Meg Whitman’s Obvious Lack of Accountability
by Tony Chavira
I sometimes hate saying aloud that we’re a “left-leaning” political site, if only because I really don’t like the idea of pre-tainting information any of us post online with the preconception that it’ll only appeal to a certain audience.
But I don’t want Meg Whitman to win California Governor in November. At all.
She steam-rolled over Steve Poizner (who is particularly well-qualified for the position), and I’m afraid that she’ll simply outspend all the other candidates into submission. She's not necessarily underqualified for the position of governor in terms of her management experience, but at the same time she's still incredibly connected to and invested in companies like Goldman Sachs, where she was almost forced into retirement amidst controversy of something similar to insider trading. Sure, it was about 6 years before the global financial scandals came to light, so in some ways the current recession really took the light off of her. I generally prefer my politicians scandal-free, thanks.
To this end, The San Diego Examiner has an interesting article about the Democratic Group “Leveling the Playing Field,” who are doing what they can to counteract her single-minded ambitions:
Members of the group include the California Nurses Association (CNA), the California Faculty Association and the Painters District Council 36. They have assembled a seasoned veteran campaign management team, including former Los Angeles Deputy Mayor Sean Clegg as Campaign Manager and Dan Newman as Communications Advisor. The group has already come out punching hard at Whitman, demanding she release her tax returns and exposing her lavish lifestyle as eBay CEO, in particular, her frequent personal use of the corporate jet. It is not clear whether her use of the jet was treated as income: her personal use is estimated to have cost nearly $3 million. After wavering on the subject, Whitman has not yet indicated whether she will fully disclose her returns. The group has broadcast two radio ads in the Sacramento and Bay areas, one a grass roots organizing theme, the other demanding her full accounting of executive pay and perks, including use of the jet.
The fundamental question you should ask yourself is this: "Why would someone who's used to making millions of dollars a year want to be a public servant with a $300K salary, tops?" Need a hint? It's not "out of the kindness of her heart."
Obviously, she wants the power to dish out contracts and government money. She's certainly not doing this thanklessly, and she's a business person... she's not going to dump her fortune into an investment that won't pay off bigtime. Too bad people like Meg Whitman only seem to understand the term "paying off" to in terms of monetary compensation.
Most importantly, by privately funding her campaign she doesn't owe anything to big donors if she wins (even if they're unions). She is a power-decider with no obligation to anyone. Contracts and monies can be allocated to her friends almost openly, if she so chooses. Who does she have to be accountable to if she knows that when you have enough money, you can get away with whatever you want?
Comments
No comments.
