Monday, March 01, 2004
Here's an interesting story about how a sheriff in Texas has accepted some $3500 in campaign contributions from a man who has been convicted of selling the illegal drug methamphetamine and is currently facing charges for shooting at his neighbor. Other neighbors claim that the sheriff has gone easy on the man after they've lodged complaints about his dumping of refrigerators or oil containers near their property.
The sheriff says that ""I have never taken a campaign contribution with anything attached to it. No one has ever handed me a check and said, 'Here's a contribution to your campaign if you do me a favor."
Maybe so, but the ex-con certainly seems to want to keep the sheriff in office. His ability, and willingness, to spend $3500 to keep a friend in office suggests that even if there's nothing corrupt with the sheriff, there certainly is with the local campaign finance laws.
My question is, how come the media doesn't pay similar attention to when a scofflaw corporation that has been convicted to dumping illegal substances gives money to help elect the people that enforce the laws that impact them?