Paul,
Thanks for the question.
I’m not sure if he is or not. But that’s the point. There is no apparent evidence that has broken the rules. If I had to guess, I would say that in one way or another, the taxpayers are getting at least 80 hours a week from him. money’s worth from Senator Deluca.
But I must agree that it would be an odd situation to have a state senator working as my subordinate. It would be tricky, in the least.
Also, I agree that sitting reps and senators should not accept a paid position with the state. That was one of my platforms when I ran. I just can’t imagine how an interview process could be fair if one of the applicants is a senator. How could you not hire them? I’m thinking of Joe Booth’s job at Sussex Tech as I type this.
I also agreed that if I won, I would quit my DelDOT job. I could see that to do both jobs it would have kept me away from young family. But my kids are little, so my situation is unique.
Finally, Dana, we already have many reps and senators who are effectively full-time politicians. I’m thinking of the numerous retirees, like Pete Schwartzkopf. Most of those retirees give at least 40 hours a week to the taxpayers, and do a great job.
Sunshine is the best antiseptic. As long as information is made public, there should be no problem with public officials also holding public sector jobs. The problem here does not seem, necessarily, to be one of conflict of interest or double dipping, rather it is the appearance of the two and the lack of transparency to confirm or deny whether or not there actually is any conflict of interest or double dipping.
And, by the way, awesome letter EVERYONE!
All elected officials should be subject to financial transparency, as “We the People,” pay their salaries.
I think we should hang the moniker “Tiny Toenail DeLuca” upon him.
He’s so hard to cut in salary.
Thanks to “Baby Bird Beau” Biden.
I am still waiting for someone to answer Jim Westhoffs question.
Is someone actually charging DeLuca with not showing up for work?
And as for the 80 hour a week charge. Elected officials are not full time. So they are not required to be “working” 40 hours. Its hard to measure the actual hours an elected official actually puts in. Constituent services, phone calls, public meetings, legislative sessions. The only obvious checkable time is public meetings and legislative sessions.
I personally do not want full time legislators. This happened in Pennsylvania and legislative costs went up considerably. You also had full time legislators just looking for some new law to pass. Idle hands…..
Also, when Jim was running in his district, he took vacation time off from his day job to run. So just because you see an elected official out and about when you think he should be at work, he might just be off the clock or using vacation time.
There is no public way to know if an official is off or on clock but I am sure there are ways to verify Jims attendance with DelDot either through Jim producing it or DelDot investigating to see if there is any impropriety. The same could be said for Frank Shade here in Sussex. He was VERY careful about his time. He would leave the building on his lunch break to return phone calls.
State workers are pretty conscience of this stuff. Employees get looked into for their use of state vehicles, flex time and sick time.
True enough, elected officials should not get hired while they are elected officials. And, in my opinion, should be barred from getting state jobs afterwards for a minimum of 2 years. But that is not what we are talking about.
So far, there is no there there. Why the big deal now? Payback for DeLuca? Any evidence of his wrongdoing? Has the Dept of Labor investigated these claims? If there is evidence of wrong doing, have it investigated. If DoL doesn’t then perhaps a commission is necessary.
I think the best point on this post was the argument that if the Dept of Labor is part of the Executive, how can DeLuca even have the job? Is this a job for the ethics committee? (and yes, I know how oxymoronic senate ethics sounds)
SussexAnon –
I believe the reason DeLuca has drawn so much scrutiny is because he’s bent the rules before, having his Senate assistant also work on DOL matters. The AG’s office previously gave its OK to that somewhat shady arrangement. (http://attorneygeneral.delaware.gov/office/opinions/2010/10-IB16.pdf)
But it truly doesn’t matter if anyone has accused or suspects DeLuca of cheating or not. That’s not the issue here. The issue is that we as residents of Delaware are not allowed to check if he is cheating or not. We have the right to know, and he’s been hiding it behind that anti-terrorism dodge. The GA needs to correct that, and promptly.
“there is nothing wrong with a state employee also serving as an elected state official. In fact, their experience as a state employee would give them a good perspective, which may allow him or her to make well-informed decisions.”
I have no problem with FORMER state employees bringing their perspective to the GA. But if a current state trooper was told he couldn’t run because he works in the executive branch, how would Dept. of Labor (or DelDOT) employees be different?
Geezer — The issue is sharper than that. Executive branch employees can indeed serve in the Legislature, but those who enforce the laws (such as a state trooper) cannot. This explains why Jim Westhoff could have worked at DelDOT and served in the House simultaneously, and how Joe Booth can work at Sussex Tech and serve in the Senate simultaneously.
The Supreme Court found in the Salter case (1998) that there is a distinction between “civil employees” who also serve in the General Assembly – giving the example of public school teachers – and those who “perform the sovereign function assigned to the executive branch of enforcing the laws of the State of Delaware.” The latter are ineligible to serve in the legislature. Salter could have run for the legislature as a sitting trooper, but by winning would automatically resign his state police job.
See http://caselaw.findlaw.com/de-supreme-court/1274997.html for details.
That said, it positively absolutely begs the question – if a state trooper is ineligible because he enforces the laws of the state, why isn’t Tony DeLuca – the guy in charge of ENFORCING LABOR LAW FOR THE STATE – also in that category?
Thanks for that clarification, anon.