 |
| Congressman Aaron Schock interviewed by ABC News' Jeff Zeleny |
A few days ago I reported on the "Downton Abbey" themed congressional office of GOP Congressman Aaron Schock of Illinois.
At the time, it was a bit of a light-hearted story as gay rumors have followed the congressman for years. So, having a bright red, "Downton Abbey" inspired office seemed right up the young legislator's alley.
Now - however - after all the attention, it seems Schock has been hit with an ethics violation inquiry as it seems he's spent a LOT of money on decorating his office and it seems to be coming out of the taxpayer's pocket. In addition, his decorator said he offered her services for free which is considered a violation in itself.
In December 2009 he paid $7,400 to an Illinois design/build firm called KBL Design Center, and then another $21,000 to a hardwood floor company, a building contractor and company called Old World Granite and Marble that apparently makes high-end countertops. He then spent $6,600 on an Illinois painting contractor.
Two months later, Schock spent $79,061 on furniture purchases, including $5,123 from a company called Mulnix Industries that specializes in hardwood podiums.
Around the same time, Schock spent more than $4,000 with a fine-leather furniture company called Garrett Leather.
[snip]
The Washington Post story quoted the designer of Schock's Capitol Hill office as saying she provided her design services to Schock for free. That led the liberal group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington to file a complaint Tuesday with the House alleging that Schock may have received an improper gift.
Schock says he paid his decorator last time she worked for him, and he will again.
And, he denies having ever seen a single episode of "Downton Abbey."
Riiiiiiiiiiight. That's why his offices were decorated in this bold manner.
I'm not a Republican, but unless the money trail indicates otherwise, I'm willing to give the congressman a pass on this non-story. He handled the reporter very respectfully, and his responses reasonable. At the risk of losing my gay card, I have to add that I'm not an expert in decorating, but isn't the office in a "Federal" style? Downton Abbey is very Victorian. Again, unless there's inappropriate use of funds, I don't get the fuss about this apart from speculation regarding Schock's sexual orientation which, as long as he isn't living some kind of double life (i.e., living one way - voting another), is no one's business but his own. I'm glad that I had that "luxury" until it was time to come out.
ReplyDeleteI agree, KJ. Schock handled the interview well. The two issues do seem to be:
ReplyDelete1. He has violated campaign funding rules by using those funds to pay for decorating his offices. That's what the ethics violation is looking into. And apparently, it's not the first time. Plus, his decorator told the press she "donated" her services which is a violation of congressional ethics.
2. Regarding the interest in his sexual orientation, he has voted against LGBT protections in the past, like enforcing hate crimes against LGBT folks, against the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Act, and against the repeal of DADT. He also told Buzzfeed that he supported a federal amendment banning same-sex marriage. He later hedged saying he "hadn't really thought much about it."
I'm not one for outing folks, unless they are gay & closeted AND use their position in society/business to hurt the LGBT community. Then, I have a problem. The double life thing does seem to be in play here.
Chris Geidner at Buzzfeed covered some of this back in 2012: http://www.buzzfeed.com/chrisgeidner/rep-aaron-schock-hedges-on-federal-marriage-amend#.mxnbDwg3q
ReplyDeleteI believe that you and I are in agreement. If it's determined that ethic violations have occurred, "Game on!"
ReplyDeleteI am aware of the history regarding Schock, but kind of hope that he is on our “team,” and if so, that one day he will be at peace about that and fully authentic. Meanwhile, his anti-GLBTQ voting record does not come as a shock (Did you see what I did there?). If he’s closeted, including to himself (I spent a few decades in that space, so I know its reality and weight.), I have no more umbrage toward him than any other pol with a similarly atrocious voting record. Maybe he’s bi. Would he need to be at a certain point on the Kinsey Scale in which it would be okay to make same-sex attraction an issue? I hope not. That type of politics is fun to watch on “House of Cards” (02/27!) but removes human dignity from the equation.
However, as I mentioned before, if there is observable hypocrisy in which Schock votes one way while living another, “Game on!”