Decker’s action disgraces N.C. House

  From The Charlotte Observer, Aug. 2

  Former state Rep. Michael Decker earned a tainted foot*note in N.C. history Tuesday when he pleaded guilty in fed*eral court to extortion and fraud for taking $50,000 in contri*butions to switch parties and help keep Democratic Speaker of the House Jim Black in power in 2003.
  Decker’s admission of guilt in this disgraceful episode in state politics affirmed the fears of many voters who suspect*ed wrongdoing in Decker’s Jan. 24, 2003, switch from the Re*publican Party to the Democrats. That deadlocked the N.C. House at 60 Democrats and 60 Republicans and enabled then two-term Speaker Black to forge a co-speakership with Re*publican Richard Morgan to run the 2003-04 N.C. House. Re*publicans had anticipated running the House with a 61-59 m a j o r i t y.
  Federal prosecutors say Decker met with an unnamed Democrat in late 2002 in Salisbury to discuss changing polit*ical parties. They said Decker “solicited and agreed to ac*cept $50,000 and other things of value in return for switching” and backing a candidate for speaker.
  Prosecutors did not identify Jim Black in any proceedings or court documents. Black has de*scribed how he welcomed Deck*er to his management team and how he encouraged his allies to support Decker. But the scenario described in court before U.S. District Judge James Dever pointed a laser directly at Black’s office.
  The speaker has maintained he did nothing illegal. He has not been charged. Even so, as we said in March, we believe Black wrongly manipulated the system to stay in power, punishing enemies and reward*ing allies. We urge Jim Black to step down as speaker and let the House rebuild its credibility and leadership.
  Decker voluntarily pleaded guilty to a single conspiracy charge involving extortion, mail fraud and money launder*ing – a clear sign he is cooperating in the investigation. He said he “accepted an envelope containing about $38,000 in checks ... and $12,000 in cash” plus a legislative job (later filled by his son) in return for switching parties. Prosecu*tors also said Decker agreed to keep his campaign account open after losing the 2004 election “in case there was a need to run some money through it.” In early 2005 he received $4,000 “and converted it to his use.” The picture federal authorities drew was clear: Democrats in the House paid Decker to change parties and keep Democrats in power, and after Decker lost his seat two years later they still tried to help him. That conspiracy might still remain a secret had not federal and state authorities launched investigations about possible links between cam*paign contributions and legislative action in the House.
  The public has a right to know who negotiated this sad deal and who delivered the money. Citizens should be heart*ened that federal and state authorities are cooperating in the investigation of this disgraceful episode of criminal ac*tivity in public office – and dismayed by those whose utter contempt for the law made it happen.
 
http://www.hpe.com/