Pages

Wednesday, September 19, 2007

Pete Kott Trial Day 11 - Pete All Afternoon

There was a lot said, not much earthshaking and I just don’t have time to cover it all. Pete Kott took the stand and covered things like:

  • Why he keeps $30,000 in cash in his closet. (Is it alone on F Street while he and Deborah are in Anchorage? I hope the burglars don’t read the newspapers.)
  • He never asked for a poll to be done, never used it.
  • Old campaign fliers that showed he used the slogan “Experienced, Proven Leadership” since his second campaign (implying that the fact it was on a 2006 flier didn’t prove that he took Dave Dittman’s polling advice to stress leadership.)
  • He’s never taken a bribe from Bill Allen.
  • A blow by blow account of the November ‘04 legislative coup by 13 Democrats and 9 Republicans that would have had Pete Speaker of the House for two days.

He talked about his life:

Born in Flint, Michigan. Dad worked for GM. So did Kott after high school. But in 1969 he joined the Air Force. He had postings in Texas, Thailand [Taiwan according to ADN] (where he met his wife), Turkey, New Mexico, and Florida (where he got a BA in Criminal Justice and a Masters in (dare I say it?) Public Administration. That’s two MPA’s out of two legislative corruption trials. Really, we teach ethics. But these are things that faculty can’t really test (unless students cheat on their assignments) for, and in the short time students are in graduate school it isn’t easy to change fundamental values. And many could argue legitimately that we shouldn’t. But the basic standards of the field? But I digress.

He ended his Air Force career in Anchorage where he also started teaching political science at Whalen Baptist College. A student who read the chapter on when to run for office, pointed out that after reapportionment, Kott’s district had no incumbent. So Pete ran. He loves being a legislator.

All this testimony, starting at 1:30 and going till 4:30, seems to be intended to contrast the real, living Pete Kott with the often drunk, foul mouthed, guy the jury has seen and heard on tape. And he looked much more impressive on the stand under the friendly questions of his attorney. He even looked like he was talking directly to the jury. But he may have only been looking at his monitor.

What about his relationship with Bill Allen? Well, they were introduced by Ramona Barnes who had taken Kott in when he joined the legislature and they bonded on a bus on Sakhalin Island, Russia, a state paid trip.

He and Bill hit it off so well, he thought, because

  • we liked each other
  • his immediately family was not so immediate - son and sister moved away. He was by himself and I was too sort of
  • we had a lot of things in common
  • hands-on trying to scratch through a living - he did much better than I
  • Our beliefs in developing natural resources

This is pretty close to verbatim:
Bill Allen was very knowledgeable. He was my number one source of information. Before lobbyists, They have their own interests. Bill and Rick always gave me an honest answer.
It was at this point that the lady behind me laughed out loud. I was also thinking, Bill Allen didn’t have his own interests? Didn’t he get fined for lobbying when he wasn’t registered as one?

Then at 3:20 pm Wendt started asking Kott about the PPT legislation. Detailed information about it. Starting with page one of the legislative history. Line by line. Translating every coded term. (PPT was the Petroleum Profits Tax that was the highest priority of Veco.)

2/21/06 FN1 Zero DNR
3/30.06 RES RPT CS 1DP 1DN 2NR 3AM

This went on until 4:30. Actually, I have to admit, that while I thought I would fall asleep for sure, learning the code was kind of interesting.
FN= fiscal notes DNR= Department of Natural Resources - they had zero fiscal notes

RES = Resource Sub Committee
RPT = Report
CS = Committee Substitute
So the Resource Sub-Committee reported the bill out with a Committee substitute bill

1DP = 1 Do pass
1DN = 1 Do not pass
2NR = 2 No recommendation
3AM = 3 support the Amended bill

This is how the seven sub committee members voted on the bill.

But why are we doing all this?

It appeared to me that Defense was trying to make two points:

1. Kott had no impact on the bill.
2. Kott actually voted to raise the tax, not lower it.

The first time he got to vote on it was May 7,the second to the last day of the regular session I think, There was one other vote when it was unanimously voted onto the floor for debate. Even though the Senate bill was passed first and so became the working bill for both houses, and the Senate had voted for 22/22 (I think) instead of 20/20 (20% tax; 20% credits for new investment), the Finance subcommittee had voted it back down to 20/20 before it got to the floor of the House.

Another line in the record looked so innocent:

5/7/07 (H) AM NO 20 Adopted Y21 N19

On May 7, in the House, Amendment Number 20 was passed 21-19. This was the famous (among wonks) vote when Weyhrauch voted wrong. He voted to raise the tax to 21.5 by mistake, and they had to get the vote rescinded. Under questioning from his attorney, Kott said

I made the motion to rescind. Rep. Weyhrauch came to me. And I believe...(I didn’t catch it quite, but it was something like votes should be what people really meant, not mistakes). Anyone on an issue of this magnitude, if someone made a mistake, I wanted to be sure everyone voted their conscience.
That sounds pretty noble. But you know that the defense is going to play the tape I posted last night in which Kott, from the floor, calls Smith in Room 604, and tells him what happened and they’re going to rescind the vote and revote. Here you can listen for yourself:
Rep. Pete Kott to Veco VP Rick Smith phone call

So then the next line of the history of the bill:

5/7/07 (H) RESCIND ACTION ON AM20 Y22 N18

By now I bet you can read that without translation. Rescind the vote on Amendment 20 passes 22 to 18.

Kott said he was surprised it was rescinded 22-18. Someone beside Weyhrauch changed his vote. If only Weyhrauch had changed his vote it would have been 20-20 and the 21.5/21.5 would have stayed. "On an issue this contentious, I just thought if only Bruce Weyhrauch changed his vote, it wouldn't pass."

Do you think that Pete Kott, if the original vote had failed and a Democrat had asked to have it rescinded so he could vote his conscience, would agreed? Listen to this the audio of what Kott told Smith right after the vote:

Rep. Pete Kott and Veco VP Rick Smith phone call

These simple cryptic lines hide so much. Defense was trying to show that Kott never did anything to help Veco get the bill passed. He has to know these tapes are going to be played in the cross examination.

The second main thing he was trying to get across was on the next lines:

5/8/07 (H) AM NO1 BEFORE THE HOUSE

5/8/07 (H) AM2 TO AM1 ADOPTED Y22 N17 E1

If I understood this right, there was a new amendment to raise the level from 20/20 to 22.5/22.5. (Veco wants it to stay at 20/20). But Kott is able to get AM2 passed 22-17 (I don't think he told us what E1 was) AM2 amended the AM1 changing the 22.5/22.5 to 21/21. So, instead of an Amendment raising the original 20/20 to 22.5, Kott's amendment had it only go up to 21. In essence, he lowered the amended level of 22.5 to 21, thus, I'm assuming, limiting the damage.

But Wendt characterized this as Kott's only real action on this bill was to raise it from 20/20 to 21/21 - the opposite of what Veco wanted. And the opposite of what happened. Cute. But I'm sure the prosecution will easily knock over this house of cards.

So at 4:3o (yes there was 70 minutes on this) the jury left and the attorneys talked about the schedule. I think that is worthy of a post by itself and not being buried down here at the bottom of this long post that only three people will see to the bottom. But for those of you who made it this far, the prosecution expects to begin its cross examination of Kott in the afternoon tomorrow for a few hours. I would guess this will be the most interesting part of the trial.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Comments will be reviewed, not for content (except ads), but for style. Comments with personal insults, rambling tirades, and significant repetition will be deleted. Ads disguised as comments, unless closely related to the post and of value to readers (my call) will be deleted. Click here to learn to put links in your comment.