Kentucky Gov. Matt Bevin has called for the resignation of any lawmakers or government employees who have settled sexual harassment claims. Do you support Matt’s idea?
Oh sure, send a witch hunt after Hollywood, but when it comes to Washington D.C., it's hands off. D.C. is more corrupt than Hollywood could be. That's not saying too much either
No. Sexual harassment is a too broad accusation, often pressed to extort money for crude behavior, that may not meet the criteria; but is much cheaper if settled out of court.
No. First, even if it looks slimy to settle rather than go to court, settling is simply not an admission of guilt. There are other reasons for not going through litigation (see Ebola1's comment below).
Second, it would invite *many* false claims by people wanting to get a politician removed from office, probably in an organized manner. We really mustn't open an *automatic* door for that process.
No, often those with money would rather pay the settlement than deal with the problems of going through the process even when innocent
Settlements aren’t always an admission of guilt.
No I don't because a lot of the sexual assault claims where fake and by what he said includes all those people too
innocent until proven guilty. it sucks that some people lives are ruined by false allegations.
No. This gives a lot of power to people who would make false allegations and then agree to settle.
Also, seems like exactly the kind of political grandstanding we should all resent.
Convicted yes, settled, no. As long as we have people who make false claims to get a payout there will be false claims.
Absolutely not that is a horrible idea, put them in power for their ideas please justify why they might do any less of a good job if they are a sexual offender. I want Matt out of office right now more than people who actually have sexually assaulted people
Do you live in KY?
This sounds good in theory, and I'm all for the resignation of anyone who has committed sexual harassment, but a blanket policy like this would create some very messed up incentives.
Legally, they’ve been settle and they haven’t been charged, I don’t know that this guy has the jurisdiction to do that.
Why would someone settle if they are completely innocent? That always seems fishy to me. Politicians trying to hush up bad press, perhaps, but still. If I was innocent I would take it to court to clear my name.
I agree, though. If they haven't been found guilty, I really don't think they would have jurisdiction.
I finding settling pretty shady, personally. I.e. Bill o Reilly
No, they're settled.
Good question about which I am ambivalent. It sounds good but I’m not sure it’s fair when no determination of guilt has been shown. Many medical malpractice cases are settled, not because of any wrongdoing, but because it would cost more to litigate than to settle.
Ridiculous. Many times when people settle, its because the allegations are false and they just don’t want to deal with a court case.