Shocker! LA Times editorial defends Sarah Palin

*
The Los Angeles Times' editors are no friends of Sarah Palin. But though they don't see eye to eye with Gov. Palin on most issues, they have come to her defense in a Saturday editorial. The LAT editors say that a California state senator's attacks on the 2008 GOP vice presidential candidate over the contract with Cal State Stanislaus for her upcoming speech are "off base and weaken his original, stronger argument" for more transparency by private foundations that raise funds for California's state universities:

The dustup began when one such foundation, based at Cal State Stanislaus, hired the former Alaska governor to speak at a June 25 fundraiser, but refused to divulge her speaking fee to students or to Sen. Leland Yee (D- San Francisco) on the grounds that it was a private organization, not a public one. A watchdog group sued.

The assumption was that the fee might amount to $100,000, similar to Palin's fees for several other appearances. Yee used this to promote his bill, SB 330, which would require foundations for the University of California and California State University to follow the same disclosure rules as public agencies.

The legal debate plays on, but in the meantime, people who gained access to the contract report that Palin is being paid $75,000 plus expenses that include bottled water and bendable straws. That led to a new round of criticism from Yee, who said the foundation had failed in its duty to negotiate a good deal and that Palin was lining her pockets at the expense of California college students.

Hardly. If Palin had chosen to waive her fee, that of course would have been lovely, but it's not her responsibility to donate to Cal State Stanislaus; that's the job of the foundation. Love her or not, she can make $500-a-plate tickets sell. The fundraiser is expected to net more than $150,000 for the university.

The editors acknowledge that these foundations typically use state university offices, personnel and funds, and therefore they should be required disclosure certain financial information. But unlike Sen. Yee, they don't believe the foundations should have to reveal details of a contract which the contract's non-disclosure clauses protect. That, says the editors, would be an intrusion on private organizations. Yee's grandstanding on this issue hurts his cause, which is ostensibly the transparency legislation.

- JP