Reviewing Rennie's column

The more I think about it, the more I'm thinking that Tom Gaffey may very well be in some hot water.

At first when I read Kevin Rennie's Courant column, I noticed the salacious details...

In June, Joseph Ferraiolo, married for 18 years, sued his wife for divorce, citing adultery, a pointed claim in an age when the vague "irreconcilable differences" suffices. The couple divorced in October. Their three young children live mostly with their dad under the divorce agreement. A highly unusual paragraph in it precludes the parties and their lawyers from discussing their grievances. It punishes any leaks. Husbands and wives don't usually worry about leaks, but politicians do.

As the summer ended, Gaffey and Ferraiolo were living in a convoluted e-mail world, one that could have been written by Barbara Cartland with some Stephen King creeping in. In August, Ferraiolo oohs and aahs at a Gaffey favor for a mutual friend. He declares, "I move mountains for my friends." In September, brace yourself, she proclaims him a "god." "Alongside every god is a great goddess," reads his modest reply. News from Gaffey that he's had a call from an editor at The New York Times has Ferraiolo repeating in capitals that he is indeed a god. Another exchange finds Zeus offering bon mots in French. Power rarely improves the judgment of those who wield it.

But upon reading it again, I noticed there may be some real concerns because, while...

The state ethics office says that "the Code does not bear on this situation because "the liaison is not a family member" and the senator didn't receive "any benefit" from the bill's passage....

Rennie seems to say that opinion only accounts for money going from government to the Senator. So Rennie continues:

The benefits bestowed by state employees on individual legislators are regulated. Ferraiolo and Gaffey had better start gathering receipts for the state's ethics agency. Shortly after the bill was passed, the Senate Democrats requested an opinion from the Office of State Ethics on Gaffey's role in the legislation, but failed to ask about any benefits he may have derived from his relationship with Ferraiolo.

And that sounds to me as if Rennie is asking if there was money going from Ferriaolo to the Senator? Do you read it that way?

Anyway, if I'm reading this correctly now... while the aforementioned details sound bad, the ethics people said there were no laws broken. But Rennie seems to raise a legitimate question. I wonder where this will go? In the meantime...

Should the Senate investigate Gaffey?
	yes, it goes without saying
	no, there's nothing to see here, move along
	Elizabeth Esty for state Senate!
pollcode.com free polls

Tim White