Goodman’s job caught up in Bombardier amendment
Sen. Jack Goodman had planned to start work soon for a large law firm. He has been shutting down his private law practice in Mt. Vernon.
But now, he is in limbo, the unintended casualty of a Senate amendment attached this week to a tax credit bill.
The bill (SB1234) would provide up to $40 million a year to lure Bombardier Aerospace to build a plant near Kansas City International Airport.
The amendment that affects Goodman would bar companies from drawing the incentives if they employed — directly or indirectly — any elected officials or their relatives.
The target of the amendment was Amy Blunt, Gov. Matt Blunt’s sister. A lawyer, she works at Lathrop & Gage in Kansas City. Senators say Bombardier has hired that firm, though Lathrop & Gage won’t confirm that.
Goodman won’t say which firm he was about to join but others say it was Lathrop & Gage. Goodman will say only that he was “going to start working for a law firm” until he learned “they had a client that would be interested in the mega-project” subsidy.
He said he did not want to discuss his job status but acknowledged it is uncertain.
Senate Majority Leader Charlie Shields, R-St. Joseph, said he hopes to rework the conflict-of-interest provision so that it is more narrowly focused. He’ll probably drop the Senate bill and wait for the House to send over its version of the legislation.
In the meantime, Goodman has been abstaining on all votes concerning the mega-tax break.
“I take my ethics very seriously and I’d rather err on the side of caution,” he said.
All things considered, I think I’d be against this amendment. The tax incentives ought to be granted or not on the basis of its need. If the company needs it to relocate, so be it; tho I’ve always been against cities and states and other govenmental districts bidding against each other to give a company or sports team money it doesnt need, and that’s part of my congressional platform. If the tax incentive is to come here because of costs or relocating or expanding, fine; it it just goes in the pockets of the company, than in principle I’d be against it. What we need is federal legislation addressing this issue, and I hope to introduce that my first year or at least first term.