Legislature(1993 - 1994)
04/06/1993 06:00 PM Senate JUD
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
JOINT HOUSE AND SENATE
JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEES
April 6, 1993
6:00 p.m.
SENATE MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Robin Taylor, Chairman
Senator Rick Halford, Vice-Chairman
Senator Suzanne Little
Senator Dave Donley
SENATE MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator George Jacko
HOUSE MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Brian Porter
Representative Jeannette James
Representative Pete Kott
Representative Gail Phillips
Representative Joe Green
HOUSE MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Cliff Davidson
Representative Jim Nordlund
OTHER MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative David Finkelstein
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
Confirmation Hearings: Public Members of the Select
Committee on Legislative Ethics
WITNESS REGISTER
ED GRANGER, Nominee
Select Committee on Legislative Ethics
931 Lighthouse Court
Anchorage, Alaska 99515
Phone: 552-2218
Position Statement: Provided information and answered
questions related to his nomination
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 93-55, SIDE A
Number 000
The Joint Senate and House Judiciary Standing Committee
meeting was called to order at 6:14 p.m., on April 6, 1993.
A quorum was present. Chairman Robin Taylor asked Mr. Ed
Granger if he wished to provide an opening statement.
Number 041
REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN requested that he be "dismissed
from the vote" since he personally knew Mr. Granger.
REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN PORTER said, "I have not yet seen a
person who declared conflict of interest escape a vote."
CHAIRMAN ROBIN TAYLOR OBJECTED to Representative Green's
request to be excused from voting and added, "I don't know
about my jurisdiction in that matter since we are a joint
committee and this is a House organization (matter)."
Number 064
ED GRANGER, NOMINEE FOR THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATIVE
ETHICS, said, "I'm glad you didn't let Representative Green
get away with this because we do know each other and I have
no problem at all with him asking me any questions. In
fact, I look forward to it, if you have any, because I have
a deep appreciation for him and what he went through - three
years with the Chugach Board of Directors - and my hat's off
to anybody that lasts the whole three years doing what you
did."
MR. GRANGER continued, "I'm really deeply honored to even be
considered for this position. And I would even be more so,
of course, if I was selected. I don't have high
expectations with regard to what I can do because if I am
selected, I'm going to be dealing in what I consider to be
most unpleasant matters and very serious. I've got to read
you my horoscope for today. I don't want you to think from
this that I place great value in this or that I'm overly
superstitious but I am a Taurus and here's what your Juneau
paper says about me today."
MR. GRANGER read, "`Neither you nor any person with whom you
are presently involved is completely forthright with the
other.' And it goes on to say, `this is a no-win situation
that can only be corrected through honesty.' I didn't come
down here to tell you a pack of lies anyway... He continued
further, "I'm probably not what you would judge to be a good
Republican, okay? I don't know whether that's good or bad,
but going back to honesty, I'm going to lay it right out on
the table."
MR. GRANGER said, "The only political position that I've
ever held, I was appointed by Governor Egan, who was a
Democrat and I grew to love the man dearly. In fact, when I
was approached through his lieutenants and eventually talked
to him about it, I told Governor Egan, Look, I said, I
didn't know what I was until I reached 38 years old and
listening to both sides talk I've decided I'm a Republican
and I really don't think I should take this position that he
offered me. And he told me, he says, 'Ed, don't tell
anybody and they won't know the difference, you know?' Now,
so I did."
MR. GRANGER continued, "When I was overseas the only person
that ran for office that I ever sent money to was Kerttula
up in Palmer. I didn't know if he was a Republican or
Democrat at the time. And you can look through his records
and see where I made substantial contributions to his
campaigns and if you ask me why, I couldn't give you an
answer. Except I had great respect for him. He used to be
very tough on me in budget hearings when I was down in
Juneau, made it almost unpleasant, but I respected him. And
I didn't know who else to give money to so I did to him."
MR. GRANGER continued further, "Representative Green will
vouch for the fact that I had a Democratic sign in my yard,
okay? But I am definitely a Republican, okay? In the way I
think and the way I feel to the best of my knowledge. So I
registered that way. Probably the toughest question that
you guys can put to me would be why am I even here, why did
I even submit the application. I was talking to Pete
[Carran] about this before the meeting started. And I've
been thinking about it a lot because there really isn't a
good answer."
MR. GRANGER said, "If I had the time and the patience and
the, actually the wherewithal, probably, because it would
cost some money if I did this, I would attempt to be in one
of your positions, okay? Because I think each of us has a
desire to help form the State of Alaska. And certainly
you're in a position to do that and I would love to do that,
if I had the time and the ability, perhaps. And I don't
feel like I do. In fact, I know I don't. And perhaps this
is the second best thing that I can do in trying to pay back
what I consider to be a very real debt to the State of
Alaska."
MR. GRANGER said further, "I enjoy doing this sort of thing,
I have found, since I ran for the Chugach Board. It's
exasperating there and I can imagine what you folks go
through. Well, I can only imagine because you never know
unless you're in it, and I don't ever plan to be. I think
in the interest of time, I'll let it go at that..."
Number 206
REPRESENTATIVE GAIL PHILLIPS asked, "Do you have anything in
your personal life that would cause you a problem for
getting away if, in fact, you were appointed to this Board
and might have to come and be down here for weeks on end
during investigations, in your personal life, as far as
either your directorship on Chugach Electric Board or your
family or anything like that, that would prohibit you from
making this commitment if you were appointed?"
Number 217
MR. GRANGER said, "Well of course, there's definitely going
to be conflicts, there's no question about that. That
wouldn't be a real world answer if I say there wasn't.
Probably the first thing would be family and of course
there's just my wife and myself and so there's no problem
there. I personally don't like to be away from home that
long but I travel. I have to. I spend weeks in Shemya, so
Juneau don't sound too bad when you put it in those terms."
MR. GRANGER said further, "As far as my work is concerned,
with the Air Force, as soon as I found out this was coming
up I'd have to get clearance from the Judge Advocate's
Office in the headquarters of the Alaska Air Command in
order to even be down here and the possibility of my being
selected was very well received. Better received than with
the Chugach Board actually. And I was surprised. I am in a
position where we do have depth in staff where I can be
gone. I can take leave without pay if I have to, or I can
use my leave."
MR. GRANGER continued, "So the answer to your question is
yes, there will be conflicts, but I can handle them and I'm
pretty confident that probably there's no answer as to how
many days a year we will be gone. We don't know what we're
into here, I don't believe. So I'm probably as well
prepared as any working person to meet the requirements and
obligations that go along with this assignment."
Number 256
SENATOR SUZANNE LITTLE asked, "What is your position
currently, your occupation?"
MR. GRANGER said, "I'm a civil engineer by training.
Actually, I'm a project manager for Air Force MILCON which
is military construction program. (We) only deal in large,
new projects."
SENATOR LITTLE asked, "Is this a private firm?"
MR. GRANGER said, "No, it is a civil service position."
SENATOR LITTLE asked, "What is your association, or do you
have an association with any members of the legislature?"
MR. GRANGER replied, "I know some of them, of course.
Alaska's very small in that respect. Up until just before I
found out I was going to be asked to come down here, I sent
a public opinion message to four legislators. Other than
that, I don't have any contact with them. Certainly no more
than the normal Alaskan. That doesn't mean I don't see them
and I don't talk to them, but I haven't talked to one now
for nine months, six, something like that."
Number 284
SENATOR LITTLE said, "I noted that Representative Green said
he had a conflict. Can you describe (it)? Or maybe I
should ask Representative Green."
MR. GRANGER said, "I'll be glad to answer. I'm very
privileged to (have) run for the same position that
Representative Green had on the Chugach Board of Electric
Association. And in the process of that election, and Joe
you feel free to correct me if I'm not describing this
exactly right, it was a very heated campaign for being
unpolitical. I didn't know Joe from Adam. I have met and
talked to him since then and talked to a lot of people that
know him and I don't have any bad feelings towards him and I
hope the same towards me. It was just a contest."
SENATOR LITTLE verified, "So you ran against each other?"
MR. GRANGER replied in the affirmative.
Number 304
SENATOR LITTLE continued, "Have you had any dealings in your
life with press pressures?"
MR. GRANGER said, "Yes, I have. I was Director of Aviation
for the State of Alaska for quite a few years and, of
course, back then it was anything that happened in aviation
was big news. I didn't consider it pressures at the time
but we were in contact with the press quite often. I don't
know if that's what you're looking for, but I never had
pressure that I didn't feel I couldn't stand with the
press."
SENATOR LITTLE proceeded, "Regarding a conflict, if Mr.
Green for instance, had a complaint waged against him, would
you feel in any way that you'd start out with your thoughts
leaning one way or another before you even looked at the
case?"
MR. GRANGER said, "I hope that never happens, where I have
to sit in judgment of Joe, but I consider him to be very
much a gentleman. I have no reason to, and no one has ever
said anything to the contrary on that. I feel like I could.
I wouldn't offer to disqualify myself in his case because I
think I could render a fair decision. I wouldn't have a
tendency, I don't think, to either favor or disfavor any
decision that would come out on him. Which is, it ain't
going to happen, right?"
Number 341
SENATOR LITTLE asked, "What if a complaint was waged against
a person of a different party from yours?"
MR. GRANGER replied, "I talked a little bit about whether I
was a good Republican or not. And I have here a marked up
copy of the House of Representatives and Alaska State Senate
and I have to tell you that when I went down there and
started marking these things, I didn't know probably 85
percent of those names, whether they were Republicans or
Democrats. I don't think that's important in my view.
That's just the way I feel about it."
Number 358
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER said, "I wish though that you hadn't
mentioned that horoscope. I'm also a Taurus and am now
wondering who lied to me all day long."
MR. GRANGER said, "Excuse me, the way out of that according
to the horoscope is don't tell any lies to start with and
the other guy's got to tell you the truth, see?"
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER replied, "With that in mind, the
question that we have asked each person that has come before
us: There have been, over the last couple of months,
allegations in the newspapers and media about at least two,
perhaps more, members of this body that one would have had
to have been out of the state to not have heard something
about. Have you, as a result of whatever you have heard
about any one of those incidents or allegations, formed any
opinions that would cause you not to be able to fairly judge
whatever might come before the committee?"
Number 379
MR. GRANGER said, "I've been thinking about this for a while
because I figured the question would come up. It's not a
difficult question to answer in my mind. I just want to
make sure I put it to you exactly how I feel. I'm not
Pastor Jones and I'm not Jerry Prevo. I mean, I have
probably done everything that any individual in this room
has done. You've already passed over a lot of good people,
from what I've read. So we know right out from the start
you don't want a good one, you're looking for a bad one,
okay?"
MR. GRANGER continued, "Maybe I'm overqualified but in any
case, they say don't judge a man unless you've walked a mile
in his moccasins. Well I have walked in those moccasins,
okay? And I think I'm open-minded and I judge myself to be
a relatively clear thinker and I think I can do the job
without being biased one way or another. That's what I
think."
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER resumed, "Another explanation that we
made to anyone that has applied is that what the committee
is going to be asked to do is to evaluate the request for
opinions or allegations of violations of the ethics statute.
That is to say, you will be asked to interpret the ethics
statute, not apply your particular individual feeling about
ethics or someone else's for that matter." He then asked
if this presented a problem to Mr. Granger.
Number 424
MR. GRANGER replied, "No, it doesn't present any problems to
me. Obviously, you're aware I'm not trained in law. I
think that's probably one of the good things in our entire
system. Not only judicial, but throughout, as far as
judgments are rendered on the communities. I think I'm well
qualified to be a juror, if you will, at large. If you
question me on the nuts and bolts of what is proper,
improper ethics you would probably find I'm relatively
unknowledgeable. In fact, I'll take away the word
relatively, okay?"
MR. GRANGER continued, "But I do know what's right and wrong
and I do know what's good and bad and I do know when I'm, at
least in my mind, what would be a gray area. It would be my
intent to give the so-called accused the full benefit of the
doubt. Which I think our entire system is really predicated
on. I would intend to be fair. I sure wouldn't be out to
get anybody. That's not the way I feel about it."
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER asked, "Have you read the ethics
statute?"
MR. GRANGER said, "I tried to. I got a copy of it. I took
it up to the Judge Advocate's Office at Elmendorf and after
he read it, I asked him what he thought about it and he
said, well I'll put it in my words rather than his, he says
it's difficult to read, and it is. The information's there.
I would have a lot more interest in it if I'm appointed, of
course. And I dare say there's very few people in Alaska
that's read it except perhaps you folks."
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER said, "I guess the point of my
question is that (there are) difficulties, that I agree with
you will be. That is the basis for judgment, not your
personal knowledge of the difference between right and
wrong. That, therein lies the challenge. Are you ready?"
Number 461
MR. GRANGER replied, "Oh yes. Yes sir."
REPRESENTATIVE PETE KOTT asked, "I just want to follow up on
the first question that was asked. And that is, this
particular position is going to require quite a degree of
commitment. We're not talking about just involvement.
We're talking about being committed, at least initially.
There's a lot of things that this committee's going to have
to start off and run with. If I remember correctly, the
rest of the members are planning to meet on the 16th of this
month and it could be expected that you could be meeting for
up to a month perhaps."
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT continued, "It is a very lengthy period
of time and I just want to make sure that you know that
there is a commitment involved here. Sort of like the old
analogy between the ham and eggs when the chicken was
involved and the ham was committed. You're going to have to
be committed here. I know that having been in the Air Force
myself for 23 years and having worked a little bit on the
OTH...and this is going to be a very lengthy process I would
imagine. And a lot of that is going to be just trying to
determine what that ethics law is really all about."
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT continued further, "The other thing I'd
like to ask you is, do you perceive that there's a
difference between immoral behavior, unethical behavior and
just a mere violation of a law?"
MR. GRANGER replied, "If it's a violation of the law, it may
not come in front of the ethics committee. I would think
the legal system would take over and it will probably be
taken out of the committee's hands, I would anticipate that
anyway. That may not work out and maybe I'm being naive, I
don't know. I really don't know how to answer your
question. I'm not overly religious, let me start out by
saying this. But I did go to Sunday School seven years
straight without missing one."
MR. GRANGER continued, "The Golden Rule and the Ten
Commandments is not a bad thing to strive for and I venture
to say there's not a soul in this room that's made it, okay?
I think there's some compassion and understanding and
leniency, a little bit of forgiveness, on the part of the
person that transgressed. I think that there's some
interpretation that (is) probably well safeguarded by the
fact that you've got nine members on this committee, okay?
There isn't going to be one wild horse that will run off
with it."
MR. GRANGER continued further, "That's because the
democratic system, when you put that many people together,
is a safeguard against it. So, I can only say that, come
time to cast the vote, I would measure and cast it based on
my best judgment. Now with regards to my commitment, if I'm
selected. I take my commitment pretty seriously and the
record will show in the two years that I've been on the
Chugach Board, I have missed less meetings than anyone else.
I missed one and I was very sorry about that, okay? I
should have been there."
MR. GRANGER said, "I don't intend to miss any meetings of
this committee, if I'm selected for it. And I would do
whatever I had to do to be there. I do recognize it as a
very, very important appointment and it's critical to the
state. I think it gets a lot of attention out in the
community and I would be very pleased to be a part of doing
these things if it has to be out in the open and laid to
rest and hopefully go out about our business, or make it
possible for the legislature to do it. I've talked a long
time and I may not have answered your question because it's
a difficult one but I've done the best I can."
Number 545
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT said, "The reason why I asked the
committal question is I know, having been there before,
you're a project manager and you mention that you were apart
from your loved ones at times, that in various positions,
especially working with the Alaskan Air Command and all the
exercises that seem to come about at various times, that you
can be gone for a week or two at times, and that should be a
consideration. ...I think it was earlier it was asked by
Senator Little if you had any involvement or activities, in
relationship with speaking to the media."
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT asked, "Can you elaborate on that? Or
perhaps have the media contacted you regarding this
particular appointment?"
MR. GRANGER replied, "I've only had one contact, and I
forget who it was. They essentially walked away with name,
rank and serial number, okay? I'm not adverse to speaking
to the press, but if I'm appointed to this committee, I
would expect those releases to be through the chairman of
the committee. Everybody on committees, when they get voted
down, has the impulse to just go out and raise cain and I'm
no different. Things, and Joe will know this for fact,
things that have happened with the Chugach Board have not
exactly gone the way I wanted them to and, except for one or
two cases, I've pretty much restrained myself."
MR. GRANGER continued, "I still believe that in the
democratic process as far as, especially as it relates to
news releases. But for instance, if I was chairman, those
releases would be issued in accord with what the committee's
position was. It wouldn't be a free-lance deal. Although,
don't misunderstand me, I don't necessarily want to be the
chairman, but whatever."
Number 583
REPRESENTATIVE GAIL PHILLIPS asked, "...Do you have any
problem with making your personal finances public
information? Because you will be requested and required to
sign, to file a public financial disclosure statement."
MR. GRANGER replied, "As far as I'm concerned they can have
my income tax form. It's all modestly earned and rapidly
spent."
Number 597
REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS continued, "Have you looked at any
of our financial disclosure statements to see what is
included? Because you do have to list all of your assets,
your properties, etc., of your spouse, your family members,
I mean it's a fairly involved form that you must file."
MR. GRANGER said, "I really don't have anything to hide. I
give my social security number out to people. I'm not one
that leaves that blank. I really don't have strong feelings
about it."
Number 603
SENATOR LITTLE said, "You mentioned that you have a spouse.
Do you and your wife have children?"
MR. GRANGER replied, "Yes ma'am, but they're gone."
SENATOR LITTLE then asked, "How would you define sexual
harassment?"
MR. GRANGER said, "Having very little experience in this
field, I would say going beyond the bounds of being a
gentleman, okay? Of being forceful, of being obstinate. I
don't know. It would be going beyond what a reasonable
person would go to, whether they be male or female. I guess
that's probably the best answer I could give you."
SENATOR LITTLE continued, "Have you seen or experienced
sexual harassment in the work place during your lifetime?"
MR. GRANGER replied, "Oh, I think we probably all have.
It's a matter of definition. I think that probably in our
day-to-day work sometimes you're getting on the edge
yourself. It depends on the people involved, to a large
degree, and what their past association and relationship has
been. What might be harassment in one instance with one
pair of people is not harassment with another pair."
Number 627
SENATOR LITTLE asked, "Do you think it's really a problem?"
MR. GRANGER said, "Well, if you judge by what you read in
the newspapers, perhaps. It's a problem when it occurs,
there is no question about that. Whether it be the male
being the one that's doing this or the female, it doesn't
make any difference, if it occurs, it's a problem. I think
it's a very difficult thing to prove."
SENATOR LITTLE asked, "Do you believe it occurs?"
MR. GRANGER replied, "My, yes."
SENATOR LITTLE continued, "How do you feel about a person
who drinks alcohol?"
MR. GRANGER said, "Well, I drink alcohol, okay? It makes me
very sad when I see people who drink too much of it. I'm
fortunate because I get deathly ill, okay, and I'm no good
for about three days so I quit about 20 years ago drinking,
too much. I still drink, but I sure know when to shut her
off. Yeah, I feel sorry for people that have the problem
and I didn't, you know as a young kid you don't realize that
it is an illness."
MR. GRANGER continued, "For the first 20 years when I heard
it was an illness, I said that's balderdash, but it is an
illness and you're talking to a guy that hasn't had a chew
of snoose since July, okay, so I know what addiction is.
And I used to have to have a chew of snoose in order to take
a nap, okay. So I think I know what it is now to try to
stop smoking and I think I know what it is now to try and
stop drinking when it gets hold of you. It's a very serious
problem, okay, because I had it, but it wasn't, it was
chewing tobacco, okay."
Number 657
SENATOR LITTLE asked, "Do you believe that a person who does
something under the influence of alcohol should be held less
responsible because of that influence?"
MR. GRANGER replied, "Well, no, I don't ma'am, probably the
best thing that ever happened in my view is that Mothers
Against Drunk Driving. It's opened everybody's eyes and it
has pretty much established that those people are
responsible that cause injuries. I guess that answers your
question."
SENATOR LITTLE asked, "Do you understand that much of the
testimony, if you are appointed to this committee, most of
the testimony will likely be taken confidentially? So you
will be in a position where you will not be able to divulge
information brought forward to you. Have you ever had
experiences with confidential matters in your business or
certainly on the Board of Chugach Electric?"
MR. GRANGER said, "Not so much with Chugach but certainly
with the State of Alaska in personnel matters. I've been
involved in contract work, large substantial contracts
overseas where confidentiality was required by foreign
counterparts. Never had any problem with breeches of those
confidences. Always remained, in my view, even when I was
outside the jurisdiction of the United States, all remained,
in my mind, perfectly legal, okay? I've never had any
problem with people that I've worked with understanding
where I'm coming from, as far as being ethical is concerned.
I don't think I have any problems in that area."
Number 688
SENATOR LITTLE asked, "So if a vote, for instance, on the
committee didn't go quite your way, you wouldn't have any
problems holding all that, whatever you felt, inside and not
divulging it to anyone."
MR. GRANGER said, "That is correct."
REPRESENTATIVE JEANNETTE JAMES said, "You're doing something
I wouldn't want to do. But you did say that you would like
to be where we are and that you might, if the time was right
and the opportunity was in your favor, that you might like
to have this position. I just wanted to ask you what do you
think the public's opinion is of legislators? Are they a
different kind of people? Or what kind of people do you
think the people think we are?"
Number 699
MR. GRANGER replied, "Well there's, first let me say please
if I may, that I do not envy your position. And I hope I
didn't say I would like to have it because I wouldn't. The
public perception of the legislature is not as good as it
should be. Let me say that. And it disturbs me when the
people that complain about it probably are not even voting.
The more involved you get in trying to help the State of
Alaska, would it be Chugach Electric or whatever, you find
that those that are complaining the most are not the ones
that voted."
MR. GRANGER continued, "I can't answer you about what it is
out in the hinterlands that the people think of the
legislature. I wouldn't believe necessarily what I read in
the paper, I know that, necessarily. And I know that
oftentimes individuals within the legislature are unfairly
attacked and repeatedly attacked and without given all the
information that's available those attacks are unwarranted,
in my opinion."
MR. GRANGER continued further, "I know that and this is a
perfect example as far as I'm concerned: I lived in South
Africa for almost five years and every time I'd come home
I'd read these headlines about South Africa. I just came
from there. I'm reading about a different place. And it's
still happening, that my ties are still very firm back there
with good friends. And it's the same situation with the
legislature."
MR. GRANGER added, "Unfortunately, and I apologize to
members of the press that's here, but I really feel that the
whole story's not being told and some of the things that's
being discussed really shouldn't until the whole story's
available, and it's unfairly shaking people's opinions of
the legislature."
Number 732
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES asked, "Do you think that people should
hold the legislators to a higher standard than other
people?"
MR. GRANGER replied, "They would certainly like to ma'am, I
believe. Everybody wants the best possible person that they
can get to be watching over their funds and their real
estate, which is what you guys are doing. You wouldn't want
somebody less than you doing it and so, yeah, you betcha
they would hold you to a higher standard, I would think.
They would desire to."
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES asked, "What about you? What do you
think if you were judging someone who was a legislator as
opposed to judging someone who is in some other occupation?
Would you think they should have a higher standard of
behavior than someone who is, for example a construction
manager or someone who is just a carpenter or meat processor
or something, a fisherman?"
Number 744
MR. GRANGER said, "You know, the older a person gets, the
more you realize that people are people. It doesn't really
matter, you know, how you've been anointed. Who is
sprinkling with holy water doesn't have anything to do with
it, he's still people, or she's still people. In my mind, I
would probably, not probably but I would, I would probably
cast that aside in my mind about what positions they're in
or what position he is in and try to judge him on standards
of conduct that would be reasonable for a prudent person."
REPRESENTATIVE DAVID FINKELSTEIN said, "Just to qualify that
last question, the question Representative James was putting
forward was rather a theoretical question. In practice the
law does apply higher standards to legislators than to
members of the public. There's just a variety of
disclosures and expectations on treatment of income and
other things, disclosures of (inaudible) that, of course,
the public doesn't have to do and someone in a private
business venture doesn't have to do. So, in that context,
I'd assume you would answer differently that we would hold
legislators to a higher standard than the ordinary public."
MR. GRANGER said, "Is that a statement, sir?"
REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN said, "You said on the record
that you don't believe legislators should be held to a
higher standard, that's your view. Since the law requires
that (they) be held to a higher standard, I'm just trying to
make sure that, recognize that you would hold them to a
higher standard. That's good. Your answer was to a
theoretical question, I was trying to apply it to the
practical question of what the job of the ethics committee
is, which is to enforce the ethics law."
Number 773
MR. GRANGER said, "Well, I think it's rather clear that the
obligation would be to measure the accused actions, if you
will, against the requirements of the ethics law. I think
that's a foregone conclusion, you would have to, in fact,
you know, make that determination based on the facts and
information that's laid out in front of you."
MR. GRANGER continued, "My feeling is, a person is still a
person and if, in fact, he had no malice, and if he just
made a mistake, and if he's an honest person, which most
people are that ran for the legislature, surely, and you
know, I would exercise my judgment in casting my vote
against or for this person. I think I better leave it that
way."
REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN continued, "I may just
misunderstand what you're saying, but if the law says
legislators shall do 'X' and there's a case before you, and
based on the evidence a legislator hasn't done that or
somehow not completed that part of it, is what you're saying
then that if there was no malice intended, and they were a
good person of heart, that you would (not) find a violation?
I don't want to misinterpret what you're saying here."
MR. GRANGER replied, "Yeah, I understand. If it's black or
it's white, there's no gray areas in there, well of course,
you know, he's obviously violated the ethical standards as
required, you have no choice. If it's so blatant, so clear,
so positive that there's no doubt, why of course you would.
But I think the word 'doubt' is a pretty strong word. I
think if there is doubt in there, well then other parameters
start moving in on you, as far as the decision making
process is concerned."
MR. GRANGER added "I don't know how to better answer your
question on that, but if it's definitely black...it's got to
be definitely black."
Number 806
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT asked, "Ed, you currently possess a
security clearance?"
MR. GRANGER said, "Yes, sir."
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT continued, "Can you convey just what, at
what level?"
MR. GRANGER said, "It's secret." (Laughter ensued.)
TAPE 93-55, SIDE B
Number 011
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT asked, "(Inaudible) under the influence
of alcohol and committed an ethics violation, would you
consider under the influence of being inebriated or
intoxicated a mitigating factor in the decision making
process?"
MR. GRANGER replied, "You asked me if I would consider it
and the answer to that question is pretty easy in my mind.
Of course, you'd consider it. Of course you would, but I'm
not going to sit here and give you an answer to a question
that really we don't have the time to get into the details.
I'm not going to do that. But, of course, you'd consider
how drunk was he, you know, how drunk is drunk, okay. Maybe
the guy did know what he was doing, but even if he didn't,
he's still responsible, you know, like we talked about."
MR. GRANGER added, "I don't know, I don't expect any clear-
cut cases to be brought in front of this committee. I just
don't expect it. I expect every one of them to be tough
decisions. And hopefully, with nine good people sitting
there, they'll be good decisions that come from the
committee and they'll be well argued. And I will probably
argue as strong as anybody, either for or against whatever I
believe in, but yes, you would consider whether he was drunk
or not. Of course you would. How could you not?"
Number 040
SENATOR LITTLE asked, "If a complaint was filed against a
legislator and the complaint was filed by someone you knew
to be a, well let's say a scum-bag, in those terms, would
you..."
MR. GRANGER interrupted, "A fellow legislator?"
SENATOR LITTLE said, "No, the complaint, the person who
files the complaint was someone you knew to be of
questionable character. Let's put it that way. Would you
take that complaint less seriously?"
Number 058
MR. GRANGER replied, "I would think that any complaints that
come in front of the committee...if it's formally sworn or
however it's to be decided that it's to be submitted, would
be considered on its merits. On its merits would be: how
serious it was and who filed it, whether there's a
probability that the accusation had any semblance of truth
behind it. I don't expect a firestorm of accusations but I
could be unpleasantly surprised. I hope not. My
expectations are that we won't be dealing with as many of
these things."
MR. GRANGER continued, "We all know scum-balls and we all
know people who follow folks around and like to complain
about government or organizations or whatever. They're
still taxpayers and we've all had to deal with them and I
think that, in fact, I deal with them in Chugach to a
degree. That's part of the Board action, we don't have any
problem. We act as if we're human and you have to stand
together that way. That's the way we deal with things like
this."
MR. GRANGER added, "I can anticipate that we get a letter
complaining, we'd answer the letter and if there isn't
anything to it the answer would be very short."
Number 096
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR said, "Thank you very much for your great
candid answers. It's been a privilege just to sit and
listen to you. I wonder if you would do one thing for me.
Will you read what that article says about Aquarians?"
MR. GRANGER said, "My wife is a Pisces and I am not going to
read that one to you." He added, reading, "Objectives can
be achieved provided you persevere and prepare yourself for
making reasonable sacrifices. There aren't apt to be any
free rides on this railroad today."
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR said, "That's the truth," and asked if there
was anything further.
Number 120
MR. GRANGER added, "I very much appreciate the opportunity.
Like I said, it has been an honor to even be considered and
I mean that very sincerely. And if I am selected, it will
be even more so of an honor. This is sort of a win-win
situation as far as I'm concerned. It's a hell of a deal if
I'm selected and it has been wonderful just being here, even
if I'm not, okay? I would promise to do the best job that I
possibly can and I consider myself to be a pretty hard
worker and the people I work for have verified that through
the years and stuff."
MR. GRANGER continued, "I wouldn't do any different if I am
selected for this. It's rather an exciting deal because
it's so unknown, if you will and it almost makes you anxious
to succeed in because it's so difficult. You know you've
had some awful good people here and I don't know how they
tripped and fell. Some of them I know. Frankly, I consider
some of them are better qualified and certainly some of them
are better men than myself."
MR. GRANGER concluded, "But in any case, however it falls
out, I wish that the procedure doesn't go on too much
longer. Whether I win, pass or fail. Again I thank you for
the opportunity."
Number 155
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said, "Just for the record, a question
that I frequently ask other applicants that I didn't ask Ed
that I know the answer so I didn't have to is generally:
What would be a situation if you had the decision that was
contrary to the majority, would you have a tendency to fall
in with the majority or would you hold to your guns? And I
can say that Ed has a virtue of sticking by on what he
feels."
MR. GRANGER said, "That's one of my worst traits actually."
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR thanked Mr. Granger again.
ADJOURNMENT
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR adjourned the meeting at 7:09 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|