I was amused by Rep. Heather Sirocki’s Dec. 7 letter to the editor (“Testimony reveals Eves had advantage in Good Will-Hinckley job search”).

Rep. Sirocki states that the committee conducting the Good Will-Hinckley investigation discovered that one of Mark Eves’ employees, Bill Brown, was on the search committee, encouraged his boss to interview for the job, reviewed and made suggestions on Eves’ resume, and was present during the interviews. He then recused himself from the vote.

OK, what’s inappropriate or surprising about this? Isn’t this what you would have expected him to do? Do you really think any of this is illegal or immoral?

Sirocki then moves into unsubstantiated speculation, stating: “Brown may have taken other steps to tailor the process to ensure his boss would be selected.” She laments that the committee didn’t allow further investigation into her suspicions. She concludes with the statement: “If that’s not a smoking gun, I don’t know what is.”

What is Sirocki insinuating? That the search committee didn’t do a thorough job? That the board of directors abdicated their responsibility to pick the best candidate? I’m certain the members of those committees would be insulted by these insinuations.

Sirocki is using one of the oldest techniques known to man: a red herring. A “red herring” is when one introduces completely irrelevant information to distract people from the actual argument at hand.

Let’s stay focused on the fact that Paul LePage abused his power as governor and threatened harm to Good Will-Hinckley if they didn’t retract their job offer to Eves – all to satisfy his need to bully a political opponent. LePage broke the law and should be punished.

What LePage did is an unacceptably dangerous precedent that we cannot let stand. Don’t be distracted by Rep. Sirocki’s smoke and mirrors.

Andy Wright

Cumberland Foreside

Copy the Story Link