Crossing the line

Rep. John Michael admits his obscene and intimidating tirade against two senators in the halls of the State House was “inexcusable.” The time-consuming tangle the House Ethics Committee is making of the Auburn independent’s boorish outburst is inexplicable.

All eyewitness accounts of the confrontation last week agree on the essential facts: An argument between Rep. Michael and Sen. Peggy Pendleton over the handling of legislation degraded into a shouting match in which Rep. Michael towered over the senator and showered her with a torrent of foul language and spittle; Sen. Neria Douglass, who tried to intervene, was subjected to the same.

Such bullying behavior is unfortunate by anyone in any setting, but by state legislators in the State House it is utterly unacceptable. Though Rep. Michael has apologized, he spoils the effect with a pathetic attempt to portray himself as the victim of a partisan conspiracy – he defeated a Democratic incumbent for his seat, the two senators are Democrats – but the weakness of his “blown out of proportion” routine should be obvious.

The Ethics Committee spent two days on this matter this week, far too much time for conduct that simply cannot be condoned. Worse, some lawmakers seemed to buy into Rep. Michael’s victimization theory, while some seemed to think setting a standard for acceptable conduct in the most important public building in the state is a deep and complicated issue fraught with sociological and constitutional peril.

Rep. Stavros Mendros, Republican of Lewiston, embraced the Michael-as-victim line, saying Democrats wanted “to hang him from the rafters.” Democrats are, of course, planning no such thing and it is unfortunate that Rep. Mendros would in any way legitimize Rep. Michael’s blatant attempt to shift blame. Rep. Glenys Lovett, Republican of Scarborough, said the matter made it clear to her ”there are things you might say to a man that you shouldn’t say to a woman.”

At the local bar and grill, perhaps. But this is the State House, the inhabitants aren’t there to be served but to serve the people of this state – gender simply is not a factor. There is no need, as the committee’s self-inflicted quandary suggests, for there to be a list of specifically prohibited words or a decibel limit for arguments. In no other place where a certain elevated level of conduct is expected, such as school or the workplace, is setting a standard seen as an unfathomable quandary. If nothing else, given the obligation lawmakers voluntarily take on and the crucial importance of civility and a cooperative spirit, the standard in the State House should be even higher.

For now, Rep. Michael is on temporary leave from his committee, State and Local Government, of which Sen. Pendleton is chairman. With childish petulance, Rep. Michael says he sees committees as a waste of his time and would welcome permanent removal. That statement alone should be enough to guide the Ethics Committee in the disciplinary recommendation it makes next week to the full Legislature. Committee work is the grinding, often boring, part of the legislator’s job and Rep. Michael should not be given a pass from doing it. He relishes the loose cannon role and should not be allowed the indulgence. He should be reprimanded, not permitted to play the victim. The Ethics Committee does not need to agonize over precisely where the line between acceptable and unacceptable conduct is drawn, it only needs to make clear that such a line exists and Rep. Michael crossed it.