Correction to ‘The Quinns’ first day in court was not a pretty one’

Note to self: When I can’t figure out how I reached an earlier conclusion, I should consider that it could be my new understanding that’s wrong. On Sunday, I said I didn’t know why I had not earlier noticed that it should be easy to prove that Rep. Rick Quinn didn’t report business his father does with organizations that employ lobbyists. The reason I didn’t notice earlier is that it doesn’t matter.

Unlike the part of the law that prohibits legislators from voting in a way that would help themselves or their parents financially, the reporting requirement does not apply to legislators’ parents.

That wasn’t the main point of the column; the main point was that Rep. Quinn’s appearance in court last week made the case against him look stronger, primarly because of the evidence Solicitor David Pascoe outlined that he says shows Rep. Quinn is part of his father’s business. But main point or not, it was still wrong.

Thank you to former House Ethics Chairman Kenny Bingham for pointing out my error.

I corrected my column Sunday evening; you can read it here.