[Meredith’s post below this one reminded me that I had intended to write on this earlier. I guess it’s "pile on Jack Scott" day…]
About a month ago, State Senator Jack Scott was "hired" to be the new Chancellor of the California Community College System, said employment to begin at the end of the year. Shortly after his appointment to this post was announced, Scott tendered his resignation as Chairman of the Budget Subcommittee on Education (The Bee’s Capitol Alert carried it here – registration req’d).
At the time, Scott’s spokesperson said that the Senator, "didn’t want any possible appearance of a conflict of interest."
I guess its time to ask the obvious question — if Scott resigned from a budget subcommittee because a conflict of interest (I can’t think of a bigger one than having accepted a job at the end of your term from a public agency that is heavily regulated by, and receives state funding from the legislature) — exactly what is it that Mr. Scott CAN vote on that will not present a conflict?
First and foremost, while he dropped off of the Education Subcommittee of the Budget, Scott has retained his position as Chairman of the Senate Education Committee. How fortunate for the Community College system — he is well placed to look out for the interests of his pending employer in that role.
What about when the time comes for voting on the state budget? Would Scott be able to vote for a budget that cuts funding to the Community College system without endangering his future financial income?
There must be a myriad of times, whether in formal Committee hearings and Senate Floor Sessions, or informally, when in chatting with fellow legislators, or perhaps the Governor, when the subject of education will come up… And Scott’s articulated thoughts and substantive actions are now in doubt.
It seems to me, at this point, that the interests of the State of California, and frankly those of Mr. Scott, are best served if he would just leave the Senate early, and begin his new position as Chancellor.
As long as he continues in the Senate, he now "serves two masters" as it were. On principle, he should be resigning from positions and certainly abstaining from a lot of votes (including the budget) — but his new bosses would prefer that he not, I’m sure. And they speak to the Senator now with a much louder voice than any of those pesky constituents back down in Pasadena.
On a closing note, ask yourself this question: What if instead of being named Chancellor of the Community College system, Scott instead announced that at the end of the year, he would be going to work as the new CEO of a private company that directly benefits from state funding, and lots of it?