MORALITY IS NOT ONE OF DREW’S ATTRIBUTES!
by Steve Fair
mo·ral·i·ty (m -r l -t , mô-) NOUN: pl. mo·ral·i·ties 1. The quality of being in accord with standards of right or good conduct. 2. A system of ideas of right and wrong conduct: religious morality; Christian morality.3. Virtuous conduct. 4. A rule or lesson in moral conduct.

“It was my obligation to defend this (HB 1804).” “I only have to argue the legality of it.” “I’ve very grateful I do not have to argue the morality of it.”
Oklahoma Attorney General Drew Edmondson in 12/4 edition of The Oklahoman

Drew Edmondson, Oklahoma AG, is between a rock and hard place. He says he has to legally argue for a law that he believes is immoral. Edmondson is an attorney, so it’s difficult to believe he hasn’t faced these dilemmas before. It's a good thing Drew doesn’t have to argue the morality of HB #1804- or any law for that matter. Edmondson’s morals and ethics have been questionable for years. Consider the following examples:

In November 1998, Edmondson and seven other state A.G.s announced they had negotiated a historic settlement with big tobacco. The settlement imposed sweeping bans on tobacco advertising, stopped the tobacco companies from targeting children, allocated funding for tobacco education efforts and pays the states about $206 billion in recovery funds. But Edmondson benefited from the Tobacco Settlement by reaping major campaign contributions from the lawyers who got big fees in the tobacco suit.

In 2000, Edmondson involved the state of Oklahoma in a U. S. Supreme Court case by supporting a New Jersey court decision ordering the Scouts to reinstate a homosexual scout leader. The Boy Scouts of America is a private, non profit organization engaged in instilling its system of values in young people. It asserts that homosexuality is inconsistent with those values. James Dale was an adult whose position as assistant Scoutmaster of a New Jersey troop was revoked when the Boy Scouts learned that he was openly gay and a gay rights activist. The case went to the U.S. Supreme Court where the lower court’s decision was overturned. In the majority opinion, written by the late Chief Justice William Rehquist, “Forcing a group to accept certain members may impair the ability of the group to express those views, and only those views, that it intends to express. Thus, "freedom of association ... plainly presupposes a freedom not to associate." Edmondson’s involving of the State of Oklahoma in the Boy Scout case proves he doesn’t understand biblical morality and is completely out of touch with the average Oklahoman. The defeat in the Supreme Court reveals he doesn't understand the law.

In 2002, Edmondson wrote the Securities and Exchange Commission on behalf of an Oklahoma company- Pre-Paid Legal, an Ada, Oklahoma company. He asked the SEC to investigate those who were “short selling” Pre-Paid. In the 2002 election cycle, Edmondson had twenty-eight campaign contributions from Pre-Paid employees and executives. Edmondson said he was comfortable acting on behalf of Pre-Paid because it appeared they were being targeted for illegal manipulation.

In August of 2003, Edmondson filed the first criminal charges against former WorldCom Inc. chief Bernard Ebbers. The complaint accused Ebbers, and other executives of breaking state securities laws by giving false information to investors in 2000. WorldCom collapsed into the nation's largest bankruptcy in 2002 amid an accounting scandal that grew to $11 billion."It is rare that we name a company in a criminal complaint, but in this case it is justified," Oklahoma Attorney General Drew Edmondson said at the time. The WorldCom collapse cost the state pension fund $64 million. The indictment of Ebbers brought Edmondson a great deal of publicity. He was lauded as a hero for making corporate America accountable to taxpayers, but was that Drew’s motivation? It would appear not.

Verizon and SBC Communications did their best to insure that MCI did not get out of Chapter 11. After all, the three companies were competitors in a growing the growing cellular phone market. SBC was and is one of Edmondson’s largest campaign contributors. Edmondson denies the campaign contributions influenced his decision to go after Ebbers, but the timing and the enthusiasm Edmondson exhibited for that case doesn’t pass the smell test.

In 2006, Edmondson came under attack for his violations of Oklahoma’s Ethics rules. He used over $2,000 of his campaign’s money to contribute to other campaigns- a direct violation of the ethics rules. He has repaid his campaign for some of the ethical lapses- others he disagrees with. Edmondson was in the middle of the “straw donor” scandal involving former State Senator Gene Stipe and partner Steve Phipps. He donated $3,000 from his campaign after it was revealed that Stipe and Phipps conspired to funnel illegal campaign contributors into several Oklahoma Democratic elected officials, including Edmondson.

“We are sometimes called to defend the state.” “On some occasions, we enter into those defenses with a great deal of enthusiasm,” Edmondson said in Tuesday's Oklahoman. He went on to say, “In some cases, we enter into those defenses because we are required. “In this case, we are defending the law because we are obligated.” Taxpayers deserve an Attorney General that is motivated, prepared, and will effectively argue their position. "The attorney general is not only under a legal obligation to defend House Bill 1804, but also an ethical obligation as an attorney,"said State Representative Mike Reynolds, R-Oklahoma City. "Typically, attorneys don't publicly undermine their client's position by making disparaging statements about them." Reynolds said the State Bar Association should look into Edmondson’s questionable ethics.

The State Attorney General is supposed to be a servant of the people, yet Edmondson has operated the A.G.’s office like a private law firm. Legal fees are collected in the form of campaign contributions. For Drew ,with his track record on ethics, to invoke morality into any conversation is laughable. Reynolds is right about bringing him up before the bar. Edmondson’s statements and actions reveal an unwillingness to be the “People’s Lawyer.” If that's the case, he should leave office.