When
officials help special friends |
If a robber or burglar was
caught stealing $15,000, chances are the result would be a prison term.
Comparable white collar offenses, however, tend to get more lenient treatment.
The disparity can be even more sharp when high public officials intercede.
State Rep. Jim Vincent's work to restore the insurance license of his former
brother-in-law and business partner provides an egregious example of the
latter. |
|
The beneficiary of Mr.
Vincent's reprehensible lobbying with state insurance officials is James Tague,
whose case was brought to light by this newspaper's Nashville correspondent,
John Commins. He found that Mr. Tague's insurance license was revoked on Sept.
5, 2002, after an investigation by the state's Division of Insurance showed
that he had cheated 11 Hamilton County business clients of $14,950 by selling
fictitious insurance policies, overcharging for policies or surreptitiously
reducing clients' insurance coverage without their knowledge. |
|
Mr. Tague, who in 2002
partnered with Rep. Vincent on a real estate deal that netted them $500,000,
was never charged with fraud for the falsified policies. He voluntarily
surrendered his insurance agent's license on Nov. 28, 2001, after the Division
of Insurance received a client's complaint and launched an investigation.
Following the division's report on the falsified policies and the clients'
cumulative losses, Mr. Tague signed a consent order with the division admitting
his actions, and the division formally revoked his license on Sept. 5, 2002. |
|
Just four months later Rep.
Vincent began lobbying to have his erstwhile partner's license restored. He
first appealed, on Jan. 6, 2003, to Brenda Sechler, the state's director of
insurance licensing. She met with Mr. Vincent two weeks later, but subsequently
refused to renew Mr. Tague's insurance license, and later noted that complaints
against him were still being filed. Rep. Vincent then appealed to her boss,
Paula Flowers, commissioner of the Department of Commerce and Insurance, in a
meeting held on April 16 in State Sen. Ward Crutchfield's office. |
|
Ms. Flowers subsequently
approved Mr. Tague's relicensing, effective June 5, 2003, but only on condition
of quarterly reporting requirements and assurance of restitution. Mr. Commins'
report, however, revealed that several clients still have not received
restitution. State records show that Tennessee Valley Insurance Co., now run by
Rep. Vincent, filed copies of reimbursement checks, but did not provide copies
of the cancelled checks. |
|
Rep. Vincent denies that he did
anything unethical or anything more than present Mr. Tague's appeal. Yet it is
reasonable to assume that his persistent interest and aid in Mr. Tague's appeal
influenced the outcome. Sen. Crutchfield's casual role is just as egregious. He
says he did not know Mr. Tague or "get anything" for his help. Yet
both politicians' accounts contrast sharply with the absence of similar
interest in the plight of his clients, even as they demonstrate their influence
in helping Mr. Tague. |
This episode smacks of
influence and power used for special interest behind the scenes. It is
precisely the sort of case that should be widely revealed and considered by
voters. Rep. Vincent, happily, has decided not to stand for re-election this
year. The state insurance department has justly, though belatedly, reopened Mr.
Tague's case.
|
Click here to return to the main articles menu.
|
