Political lessons

The Bangor region is experiencing pain and anger over the cancelled nomination of Police Chief Randy Harriman as state commissioner of public safety. There is a sense of loss for everyone who was rooting for him as a police officer and a representative of this part of the state.

The cardinal rule of politics is, no unpleasant surprises for the boss, much less a potential boss. Chief Harriman concluded that the investigation into his conduct in the 1980 arrest of Evelyn Grant was too inconsequential to mention to the governor. The chief may not have known it, but the exposure of such an event during a Senate hearing easily could have ended his nomination — and made the governor look foolish to boot. No surprise that Gov. King, angry that the information was not offered earlier and unsure of what else he may not have been told, refused to let that happen.

Chief Harriman returns to a city in which officials have been quick to defend his abilities and his integrity. That is to be expected. The governor had been impressed with Mr. Harriman’s performance as chief and did not reject him because of 17-year-old accusations; the chief was rejected because he did not disclose enough information during his job interview, according to the governor, and did not respond in a trustworthy manner when new questions arose.

News reports about Chief Harriman have angered local officials, but their anger is misplaced. The governor began an investigation after an anonymous letter was sent to him, state senators and the media. The accusations in the letter remain unsubstantiated, but the governor’s investigator on his own turned up 1980 newspaper stories relating to the Grant case. These, along with other questions raised during the investigator’s work, were enough for the governor to lose confidence in his nominee. Once senators learned about the Grant stories, whether or not the stories were made public in the media, Chief Harriman’s nomination would have been in serious jeopardy.

Gov. King and Chief Harriman held opposing news conferences Wednesday: the governor to state that his nominee’s “regretable lack of candor … has shaken my personal confidence in the candidate;” the chief to say he “had hoped to wait until the October 1 hearing to address these ridiculous charges.” Both wanted to manage the release of information, but had very different ideas about how this should be done. Along with the erosion of trust the governor expressed about his nominee, the clash suggests a relationship that may not have worked well in any event, but leaves two small lessons.

The governor’s office should have conducted a more thorough independent background check before announcing a nominee. And no nominee should consider a federal investigation, no matter what its outcome, too minor to mention — it is not too much to ask that a person seeking a political position consider the politics of his actions, present and past. Difficult lessons that both sides wish could have been avoided.