The Video is Bad, the Transcript Worse.

In the past several days, the public has had the chance to see extended video clips of Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz’s deposition in the action she brought seeking a declaratory judgment that she’s eligible to run for attorney general.  In response to queries she ought to have anticipated, Bysiewicz makes more faces than Lucy trying to dodge Ricky’s question about how she’s going to pay for her latest hat.

The transcript of the third day of Bysiewicz’s statement under oath is as or more damaging than what went before.  She refuses to provide a clear response to simple questions.  In response written requests for documents that support Bysiewicz’s claim that she has been actively practicing law as secretary of the state, the Middletown Democrat submitted three letters.  That’s right, three from 11 years in office.  It’s clear she did not draft them.  She reviewed them and made a few comments.  She then tries to pass them off as “samples” of her work.  She was required to provide more than “samples.”

She makes reference to what people in her office could provide.  Her office, however, is a defendant in this matter.  Bysiewicz has the duty to respond in full to requests for documents.  We can assume that if three is all she could produce when it’s in her interest to produce more, those three documents represent the body of what she believes is her written work in the active practice of law.  Slim pickings, indeed.

There are the emails.  Included among those few documents are some telling constituents that they’ve written about a federal question and should contact their members of Congress.

Bysiewicz’s calendars reveal what many already know:  there’s very little for any secretary of the state to do each day.  Her appointments are mostly evening meetings with Democratic town committees around the state.

There are complicated jobs in state government that require knowledge of complicated areas of the law.  The secretary of the state is not one of them.  Environmental protection, insurance, child protection, social services, and banking require some serious experience and intellect to do well.  We’ve seen what can happen when a slacker gets one of those jobs.

Here’s a question that wasn’t asked but would stump Bysiewicz and several other constitutional officers:  Why do you make taxpayers provide you with a driver?  What is it about your job that hinders your ability to drive yourself to and from work each day?  If Bysiewicz’s calendar is any indication, she can’t be tired from working.