| mySPIN |
 Wright Remedy, Wrong Timing
by Tom Campbell
March 13, 2008
House Speaker Joe Hackney asked for and Governor Easley has called a special session of the legislature next week to consider expelling Representative Thomas Wright. The Wilmington Democrat has been accused of mishandling campaign funds and using his office for personal gain. Just judging by the evidence presented at the House Ethics Committee hearings on the subject, Wright’s expulsion is probably certain, but the timing appears all wrong.
The charges against Wright first surfaced in 2006 and have taken a lengthy course through investigations and hearings by The State Board of Elections, further investigations and charges by the Wake District Attorney’s office and now a court case. Legislative leaders, especially in the House, have been stung by charges they failed to police and act in a timely manner to misdeeds by members, especially former House Speaker Black and now Thomas Wright.
In response to these charges, we were told House leadership was asked to hold off any action against Wright by the Wake District Attorney. Besides, Wright (and Black) were entitled to due process and no one wanted to violate their rights to a fair trial. But Wright’s attorney asked the judge in the court case for a postponement because the legislature wanted to proceed with their action, begging the question as to why the current “rush to judgment,” as the Legislative Black Caucus previously called the legislative action?
To be sure politics plays some role. Democrats are rightfully concerned about facing election opposition who will try to associate them with corruption and the lack of action. Hard as it might be for some members they want to be on record, preferably before the May primary, but certainly prior to the November general election. Expect this special session to move quickly and overwhelmingly to expel the first member since 1880.
Members of the Legislative Black Caucus will be put in a very awkward position. Do they follow the almost certain dictates of their leadership and vote for expulsion, or stand by a member of their race? It would be much easier if Wright had been convicted of a crime.
What will happen if Wright should win re-election to his legislative seat? When lawmakers adjourn sine die at the end of this short session, the 2007 session is completed. A new two-year session will begin in January 2009 and each elected legislator must be duly seated. Even if this session had expelled Wright, we understand the House would most certainly have to seat a newly-elected Thomas Wright unless he had been found guilty of one or more of the charges against him.
These questions could be easily answered if the trial had been allowed to go forward and Wright’s guilt or innocence had been established. But the legal remedy might come in time to address the political priority. One way or another it appears Thomas Wright’s days in the legislature are numbered. Like we say, this may be a case of the Wright remedy but the wrong timing. |
|
