Hatch Act: Difference between revisions

Hatch Act (view source)

Revision as of 21:50, 20 December 2024

4 bytes removed , 20 December 2024

m

Text replacement - "**" to ""

CargoAdmin, Bureaucrats, Moderators (CommentStreams), fileuploaders, Interface administrators, newuser, Push subscription managers, Suppressors, Administrators

1,816

edits

@@ Line 78: / Line 78: @@
 * In 2006, the [[Utah Democratic Party]] challenged the candidacy of Ogden City Police Chief [[Jon Greiner]] for State Senate. The challenge was upheld by the [[United States Office of Special Counsel]] (OSC) because the year prior the Ogden City Police Department received a federal grant to help pay for bulletproof vests. Jon Greiner appealed the decision, remained on the ballot, won the election and served one term (2006–2010) as Utah State Senator while the results of the appeal were unknown.<ref>{{cite news|last=Loftin|first=Josh|title=Police chief plans to stay in Senate race|url=http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,650203448,00.html|archive-url=https://archive.today/20120707153726/http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,650203448,00.html|url-status=dead|archive-date=July 7, 2012|newspaper=[[Deseret Morning News]]|date=November 1, 2006|access-date=July 8, 2012}}</ref>
 * In January 2007, the OSC announced the results of investigations into whether certain events during the election campaigns of 2004 and 2006 violated the Hatch Act.<ref>{{cite press release|title=OSC: High Level NASA Hatch Investigations Present Cautionary Tale|url=http://www.osc.gov/documents/press/2007/pr07_04.htm|website=OSC.gov|date=January 29, 2007|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070205221645/http://www.osc.gov/documents/press/2007/pr07_04.htm|archive-date=February 5, 2007|access-date=June 16, 2019|url-status=dead}}</ref>
-** It found no violation when [[Kennedy Space Center]] officials allowed Senator [[John Kerry]]'s presidential campaign to use a NASA facility for a 2004 campaign event, because no government employees worked at the facility in question. It found streaming the event to NASA employees and contractors violated the Hatch Act.
+ It found no violation when [[Kennedy Space Center]] officials allowed Senator [[John Kerry]]'s presidential campaign to use a NASA facility for a 2004 campaign event, because no government employees worked at the facility in question. It found streaming the event to NASA employees and contractors violated the Hatch Act.
-** It reviewed a 2006 speech by NASA Administrator [[Michael D. Griffin]] in which he appeared to endorse Representative [[Tom DeLay]] for re-election. It determined that he "should have exercised better judgment" and took no further action.
+ It reviewed a 2006 speech by NASA Administrator [[Michael D. Griffin]] in which he appeared to endorse Representative [[Tom DeLay]] for re-election. It determined that he "should have exercised better judgment" and took no further action.
 * In June 2007, the OSC found that [[Lurita Alexis Doan]], Administrator of the [[General Services Administration]], violated the Hatch Act when she took part in a video conference with [[Karl Rove]] and other White House officials, and sent letters asking how to help [[Republican Party (United States)|Republican]] politicians get elected.<ref>"Doan's fate up to president; Hatch Act violation could prompt firing". ''Federal Times''. May 28, 2007.</ref>
 * In December 2007, Vigo County Superior Court Judge David Bolk ruled that the [[List of mayors of Terre Haute, Indiana|mayor-elect of Terre Haute (Indiana)]] Duke Bennett was covered by the Hatch Act when he was candidate for mayor because he had been director of operations for the Hamilton Center (a medical facility)<ref>{{citation|url=https://www.hamiltoncenter.org |title=Home |work=Hamilton Center Inc |access-date=23 August 2020}}</ref> when he ran for mayor, and the Hamilton Center was receiving federal funding for its [[Head Start (program)|Head Start program]]. Nevertheless Bennett was allowed to take office, because Judge Bolk ruled that the legal challenge had been brought too late to prevent this. In November 2008 "Indiana Court of Appeals in a 2–1 decision found that the Hatch Act did apply to Bennett and called for a special election to fill the office of Terre Haute mayor."<ref name=TerreHaute19Nov08>{{cite news| url=http://www.tribstar.com/news/local_news/mayor-maintains-he-did-not-violate-little-hatch-act-in/article_f4b8889d-af27-58ef-b6ea-f3f42dcf191b.html |title=Mayor maintains he did not violate Little Hatch Act in seeking office |first1=Arthur E. |last1=Foulkes |date=19 November 2008 |work=[[Tribune-Star]]}}</ref> In June 2009, [[Indiana Supreme Court]] ruled that Bennett could remain in office because the challenge had been brought by Bennett's opponent after the election, and therefore Bennett was no longer a candidate, but mayor-elect at the time and was no longer in violation of the act.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.newsandtribune.com/news/local_news/indiana-supreme-court-rules-terre-haute-mayor-can-keep-office/article_c59d5f60-c046-5cca-ada0-98e50f13f105.html |title=Indiana Supreme Court rules Terre Haute mayor can keep office |date=17 June 2009 |work=[[News and Tribune]]}}<br />{{citation |url=http://www.state.in.us/judiciary/opinions/pdf/06160901bd.pdf |title=Kevin D. Burke v. Duke Bennett |work=Indiana Supreme Court |date=16 June 2009}}</ref>