Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey so frequently and so flagrantly abuses his authority in service to right-wing extremism that it’s easy to forget the other troubling theme of his tenure: The glaring conflicts of interest that have repeatedly arisen regarding his campaign fundraising.
The latest example involves Missouri’s legalized marijuana industry. As the Post-Dispatch’s Kurt Erickson reports, the co-owner of a pot company last month hosted a fundraiser for Bailey even as the company wages a legal battle against state regulators — with Bailey’s office on the other side of the fight.
People are also reading…
What could possibly go wrong?
Bailey was appointed to his current position in January to fill a vacancy. He’s seeking a full term in next year’s election.
His job as Missouri’s lawyer is to represent the state’s government and its people in court.
As previously noted on this page, Bailey isn’t doing that in a continuing legal fight between the state and the owners of unlicensed electronic gaming machines that operate with impunity all over Missouri.
Bailey has outsourced the case to private attorneys, at taxpayer expense. It appears to be an effort to avoid conflict-of-interest issues related to $25,000 in campaign contributions Bailey has received from sources connected to the gaming machine owners.
Then there is Bailey’s odd interest in a Missouri-based company being sued for alleged lead poisoning of children in Peru. The case doesn’t involve Missouri government, but that didn’t stop Bailey from filing a brief in support of the company — this after its parent company donated $50,000 to a PAC that supports Bailey’s campaign.
These circumstances aren’t illegal, but they are inherently suspect.
Why should the taxpayers have to shell out extra money for private lawyers because the attorney general who already draws a state salary is taking campaign money from the other side of the gaming case? Why should Missouri residents be associated, through the brief filed by their top legal official, with alleged corporate polluters who have donated money to that official?
The most recent variation on this grubby theme involves the marijuana company Delta Extraction. State regulators have suspended the company’s operations for alleged violations of Missouri’s cannabis regulations. The state claims the company has falsified data, failed to meet security standards, engaged in misleading advertising and other lapses.
The company is suing to overturn the regulators’ decision. Bailey’s office is representing the state in the case.
Delta Extraction’s parent company is A Joint Operation. As Erickson reported last week, the company’s directors include Josh Ferguson — who on Nov. 6 hosted a fundraiser at his Ladue home in support of Bailey’s campaign.
As Bailey himself appeared to concede in pulling out of the gaming case, there’s at least an appearance of conflict of interest when his campaign funding is tied to the opposing party in a state legal battle.
But a better solution than withdrawing from the case and hiring private lawyers is to be pickier in the first place about whose support he accepts.
Missouri’s lawyer is supposed to serve one client — the people of Missouri. When his campaign funding is coming from sources tied to unlicensed gaming, corporate polluters and now an embattled marijuana company, it’s fair to ask just who Bailey is representing.
Standard Wellness cultivation manager Joshua Cason discusses the first harvest of cannabis plants grown outside in the open-air under the sun. Video by David Carson, dcarson@post-dispatch.com
