send to a friend | print | comment
FACT CHECK: Meehan attack on Lentz supporter misses the mark
When Republican Pat Meehan’s congressional campaign discovered that a supporter of its Democratic opponent had forwarded a fundraising e-mail while at work, it accused him of doing political work at “taxpayer expense,” campaigning with “government resources.”
But the Meehan campaign’s attack was misleading or false on several accounts, a review of the facts by pa2010.com has found.
The Meehan campaign’s target was Bruce Bikin, an attorney with the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, an agency under the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. Bikin is also the longtime chairman of the Radnor Township Democratic Party, and a supporter and campaign contributor to state Representative Bryan Lentz (D-Delaware), Meehan’s likely general election opponent. On March 16, Bikin forwarded an e-mail about a campaign fundraiser for Lentz from his office e-mail address, one that ends with the same “@pacourts.us” domain as taxpayer-paid court workers use.
The Meehan camp pounced, and even compared Bikin’s conduct to the subject of the so-called Bonusgate corruption investigation in Harrisburg.
“As a judicial employee responsible for enforcing ethical conduct in the legal profession, the fact that Bruce Bikin is engaging in campaign activities with government resources raises serious concerns,” Meehan campaign manager Bryan Kendro said in a statement earlier this week, calling on Lentz to join Meehan in seeking a full investigation. “This incident raises questions about the level of political work Bikin may be performing out of his state office in support of Lentz and Democrat Party.
“Only a full review of Bikin’s official computer and e-mail server will show for certain whether Bikin is regularly using state resources to engage in partisan political activities during work hours, particularly given his senior role in the county part,” Kendro added.
But the Disciplinary Board is an independent agency, and while it is technically a government body that answers to the state Supreme Court, no taxpayer money is used in its operations, meaning no “court resources” or “government resources” are at its disposal. Rather, it is funded by assessments levied on lawyers who practice in Pennsylvania. Its board is appointed by the court and assessment levels are approved by the court—a structure designed to keep the court’s direct involvement in disciplinary proceedings to a minimum.
The assessment fees are collected directly by the Disciplinary Board, which pays the court directly for usage of its e-mail system.
“In the larger sense, it’s Pat Meehan once again shooting his gun before he bothers to aim it,” Bikin said. “He doesn’t do his research, doesn’t know his facts. It’s ridiculous.”
While Bikin acknowledged that he should have forwarded the e-mail from his personal account instead—and said he’d be more careful in the future—the Disciplinary Board doesn’t have rules or guidelines governing political activity by employees. Bikin had already been chairman of the Radnor party for several years before he was hired by the Disciplinary Board less than two years ago.
“I wasn’t as careful as I should have been, and will be thus forth, in making sure I send e-mails out from the right account,” Bikin said. “I work here full time. I am here every day early and sometimes leave late. I send out a lot of e-mails about a lot of things that don’t necessarily relate to work. For example, I have a tennis group, and we have to e-mail back and forth to see who can play that week. Does that count?”
It was one of a few times in recent months that the Meehan campaign has advanced false or misleading statements—though most of those times it fell victim to inaccurate, third-party sources. The feuding between the two campaigns has seemed to reach a new level in the wake of a ballot challenge spearheaded by the Lentz camp.
Earlier this week, Meehan campaign spokesman Pete Peterson acknowledged that it was a mistake to use the phrase “taxpayer expense” in the campaign’s original release, but defended the larger point. On Thursday, he maintained that Bikin’s conduct was still improper as the employee of a government agency.
“How can it be said that fundraising with a court e-mail address is appropriate?” Peterson asked.
“Just as some local businesses have to pay fees to government to operate, lawyers have to pay an assessment fee,” he added. “I think most businesses would consider that a form of tax, but at the very least it is still a government resource.”
Of about half-a-dozen lawyers consulted by pa2010.com, none said they considered the fee to be a tax; most likened it to the bar fees they pay to practice law in the state.
“What happened here is both very unfortunate and very clear,” Lentz campaign manager Vincent Rongione said in a statement. “The Meehan campaign perpetrated this reckless and baseless smear in an effort to distract attention from their campaign improprieties relating to hundreds of possible forgeries on nominating petitions. I think people have a right to expect better judgment from Mr. Meehan, and I hope that he will issue and distribute an apology to Mr. Bikin with the same furor that he promoted the unfounded smear.”
March 25, 2010 at 9:30 pm
Tags: Bryan Lentz, PA-7, Pat Meehan
Leave a Reply
pa2012.com blogs
Red in a Sea of Blue
Purple in Pennsylvania
The Latest from @pa2012 news
More UpdatesStay connected with pa2012.com:
advertisement
advertisement
advertisement
David Diano
Mar 25th, 2010
I wonder how many political emails Meehan has sent out over the years? Of course, the Delco county courthouse is notorious as “fundraising ground zero” where employees are expected to donate, buy tickets to events, etc. or lose their politically appointed jobs.
Reality
Mar 25th, 2010
Pat Meehan is a hack, has always been a hack and will always be a hack. For a guy who got chased out of the governor’s race, you think he’d at least kind of care about winning a Congressional seat.
His campaign is a disaster.
Colleen Guiney
Mar 25th, 2010
Thank you, Dan for taking the time to fact check these accusations. I hope that local journalists who published this story on 24 March will print an update to their initial reports.
MarvinWestPhil
Mar 25th, 2010
Are you kidding here???
The courts are funded by TAXES.
Yes, its taxes on lawyers, and yes, its debatable whether lawyers should have full citizenship…but all kidding aside, lawyers paid taxes to the government, in the form of a court, and this PUBLIC lawyer is using his email version of a “bully pulpit” to bloviate about who his clients need to support financially – and he probably sent it from his official email as a way to use his position to pressure them into ponying up the dough!
What a corrupt…
sick of it all in delco
Mar 26th, 2010
is the disciplinary board employees subject to the supreme court rule prohibiting political activity by court personnel?
md
Mar 26th, 2010
Pat Meehan – LOL what a joke!
Adam Lang
Mar 26th, 2010
The underlying issue is that the average person shouldn’t have to know the specific status of someone emailing from a government account.
Obviously the political activity rules need to be up dated. No matter who you are, you are not allowed to do political activity with anything that relates to a position of function of government.
It should be common sense that no one should be emailing fundraiser info from a pacourts.us account. The fact it needs to be fact checked to this degree would imply that the average person would view it as a governmental source.
If it is currently allowed, ethic rules need to be updated to disallow it.
Brett
Mar 26th, 2010
Meehan is all ego, just think of a very big marshmallow and you have Pat Meehan, anyone up for shmorrs, lets roast that baby!
P. O'Neill
Mar 26th, 2010
Dan, you blew it on this one. The employees of the Disciplinary Board are considered employees of the judicial “system” and are thus prohibited from engaging in political activities pursuant to a Supreme Court order first issued in the late 1970′s and updated several times since then. Mr. Bikin is in a government office and the rule plainly applies to him. The attorneys must pay a fee to the government (Supreme Court). Are certain DEP employees not using government resources because their salaries and expenses are paid by fines and fees rather than income taxes? Surely not. Dan, do Mr. Bikin’s activities really feel right to you? Why don’t you get a comment from the Supreme Court about how they feel about attorneys for the Disciplinary Board using the resources of the Supreme Court to conduct political fundraising? I hope that if (when) the Court takes action on this matter you will report same and issue a retraction of this shallow piece of “investigative” reporting.
Rick
Mar 26th, 2010
Back to the real issue. Dan, please attend the April hearing on Meehan’s fraudulent petitions and report whether Summers, McNichol and Judge invoke their fifth amendment privilege.
huw
Mar 26th, 2010
This issue is not important as it barely touches the Lentz campaign and nobody, outside of a handful of insiders, knows who Bikin is anyway. Next step for Meehan is to get Lentz’s challenge thrown out before the hearing. Although at this point Meehan has been pretty much defined as a Delco Gop good old boy, spouting a generic national message. Meehan’s been passive and allowed his opponent to define him. Time for the internal poll, see where he stands, Meehan’s probably already peaked, unless he changes his tactics. There’s very little life or energy to his campaign, certainly not reaching out to independents. He’s running last year’s campaign.
BB
Mar 26th, 2010
Would both these candidates simply go away once and for all. We’re not interested in either of you. Just go ahead and abolish the district, we would be better served than by these two. Pa. taxpayers are fed up with this nonsense, we want LEADERS who can assist their constituents, not those acting like school kids in the play ground. ENOUGH ALREADY. It’s time to CHANGE THE CULTURE of Pa. politics. Again, both of you, just go away and let us all try and have SOME DIGNITY.
Betty
Mar 26th, 2010
Of course Bikin should have known better than to use his work e-mail to forward political content but this was not at tax-payer expense and his error in judgement cannot be laid at the doorstep of the Lentz campaign.I would hope that Mr. Bikin would be more careful in the future. In any event the Meehan campaign is appearing more and more desperate.
Ed H.
Mar 27th, 2010
MarvinWestPhil-
It’s not a tax, as explained in the original post. And for the Meehan camp to still say it was improper is false, seeing that there are no rules governing Bikin’s use of his e-mail account. Adam Lang may be right that the Pa. Supreme Court and/or the legislature may want to look into changing the rules, but Bikin has done nothing wrong. Frankly, if you’re a West Philly guy, you should be more worried about how the Philadelphia Parking Authority is used as a source of revenue, registrations and the occasional vote for the floundering Philadelphia Republican Party machine.