McCaskill in 2006 promised no “ethical conflict” from husband’s businesses
October 2, 2012
For years, Republicans have been warning about the potential for conflicts-of-interest to exist as Claire McCaskill considers legislation that directly impacts her husband’s business interests, which are entirely dependent on the federal government.
While running for the Senate in 2006, McCaskill attempted to defuse the issue, vowing: “I’ll do whatever’s necessary to make sure there’s no ethical conflict.” McCaskill went on to say, “Obviously, I don’t think it’s necessary for him to stop doing his businesses while I’m in the Senate, but any of the businesses that do have any impact in terms of the federal government or any type of interplay with the federal government, obviously we will take whatever steps are necessary to make sure that there is absolutely no conflict of interest, including a blind trust, if necessary.” (Kansas City Star, October 19, 2006)
But despite McCaskill’s assurances in 2006, no steps were taken to avoid a conflict, and no blind trust was established. Now, we are learning that the stimulus—which McCaskill helped craft, voted for, and continues to support—benefited McCaskill’s network of companies, which includes more than 300 LPs, LLCs, and corporations.
This is clearly a conflict-of-interest, and it’s exactly the kind of avoidable ethical conflict Claire McCaskill promised to prevent when she ran for Senate.
8:01 PM May 24, 2013
7:01 PM May 24, 2013
5:50 PM May 24, 2013
9:07 PM May 23, 2013