The communication's director for the state Democratic party says a Department of Revenue official was just dead wrong when she stated that State Senate candidate Doug Harpool was a lawmaker in 1994.
"Doug Harpool served in the legislature from 1983 to 1992. He was out of office when Governor Carnahan came into office," said Jack Cardetti, the spokesman for the Missouri Democratic party.
The official was taking aim at Harpool for coming out for a fee license office reform plan now that a Republican controls the appointments. The official was trying to make the point that Harpool didn't push for the change when a Democratic Governor had power.
"Mr. Harpool was a state representative from 1984 to 1994, a time when the Governorship of Missouri was switched from Republican to Democratic hands. To Harpool's statement . . . Is that what you said in 1993 when Governor Carnahan was turning the contract offices over to his Democratic friends," asked the official. "At that time, how did you advocate awarding these contracts to school districts?"
But in fact, Harpool wasn't a lawmaker at the time the official alleged.
"It's hard to believe the Blunt administration would be spreading lies in an attempt to stall much needed reforms to fee offices," Cardetti said. "Doug Harpool show us he's not afraid to reform a corrupt system that doesn't work for the benefit of Missouri citizens."
"Whether they were misstating it on purpose or it was by accident, it doesn't take away the need for reform. And Doug Harpool is the only candidate in the Senate race willing to stand up to the Governor," Cardetti said.
Cardetti also said the party considers Harpools challenge to Springfield Senator Norma Champion "a top tier race." "We believe she's vulnerable. She hasn't done a lot to distinguish herself," Cardetti said. "It would really change the political landscape in Southwest Missouri. Overtaking the state senate seat in Greene County would be groundbreaking."
4 comments:
Bobicus-- Let me remind you one more time. NO GOVERNOR EVER AWARDED THE SPRINGFIELD LICENSE OFFICE OR THE OTHER ELEVEN MAJOR STATE RUN OFFICES TO FEE OFFICES BEFORE BLUNT. NOT BOND, NOT ASHCROFT, NOT CARNAHAN, NOT WILSON, AND NOT HOLDEN. ONLY MATT BLUNT.
That is why no one has ever made an issue of it before. The vast majority of fee offices have always been in rural areas involving far less money then these 11.
The decision to award the Springfield license office to a political contributor hasn't been an issue before because NO ONE has ever done it before. Now tell us all why Blunt's political friend and family fundraiser should get the profits from the Springfield fee office (from the fees we are required to pay under state law to drive and license vehicles)instead of the Springield school system.
By the way Bobiscus. The program Harpool proposes--- allowing schools to receive funds from operation of license offices has worked successfully for years in Rolla and Lebanon. In fact around 40 of the fee agent offices statewide are already run by not for profits. Harpool's proposal actually allows not for profits other then school's to apply for the offices. What more proof do you need that the program could work other then the fact that it is already working in several other location in the state. Why shouldn't our schools benefit the ways the schools in Rolla and Lebanon do? By the way Carnahan first awarded those offices to the school systems.
I am so tired of hearing that it's o.k. for Republicans to do something because Democrats did it when they were in power. What a childish excuse for doing anything. I don't care if these political supporters of Governor Blunt run the most efficient offices that have ever been run in Missouri, let's go along with what Doug Harpool and the Republican legislators have suggested and put these moneymaking operations in the hands of not-for-profit organizations so all of us will benefit and not just a select few.
Bobiscus-- Once again you appear to intentionally mislead voters. These large offices make lots of money from state mandated transaction fees and are very profitable. That is why big political donors position themselves to get to run them. The estimated overhead is 40-50% which is paid from transaction fees. That makes profit 50-60% which is a lot in an office that generates $975000 in transaction fees. The amount of the money that goes to the state does not come from the transaction fees and is not related to the efficiency of the office. The state gets 100% of the registration and license fees, sales tax etc regardless of the profit margin from transaction fees. How much the state gets depends on how many motor vehicles are licensed and how many drivers licenses are issued not on the efficiency of the fee office.
Post a Comment