Amid the rising stench of sellout journalists paid by the Bush Administration to hawk its policies, there was an interesting little odor emanating today from the N.Y. Times, one of the papers that has indignantly protested such breaches of ethics.
Consider the following story in its National Briefings section, entitled California: More Trouble For State Official (registration may be required to view link) "In the latest blow to California’s secretary of state, Kevin Shelley, the federal commission that distributes election reform money voted to audit millions of dollars in questionable expenditures he oversaw. The four-member Election Assistance Commission voted unanimously to audit $27.3 million sent to California in 2003. A state audit released last month said Mr. Shelley had mismanaged the money, in part by paying employees to attend partisan events. The commission’s decision is the latest in a cascade of problems for Mr. Shelley, who faces two state investigations and a federal inquiry into accusations of illegally accepting political donations in his state office, and on Tuesday, the State Personnel Board accused him of creating a hostile work environment. AP
Now, the eagle-eyed will notice a little something missing from that Associated Press story.
Still can’t tell? Try this version from the website of the CBS affiliate in San Francisco, KPIX: *(AP) - "The federal commission that distributes election reform money to states voted Thursday to audit millions in questionable expenditures overseen by California Secretary of State Kevin Shelley.
In the latest blow to Shelley, who is also facing criminal investigations of his hiring practices and campaign fund-raising, the U.S. Election Assistance Commission voted unanimously to undertake a formal accounting of some of the $180 million in federal funds sent to California.
A state audit released last month said Shelley, a Democrat, mismanaged the funds, using some of it to pay employees and consultants for attending partisan events.
“Legitimate questions have been raised … we have a responsibility to make sure all states are in compliance” with federal law, said Commission Chairwoman Gracia Hillman.
The state audit said that because of the poor management, California risked failing to meet requirements of the Help America Vote Act of 2002, which authorized payments of more than $3 billion to states to update their voting systems.
The audit by the Election Assistance Commission is the first the agency has ordered since its creation by the Help America Vote Act. Commissioners, who include two Republicans and two Democrats, said it was necessary because of the serious allegations raised against Shelley in California.
While the state audit limited itself to looking at how a sample of the money was spent, the federal audit will take a more comprehensive approach to whether expenditures complied with the Help America Vote Act.
Commissioners agreed to audit $27.3 million the state received in 2003 to spend on general election reform activities. The state audit had only sampled about 12 percent of that $27.3 million.
California could be asked to return some of the money it received.
The decision by the Election Assistance Commission is the latest in a cascade of problems for Shelley, once considered a rising Democratic star. Calls for him to resign have come even from a prominent member of his own party, state Senate Democrat Richard Alarcon of Los Angeles.
But Shelley’s campaign spokesman said Wednesday that Shelley did not plan to resign, and would presumably testify under oath before the state’s Joint Legislative Audit Committee next week at a hearing on his handling of the Help America Vote Act money.
Besides allegations that he used federal funds to boost his political profile and reward Democratic allies, Shelley also faces two state investigations and a federal probe into accusations he accepted campaign contributions from a political ally that had been laundered through a state grant. He’s also been accused of accepting political donations in his state office.
On Tuesday, the state Personnel Board released an audit accusing Shelley of creating a hostile work environment, and asked the state attorney general to investigate the handling of two sexual harassment complaints against Shelley, and look into whether he improperly hired the son of a political ally."*
Hmmmm. I guess the fact that Shelley is a (cough) Democrat was too insignificant for the Times to mention. Or maybe when they shortened the AP’s account to fit in the Times, something had to be deleted. Like multiple mentions of his party affiliation.
Betcha the next time some top Republican officeholder in Texas or Florida gets accused of sleaze, the Times story will include absolutely no hint whatsoever about the offender’s political status.
The Times, you see, is above that sort of partisan name-calling. :rolleyes:
