Oregon's own "Air Sununu"?

Is it me or does this seem a wee bit overblown? He didn't fleece taxpayers, no? We works for the government, no? Lot's of people claim the government rate... maybe I'm missing something here.

Shouldn't that be state rep. Lim instead of st. sen?

STATE REPRESENTATIVE, 50TH DISTRICT is the way he is listed on the Sec. of State filings website.

somebody want to close the tag on the BBC post. I tried it but everytime I hit preview it jumped to the link.

Lim used to be a senator, retired, then came back to the house. As a matter of protocol, it is proper to refer to him by his highest former title.

Now, as for the "scandal"...

This is a preliminary investigation to determine if there might be an ethical violation.

Compare this to, say, a sitting member of the U.S. House of Representatives who admits he raped a woman.

But it's only a "scandal" if you are a Republican...

Perhaps they mean it as an honorific, since he was at one time a Sen. and it's considered a higher ranking office? I usually don't agree with John Lim views but he's no crook. If the airline considered being a legislator sufficient to entitle him to the state rate, why would it be considered an ethical violation on his part? Is someone alleging that he got the discount by misrepresenting himself? Or that there's some quid pro quo in which he later did the bidding of Alaska Airlines on some bill? This sounds like a big nothing. John

Talk about jumping the gun. The article didn't state that he actually did anything wrong. The article stated that he " will undergo a preliminary ethics investigation into whether he was entitled to claim a government rate on several flights he made last year and this year to Los Angeles." It's only an accusation.

The article also states, "Friday’s (?) by the commission sets in motion a preliminary investigation, after which the commission will decide whether there is cause for a more in-depth analysis of a potential violation of government-ethics laws. Lim told reporters after the closed-door session he is confident he will be cleared after the investigation."

Give the guy the benefit of the doubt. Jumping to conclusions is just as tacky in blue oregon as it is in red oregon.

I heard he only tips 5% at restaurants, too.

BURN HIM!

I agree with the comments above, this is pretty rediculous. You can get airline discounts if you are a member of your alumni association too and you don't have to be enrolled in college.

The only exception would be if the government was actually paying for anything associated with the travel. Its like Costco or the Credit Unions now a days on who qualifies for "membership" discounts.

Why aren't they investigating stuff that matters, like the policies that lead to the situation discribed by Paul Krugman in today's Oregonian, titled Economic Inequality, Wages, Wealth, and Politics. TIF Money and PDC come to mind here locally.

[off-topic comment about Andrew Young and Wal-Mart deleted. -editor]

John,

The title of Kari's post was "Another Oregon Republican gets into trouble".

If you are going to go "off topic" (which could get your post deleted by Kari, depending upon his particular mood at the moment), then please stick to the general topic at hand, and pick on another Republican.

It goes deeper that this...

One time, an elected official was in Salem on a non-session day... and they used their Capitol building parking spot while they got lunch -- avoiding paying Salem's parking meters and thusly profiting from their office!

But seriously... based on how much we pay our legislators, I think it's ridiculous to peg them with nonsense like this. (I know of a few Dems who do the same thing.)

Who among us staffers can resist casually remarking to the airline booker, "I work for the state government," (without saying whether the trip is state business or not) and seeing what discounts materialize?

In Lim's case, the travel wasn't important enough for the state to spend money on. So, he paid for it personally. As a personal expenditure, he should have paid the regular rate available to the public.

Kari, I'll defer to you if you have some special knowledge of the legislature's policy on travel expenses, but I'm beginning to suspect you just like to throw bombs at any politician who doesn't hire you to do their website.

Who judges whether a particular trip is "important enough"? Last I checked, the legislature is a coequal branch of government, and an individual member has wide discretion to set his or her own priorities.

I suspect the reality is that he has no travel budget at all. If that's true, he paid slightly less out of his own pocket by claiming it as government business. And I bet it was government business, whatever you might think.

John

This reminds me of the story maybe more than a decade ago about a state senator from Central Oregon, and a relative (daughter?) and state troopers.

There may have been an emergency transportation issue involved, don't recall the details all this much later.

But what I do recall is the question of whether a private citizen with a daughter in exactly the same circumstances could have called upon state troopers for the same transportation. If so, it was a valid use of state police resources, if not, then it was not a valid use of resources-it was favoritism to an elected official.

John Lim is an elected official of the party which talks about "spending discipline" and the overspending of agencies, overspending on unionized employees, etc.

Turn this story around. Suppose this was the story of a Democratic legislator. If one would feel exactly the same, then it is a question of judgement and whether a public figure has access to something a private citizen cannot access.

If Lim said "I was taking the flights on behalf of..." and it was actually connected to his work as a legislator, that is one thing. If there is a regulation on this sort of thing, did he abide by the regulation? And if it turns out the airline filed the complaint, that makes the story even more interesting.

Harry,

I couldn’t tell if you were being factious as many of these comments are. On the chance that you were not, I went back and read the Blue Oregon Charter under home. My take is this is supposed to be a voice for the progressive movement. As a progressive, the more relevant story in today’s news was not whether Lim claimed a discount on the an airline ticket, when there are issues in today’s paper like WalMart and Andrew Young prostituting himself for I would guess a lot more money than a questionable discount on an airline ticket, and sinking using racist remarks to defend WalMart’s position .

http://www.blueoregon.com/2005/05/earth_to_walmar.html

To an organization that Kari has not been shy about calling out. I think Kari and Blue Oregon are better than simply a Red bashing blog, but a place where ideas and disagreements are aired and enjoy most of this exchange. That’s why I posted in this string, to add some perspective to the sin of Lim.

LT has used a key phrase as it relates to Oregon Government Standards and Practices Commission regulations. "Access to something a private citizen can not access". If you’re using your elected/government position to gain access to something you could not get otherwise and your doing so outside the needs of that position then you’re in violation of the law. Period.

For those of you who think abusing the trust of the people who elected John Lim is no big deal, I ask you to take a broader look at what it does to all elected officials when the public sees that in this example a State Representative got stuff outside the “should be narrow and confined” privileges of their office. This then becomes the dimension where distrust and dislike of all things that those “damn politicians do” breed. And what that broad sweep of the brush based on what some of you think is a little thing does to the whole vision of representative/citizen government paints the whole system black.

Fewer and fewer people trust the people elected to “serve” precisely because they think that politicians have access to privileges they are not and should not be entitled too. Instead of serving the public they are serving themselves. Swoosh, plenty of tar to go around.

Have we become so jaded by Enronism (can I start a whole new ism here?) that unless John Lim used his position to enrich himself for a hundred grand we think it should be beneath our notice or for that matter any notice? It is bad enough that the Republican majority has reduced the funding for the Oregon Government Standards and Practices Commission. Should we teach our children that shoplifting is ok as long as you don’t take more then a hundred dollars of merchandise at any one time? What happened to its wrong. You shall not do it. If you do it you will face the consequences for that behavior.?

I suspect both Dem and Republican are willing to toss out whole sections of law here but I for one believe in the rule of law and you are not doing it with my consent.

Very Well Harry and Jenni,

"It was unclear from a closed-door session who filed the complaint, but it may have originated from an airline"

DIRECT QUOTE FROM SJ article.

"It was the airline that reported him." Kari's statement of fact.

"The fact that he is being investigated, and that it appears the airline turned him in-- not a political foe-- makes it all the more interesting." JENNI's statement of fact.

However the Oregoninan article NOT linked, Lim himself states that it was Alaska Airlines that called.

"Lim said he was surprised that Alaska Airlines notified the commission about his use of the government-rate fares"

But in the article NOT linked, the local one, Lim also explains what the trip was about.

"The Gresham Republican said he made the trip to Los Angeles on Alaska Airlines to speak to the League of Korean Americans, a group that encourages Koreans to immigrate to the United States and become citizens.

"Since I am a legislator, they ask me to speak to them," he said"

In the unlinked article, he explained why the state had not paid for the trip as part of state business.

"He said he paid for the trips with his credit card. Asked why he didn't request to use state money if the trips were for state business, he said money was not available for that purpose. "There's no state allowance for travel," he said. "I don't see any problem here," he said outside the commission's meeting. "If they ask for some documentation, I can provide it.""

This is speculation on my part, but the way these things usually work, the organization that you speak to will reimburse you travel expenses and accommodations. If you are a supporter of the organziation especially if it is a non-profit or service group, you sometimes absorb the cost, but in any event you try to minimize the cost to the organization you are speaking to.

In the scheme of things this looks like a better dead than red, kind of story, the ethics question a relatively minor one, there are bigger fish to fry out there than Korean Legaislators who go speak to Korean American Public Service Groups and get an airline discount.

If JC thinks this story is too unimportant to be of concern, why does he advance such a spluttering, half-baked defense?

Why accuse Kari & Jenni of maintaining facts not in evidence (as if Lim were on trial) and then admit them to have been reported as fact?

Why does he defend taking the discount for travel on state business with the fact that the state does not allow funding such travel, and gives the reason for travel as something not defined as the business of the State of Oregon, encouraging immigration from Korea?

Methinks he doth protest too much!

Ed-

It is because I believe in telling both sides of the Story, and let intelligent people who read this Blog come to thier own conclusion.

Yes I protest too much, it is of great concern to me that a number of people who would make excellent legislators or lawmakers refuse to run because of the petty scrutiny they will be subject too, whether you are talking about a wonderful representative like Kate Brown being crucified by Bill O'Riely and the right wing blogs on Jessica's Law and the shakey facts surrounding it, or this "violation" of ethics.

Do I think the ethics commission should be looking into this.

Yes, if anything it will clarify for others just what the boundaries or rules are just like case law, and what the interpretation of policy should be so there are clear guidelines to follow in the future so legislators can avoid being in the headlines "Another Oregon Republican gets in trouble".

Should Lim be being crucified on this blog for taking advantage of a airline discount.

I think the article with LIM's side of the story should have been linked or quoted, that at least his claims that it was goverment related travel and not personal trip should have been acknowledged to have a balanced discussion.

In another life I used to do speaking engagements and ususally the organization picks up the tab for travel expenses. Usually it is a non-profit or service organization, so you try and help them out by trying to get the lowest fare. I had been invited to speak because of my position in government. I don't consider it misguided.

Should Rep. Lim be crucified? of course not, as he is no upstart messiah, more village idiot caught poaching. A stint in the pillory would be more fitting; so we brought a few rotten veggies to the event, so what? He's taking up valuable space in the House that needs to be put to better use.

I note that JC wanted the link to "The O" article "State scrutinizes lawmaker's use of air discounts" to be incuded, but not enough to give it.

Thanks Ed,

I am just an old fogie, that has never been able to successfully post a link, so I appreciate the help. As you can see by my bold and italic misapplications, so I just cut and paste quotes.

Thanks Pat. Remember that Brading couln't get the time of day from anyone until he got close on his own.

There are lots of candidates working very hard but ignored by the folks who think only the Portland / "we know who will win due to money raised and the R to D ratio" folks know everything.

This morning after church I heard one woman saying she belonged to her local neighborhood assoc. and I asked if she had ever met her incumbent state rep. "No, can't think of the name right now but perhaps I should be able to". I said "that just proves my point that the incumbent hasn't worked hard to make an impression on constituents. My friend Connie Garcia is running for that seat. The woman asked "which party?".

This woman said would vote only for Democrats this year.

Remember, anyone who wins an election is fully entitled to all the responsibilities and benefits of the office (ability to sponsor bills, etc) as well as the right to be addressed by title (State Sen. State Rep., Governor, etc) whether they were endorsed and given material support by a party, a target of a caucus, or any other sort of campaign.

I hope Brading wins, but if he does and all the rest lose because all the energy from the rest of the state went to his race, all that means is one more Dem. seat. Now if Caudle defeats Scott, Brading wins, and 2 from Marion or some other county outside Portland win, THEN and only then do Democrats have a majority!

Access to something a private citizen can not access

Okay, so does anyone know whether Lim got a standard state-business (or state employee) discount... or if the airline gave him a special, bigger discount because he was an elected official?

As long as we're quoting regulations, that distinction seems pretty key.

As it has been said, "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him follow the link." Or something like that...

In the previously linked story from "The O":

"Through a competitive bidding process, Oregon has contracts with three airlines that cover about 140 flight segments, including Alaska Airlines as the contractor for the Portland-Los Angeles flights, said Tim Hay, who coordinates the state's travel contracts.

A legislator or state employee, however, is only supposed to use the state's rates when they purchase a ticket through a state-issued account, Hay said.

Lim said he always identified himself as an Oregon state legislator when he called Alaska Airlines to arrange for flights.

If Lim were a black or hispanic democrat, this whole thing would be called a blatant racist attack against an honest politician. But since he is an Asian Republican, this is of course a serious investigation into a damning unethical controversy.

I see.

John Capradoe writes:

Harry,

<h1>I couldn’t tell if you were being factious as many of these comments are. On the chance that you were not, I went back and read the Blue Oregon Charter under home. My take is this is supposed to be a voice for the progressive movement. As a progressive, the more relevant story in today’s news was not whether Lim claimed a discount on the an airline ticket, when there are issues in today’s paper like WalMart and Andrew Young prostituting himself for I would guess a lot more money than a questionable discount on an airline ticket, and sinking using racist remarks to defend WalMart’s position .</h1>

I admit that I was being facetious (maybe more sarcastic) but I did not think that Kari would take the bait and remove your comment. Whatever. (Hey, it is HIS post (and blog) and he can and should do as he sees fit to maintain order. BTW, I am not 'pissing in his living room'...just allowing (pointing out?) Kari to use his discretion in whatever fashion he does or does not choose to use it) I agree with you on the Andrew Young thing, but also I agree with others that you should fire off an email to Kari to start a new post. It would generate a good discussion on multiple fronts.

Back on topic, this Sen/Rep Lin thing is just somebody at Alaskan Airlines making a mountain out of a mole hill. Whoops, I think I'll take United down to LAX next time. And I bet that most of the State Employees using this discount also violate the technical details.

As a previous poster already noted, if he saves the Korean group a few bucks on the airplane ticket that he submits on his travel expense reimbursement, he in no way has benefited financially. But that will (of course) come out after the election.

Whatever.

Typical dismissal of ethical concerns with glib misdirection (e. g. "everybody does it") by a Repubican supporter, Harry.

Whatever.

I'm not going to speak for anyone else, but I do want to clarify my position, because I think those who want to convict Lim are willfully distorting what I and others have said. I am not saying that "everybody does it," or "who cares about only a small ethical violation," or "I looove John Lim on the issues, so whatever he does is okay with me."

1) I don't like John Lim on the issues, but I don't believe he is an unethical person. No one's ever handed him a thing in this life. He's a working class immigrant and has gotten to the state legislature --and won his party's nomination for US Senate --based on his own sweat, with virtually no help from the Republican establishment or any of the usual right wing moneybags. He doesn't deserve to get smeared publicly based on almost no information. Karen Minnis and Gordon Smith commit worse ethical breaches before breakfast than Lim has committed in his whole life. (Why not look at every airline ticket those two have ever bought?)

2) I --and I don't think anyone else --ever said that small ethical breaches ought to be ignored (zilla). What I said was that there isn't an ethical breach at all, at least based on the slim evidence reported so far.

3) Isn't the "state rate" a policy of the airline, not a state law? If simply saying "I'm a state legislator" is enough for Alaska Air to give him the rate, that's Alaska Air's problem and maybe they need to tighten up their policy. Where's the ethical violation by Lim? Is he supposed to say "Hey, Alaska Airlines, give me your policy on 'state rate' and I and my lawyer will call you back and tell you what price you should charge me?" Who does that? Everybody in the known universe calls the airline and assumes the price they quote you is the one you pay.

If, as Jenni says, the test is "[a]ccess to something a private citizen can not access," then no one is ever entitled to the state rate. If merely "enriching himself" --ie, getting a cheaper rate than he's entitled to --by virtue of his office constitutes an ethical violation, then every single state agent who's ever erroneously gotten the rate under Alaska's vague policy is likewise committing an ethical violation.

4) The man was speaking to a Korean-American civic group! Was he golfing on Scotland? No. Was he and his wife lounging on a beach in Barbados? No. He was travelling in his capacity as a state legislator.

Please, people! Don't let yourselves fall into Rovian smear tactics just because there are Karl Roves out there doing it to democrats. John Lim and Oregon really don't deserve this kind of crap.

John

Another R-supporter hysterically claiming there is nothing to discuss at all! Talk about Rovian twists on reality!

John's prejudgements are the true attempts at PR-control of questionable ethics in use of one's priviledges as an elected official.

Ed writes:

"Typical dismissal of ethical concerns with glib misdirection (e. g. "everybody does it") by a Repubican supporter, Harry.

<h2>Whatever."</h2>

Ed,

A couple of points to consider: 1-Not all here who dissent are Republican supporters. Some are Indies or NAVs, others just disgruntled Demos. 2-Live by the sword, die by the sword...if Lim really sucks, then defeat him on his merits. What goes around comes around. For me, this is a rather lame complaint, regardless of what party the offender hails from. I'd say the same if this 'major ethical violation' was done by Kulo, Wyden or Westlund. It is still an ethical mole hill IMO.

But I understand that you may feel like this is a bigger ethical violation. That is fine. But it is still a "Whatever." to me.

Jenni writes: "In the article, John Lim never said he was reimbursed by the group for the tickets. He specifically stated that he paid for them."

<hr/>

Of course he paid for them. First. As was speculated by others, then maybe he sought reimbursement, which is standard proceedure. Or maybe he still will seek reimbursement. Or maybe he will pay it himself, with no reimbursement planned. I don't know. Just 'cause it wasn't in the article, doesn't mean it didn't happen. Again, it's all speculation on my (and others) part. Again, whatever.

Harry would do well to remember his own maxim about living by the sword... if you act like a Republican, be prepared to share their fate.

Jenni,Ed, et all.

Stop fiddling while Rome Burns.

Go to the link on your candidate Jill posted by Pat about five posts up.

I just clicked my way through it and could find NOTHING about Jill other than her e-mail address.

You had some good examples, of why you don't want Lim reelected, help this person get a website that explains that and not this petty stuff.

Obviously you know how to blog, help this person build a free blog, so when someone clicks on a link you can know WHY TO VOTE FOR Jill.

Go pound leather door to door like I did over the weekend for my favorite candidates, which by the way are all DEMS.

This Guilty before proven innocent on a something a lot of us did when we worked for government I was the delegate of my local professional society to National Meetings, and our department didn't have the budget to send me either, I did the very same thing and got goverment rate and don't think is an ethics violation.

John M. outlined it pretty well.

But PLEASE go work for Jill if she is good, have you had a house party for her, have everyone bring thier cell phones and start banking for her. But tell people all the things she would do better, her ideas, and an agenda she wants to put forth and how that will help her district and Oregon.

That's all I am trying to say.

All JC is trying to say is "shut up, your contribution is inadequate."

Not buying it. I do what I can, you are no one to judge me. I have not convicted Rep. Lim, just cheered on the investigation of him. I don't accept that as character assassination, just politics. Get over it.

Just to set the record straight, Rep. John Lim, is as Mrs. Pedro always says, "pill-ip-pino" (Filppino) not Korean.

Second, while we all know that what Lim has done is clearly wrong, it's not like he is denying what he did or even disputing the facts ala Tom Delay or the Doyles. I'm pretty sure he didn't even understand that what he did was wrong. I for one am willing to let the Ethics Commission check into the matter and make a ruling before passing judgement. Oregon's ethics process seems pretty healthy right now.

Full disclosure - Mrs. Pedro is a friend of several members of the Lim family but has never discussed politics (or this issue) with them.

I am no fan of the Republican Party being a lifelong supporter of the Democratic Party. However, I think this application of the law banning a government employee from obtaining financial gain as a result of being a government employee is inappropriate.

Each day, firemen and policemen around the state receive free or discounted meals from restaurants. This law does apply to them as well as state legislators, but these men and women in uniform are not charged with committing an ethics violation because it isn't politically expedient.

Indeed, the law IS the law, however once you start pointing fingers at people regarding something as mundane as a flight discount, then you better be prepared for the political ramifications that will follow. Should he be found guilty of an ethics violation, then local prosecutors should begin actively enforcing this law against all government employees: mayors (Tom Potter, I am talking to you), firemen, policemen, etc.