I have been asked about the status of my inquiry into the ethics question regarding the House Parliamentarian being a voting member of the Legislative body, as well as being a member of the ruling majority Party. Below I have posted excerpts from the  letter that I sent to the Joint  Committee on Legislative Ethics ( Co-Chaired by Senator Norman Stone and Delegate Brian McHale) as well as their reply.

“ In researching my Constitutional, House Rules and Parliamentary options to challenge such a ruling, I have come across a most interesting situation and one that I come to ask your assistance in challenging since there is a blatant conflict of interest. It is clear that neither the State Constitution nor the House Rules provide for a Parliamentarian yet the House Speaker appointed a Democrat member of the House to serve as the ruling House Parliamentarian.

In all governing bodies that I have researched including the U.S. House of Representatives, there is but one Parliamentarian and that person is not a voting member of either Party.  In order for the Parliamentarian to rule fairly and objectively on a question, a legitimate Parliamentarian is never a voting member of the organization or governing body.

 I will most definitely be challenged by the Speaker and he will most definitely call on the Democrat Parliamentarian to rule on my challenge. It is somewhat obvious that there is a predictable outcome to every question of procedure raised by a Republican member of the minority Party. Furthermore, there is no doubt that the ruling will be political in nature (since the Parliamentarian is a voting Democrat) and will not involve any legitimate outcome based on the rules of Parliamentary procedure. I find this a blatant injustice and clearly a conflict of interest.

I would respectfully request that the House Speaker be instructed to appoint a non member to preside as Parliamentarian who is legitimately trained in Parliamentarian process and ethics or that he appoint the Chief Clerk as Parliamentarian as it is done in the Georgia Legislature. “

The following is from their response:

” The Joint Committee has determined that the matters you describe in your letter do not constitute a conflict of interest. The Joint Committee voted to dismiss the complaint, pursuant to sec. 15-517(a)(3) of the State Government Article because the matters alleged are not within the jurisdiction of the Joint Committee”

 Does it seem odd to anyone else that they claim to have no jurisdiction over this matter but yet they still voted to dismiss?