Even the most devout observer of state government probably doesn’t recognize the name of Priscilla Dickman, but her case raises serious questions about ethics in government and how best to pursue purity.
Dickman is a former medical technologist with the University of Connecticut Health Center who ended up on trial in September before the Office of State Ethics. She stands accused of using state office equipment, including her e-mail account, to conduct personal business on state time. She admits she did so, but argues that so did just about everyone else she worked with. She questions why she has been singled out for special punishment.
During the month of September, Dickman’s trial before the ethics panel was regular nightly viewing on CTN — Connecticut’s version of C-SPAN. While I never watched a full episode of this particular reality show, I did see enough to conclude that something had gone terribly awry with the system. Right there, on cable TV, I watched as hundreds of state employee man hours and thousands of dollars in attorney fees spiraled down the drain in pursuit of what exactly? A world where no Connecticut taxpayer need ever fear that a state employee might misuse an e-mail account? Capital felony cases are settled with less litigation than the Dickman matter.
To be fair to the prosecution (which is difficult for me), Dickman was not accused of simply using her state e-mail to check on her family, or order a new fleece from L.L. Bean. She is accused of conducting work related to a part-time jewelry business. Even stipulating to the serious charges against her — taking an order for gold loop earrings without a license — isn’t this the kind of infraction that could have and should have been dealt with by her managers at the UCONN Health Center? My own answer to the rhetorical question is: Yes.
Setting aside the misuse of office equipment and e-mail accounts, if Dickman, or any other state employee, is wasting time — at the expense of the taxpayer — on activities not related to her state job, then that employee should be disciplined and perhaps even dismissed from state employment. There is no need for a trial here.
Defenders of the process will argue that principles are at stake. If the ethics commission were to look the other way in this matter it would send the wrong message. The right thing to do is pursue the case, regardless of expense, so every state employee knows the potential consequences of crossing the line. Defenders of process often wage their battles at the peril of common sense and the Dickman case appears to be the perfect example.
Dickman has admitted that she used state equipment and state time for non work related purposes. Her defense is “so does everyone else.” In the four year history of the new ethics office, this is the first case that has gone to trial. All others have been settled in what amounts to a plea bargain. What went wrong here?
Former congressman Christopher Shays once said that when it comes to ethics in government, we tend to swallow elephants and choke on flies. I may have the wildlife wrong, but you get the point. After 10 years of high-profile corruption cases in Connecticut, we have a heightened interest in making clear our devotion to strong ethics, but that devotion can lead to its own perversions. We should use any review of the Dickman case to learn how to swat the flies and so we can focus on elephants.
Â
Â
Dean Pagani is a former gubernatorial advisor. He is vice president of public affairs for Cashman and Katz Integrated Communications in Glastonbury.
