Skip to comments.Should convicted former House speaker get his pension back? [MA; Finneran]
Posted on 12/04/2016 10:19:35 PM PST by Olog-hai
The highest court in Massachusetts is set to hear arguments in a long-running legal battle over whether former House speaker Thomas Finneran should be able to collect his $34,000 annual pension despite his conviction on an obstruction of justice charge.
Finnerans fall from grace began in 2003 when he lied about his role in a legislative redistricting plan.
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
Let him spend it from prison.
No. Next question.
No. Finneran is a real creep.
No, he should not. Nor should any elected position have a pension at all. You don’t retire from politics, you can only fail to be voted in (or fail to put your name on the ballot.)
Politics should never be a valid career path, that’s what business is for. And until we take steps to stop our politicians from embezzling public funds for their own benefit (most especially in making cushy retirements for public employees), every state is on a collision course with bankruptcy.
Did he contribute any money? If so, he should probably get that amount back but nothing more.
Need some clarification...
Which Massachusetts Speaker of the House who was sent to jail is this again?
There are so many that it’s tough keeping up without a scorecard.
That is like Illinois governors- without a scorecard hard to remember which one went away for what crime
It depends on what the state law and the contract say.
Trump should investigate the charlatans in Congress to determine who was on the take the last 8 years then prosecute them if they conspired to do harm against the American people, put them in prison, remove their pensions and priveleges to set a precedent for new incoming congressional members. Their finances also need to be an open book for this very reason and they’vd made numerous attempts to change that to try and hide them the past several years. We know why.
Howie Carr calls Hindu “Felon Finneran”.
That's why a combination of (1) term limits and (2) all political donations to be ANONYMOUS* is needed to curtail the career politician, who is the cause of many ills.
*You can't sell influence if you don't know who is buying. Every American should have the right to donate to any candidate or party, in any amount they choose; that is FREEDOM. But to negotiate a result for the donation is BRIBERY, a crime. Cut it off.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.