Another politician living very comfortably, all because he is a public office holder, and that's Gil Cedillo, State Senator who is running for Congress in the May 19th elections. And it was just when you thought
Fabian Nunez' extravagance was maybe just one bad example of greed and arrogance by spending habits. The
L.A. Times story today shows that
Cedillo apparently learned a few tips from his friend and former colleague in the
State Senate, Fabian Nunez, another big spender who himself became indignant when confronted with his own practices. It looks like more of the same here.
"Cedillo reports that his campaign donors bankroll lavish meals, travel and shopping; The congressional candidate said he spent more than $125,000 in the last six years on fine dining, high-end hotels and shopping sprees, expenses he says were 'relevant' to his job as a legislator." By Michael Finnegan, April 11, 2009.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-cedillo11-2009apr11,0,170280,full.storyCedillo is apparently stamped from the same mold as Nunez, the former Assembly Speaker, who was termed out of office last fall. I have written often about things done by politicians that show their unfettered self-indulgence and and now this story comes along so conveniently to further demonstrate many of those very points.
Cedillo's opponent in the upcoming election is
Judy Chu, and her disclosure report shows what a taxpayer would like to see in terms of spending, generally. I was suprised from what the disclosure showed of her spending, but in a good way, for a change. I expect a lot of shady actions by polticians, and usually there are more examples than I expected to find to show the bad side of political dealings. Chu is definitely not a lavish spender and if their were a few more lawmakers NOT spending so routinely, we'd have a better budget situation at all levels of government.
You really don't want to see expensive personal spending patterns developing in a politician, whether done directly with tax dollars or the money collected from campaing donors, or indirectly through accepting services covered by other individuals and groups. Such outside individuals and groups all do this to gain influence. It's a plain example of "quid pro quo," the concept of getting something of value in return for giving something of value. Did you ever hear the saying, "Nothing is free?" It applies in politics in lots of ways.
All that splashing around of money on themselves tends to create a person with those pesky traits of being a big spender that translate to how they act when it comes to operating the State's business and making spending proposals and voting on spending measures.
Cedillo's spending, detailed in reports he filed with the secretary of state, contrasts with the frugal record of Judy Chu, his chief rival for the San Gabriel Valley congressional seat. A former Monterey Park assemblywoman elected to the state Board of Equalization in 2006, Chu has spent no campaign money on shopping or entertainment, and less than $5,000 on meals and travel over six years.
The two are vying in a May 19 election to fill the House seat
vacated by U.S. Labor Secretary Hilda Solis.
The L.A. Times story excerpts below give an idea of the problems with elected officials who parlay their political position into more of the dollars to finance a high lifestyle. That's a lifestyle that usually was not enjoyed until coming into office and a lifestyle that I would make a guess that is well above what most of their constituents would enjoy. You would expect some self-control by a politician, in this case, Cedillo, when it comes to spending since it can become public. In Cedillo's case, it looks like he is enjoying it to the fullest. I think he just cannnot help himself now
Such spending that is associated with the high living has become a part of them and they defend it, justifying it as somehow "necessary." Yes, necessary to them. The fact that they have no reluctance to continue in that style shows how much they have come to believe in their
"entitlement" to do it. All of this is a bad sign for the taxpayer, and if you don't see it when it's so obvious, you will surely miss it all when they try other angles to keep up the lifestyle.
Regardless of legality, the nature of Cedillo's spending is troublesome, said Robert Stern, president of the nonpartisan Center for Governmental Studies and a longtime advocate of campaign finance reform.
It sounds like he is using campaign funds to supplement his lifestyle," Stern said.
Cedillo collected $116,208 in salary last year and $39,825 in tax-free per diem. The Senate bought a $53,436 black Lexus hybrid for Cedillo; he is charged $280 a month for its use. The state pays for his gas.
But Cedillo has relied on campaign donors to bankroll his shopping and travel, along with hundreds of restaurant meals and tickets for the Rose Bowl, Los Angeles Opera and Clippers basketball games.
I mentioned that the way politicians act may not reach a level where laws are being violated, but they still don't seem to address "the spirit of the law" by using campaign funds and donations to cover lavish spending on meals, lodging and travel and trying to relate it all to doing state business.
Another feature of politicians' who come from modest backgrounds is that they seem to become so overwhelmed with their good fortune and they reach out to get the most expensive of whatever they can grab that is paid for as part of being in office. It might be for another reason, too, and that's to show everyone that "I'm an Important Person," and this satisfies a need for ego gratification.
Like I have said before- and most of what I see has been said by others before, too- If they were not in office, all that money would not be seen by them. It's given to them with the expectation of getting SOMETHING BACK. Those are not donations from Santa for being good. If anyone expected them to really be "good" you would not have the money going to them in the first place. No, the idea is to
get noticed when money is given- even indirectly, like to a politician's favorite charity or "social cause.' It's not a very complicated analysis. Politicians get money and favors based on the idea of,
"Don't forget about ME and what I need."
And if you didn't remember, Gil Cedillo, called by some as "One-Bill Gil" because of his repeated introductions of a bill to permit issuance of drivers licenses to illegal aliens, is among a large circle of old friends in politics. Cedillo is a friend of
Fabian Nunez, and was from
Roosevelt High in
Boyle Heights, a very good friend of
Mayor Villaraigosa and both went to
Roosevelt, UCLA and
Peoples College of Law, and neither are attorneys. Did I mention before that lots of the political figures happen to be friends or relatives of each other? This is very evident with Latino politicians, being a situation something like the trade unions of old, where you had to have a friend or relative bring you in. That political "fishbowl" effect is what makes the actions of so many of them so similar, I suppose; It's more like a club than a public service to be a politician with this group. Look around for yourself and do a little review to find so many of the connections and that should explain something of our political environment that many take for granted as untouchable by the common voter.
The disturbing part in this picture is that there is no modesty, no reluctance to partake in the money available or any shame attached to how the politicians see these actions. After all, they ARE important, aren't they?
As for the trips overseas, Cedillo said he visited India, Taiwan, Italy, Brazil, Argentina, Cuba and Mexico on Senate business. He recalled discussing energy, immigration, population growth, water and climate change with foreign officials.
To help manage the world's eighth-largest economy, he said, senators must "go and engage people who have the same or similar circumstances throughout the world."
"All these experiences are relevant to the extent that they enrich my capacity as a legislator," he said.
I disagree with the candidate. At the rate of spending and taxation, the "world's eighth-largest economy" is headed to the "world's seventh-largest economy." All that self-importance is coming through in these, "I am worth it" actions and statements. I did not really know much about
Judy Chu before, but just from seeing the spending report, I see a way to stop the continued practice of such self-indulgence from a lawmaker that should not be part of politics. I don't say it "isn't" a part of politics, but, like the example of trash on the school grounds, it just creates a condition that invites and accumulates more trash, leaving a dirty landscape for everyone. It needs to be cleaned up, not spread.
I encourage you to read the article that is detail-rich in amounts and events and other things. It might have you wondering if you really want to be sending such candidates into further political ventures where more of the same is just going to happen, and that's that. And in closing, I need to say again that the days when there were statesmen holding public office have long been gone, and I add, unlikely to return.
Posts
