How Far Do We Go with Blago in Making Private Matters Public?

admin |

Last week, the Chicago Sun-times published an article about Senator Roland Burris sons $34,163 tax lien and the foreclosure suit filed on his home.

The paper seized on an opportunity to disclose financial information and tied together the story about Roland W. Burris IIs hiring, his credit woes and recent calls for his father, Roland Burris, to step down.

The revelations come in the middle of a Senate ethics probe and perjury investigation targeting Sen. Burris that stems from testimony he provided to the House panel that drafted impeachment charges against former Governor Rod Blagojevich, who was removed from office on Jan. 29, the Chicago Sun-times reported.

The scandal with Blago is bound to get juices flowing among some members of the press but the question becomes when does the feeding frenzy stop? In some situations, scrutiny is justified, in others, its a little over the top.

Take former First Lady of Illinois Patricia Mell Blagojevich, the former governors wife, who was fired from her $100,000 a year fund raising job after controversy regarding alleged taped statements placed her in the national spotlight. But that publicity was generated in part by her own statements and well, some might sayshe really had it coming.

In this case, what did Burris II do to be thrown into the media spotlight? Facts about where he works and information relating to his credit history unnecessarily became public when the

Sun-times report was published. Here are the facts as reported by the paper:

The Illinois Housing Development Authority (IHDA) where Burris II works as a lawyer said he was hired based on his qualifications.

"Although the IHDAs mission includes overseeing mortgage programs for low-income homebuyers and anti-foreclosure initiatives," the paper also reported that it is not a practice of the agency to request financial information from any of its applicants. So essentially, Burris II was treated like any other applicant and apparently credit history was of no consequence in getting the job.

Separately, the paper wrote, "federal authorities have been investigating hiring decisions by Blagojevichs administration." (But heres the kicker) "Authorities, however, have not expressed any interest in Burris II," the Sun-times report concluded.

So heres the question. If Burris II was hired based on his qualifications, if submission of his financial information was not a requirement of the job for any candidate and most importantly if hes not a target of the federal investigation, then why waste the ink by making financial information related to his credit history public? This past Sunday, Burris met at a South Side church with ministers and friends who offered prayers for him in facing adversity in weeks ahead. We support the ministers who are calling for the media to respect the rights of family members who happen to be private citizens.

Private citizens, unlike public officials (unless private citizens knowingly place themselves in a public light) have a constitutional right to privacy. Right now, Roland Burris status as a public official is a burden he carries alone and attempts to feed the medias voracious appetite for news, becomes a slippery slope.

Unless otherwise justified, the media should respect the rights of all private citizens and insinuations without justifications on the record, only amount to sensationalism, "he said-she-said journalism," speculation and innuendo.

Otherwise, if you work for the state or if you are looking or a job, youd better get ready to make your financial information, including your credit history, a part of the record and a matter for public spectacle, even if the motivation behind digging up credit history has nothing to do with getting the job and is targeted towards someone other than the person applying.

Latest Stories

Latest Podcast

STARR Community Services International, Inc.