I read the Earnie Porta (supposed) "sexual harassment" story on a couple of Virginia blogs this evening, and my first reaction was that it didn't make much sense the way it was being reported. Not based on everything I'd heard about Earnie Porta, at least. Anyway, after reading the article in The Hoya, it seemed to me that the absolute worst thing Earnie MIGHT have done was to not crack down hard enough on inappropriate behavior in his office. Anyway, I was curious what the Porta folks had to say, so I asked them. According to Earnie's campaign manager, "it's been all about in the blogsphere today, complete BS. That story is from 3 years ago, it is not accurate....[Earnie] seriously wouldn?t be running if he had something to hide." In short:
Earnie Porta was never accused of personally harassing anyone.This was a disgruntled employee who sued after being fired. The University, Earnie's supervisor (a woman), and the HR representatives (again women), completely supported him.
Judge ruled no actual malice or evil motive on Earnie Porta's part. Case was ultimately settled.
Michele McQuigg has been shopping this around since last spring, talking to folks about it at the doors. There must have been something threatening in her polling to make them go negative. She must be desperate.
Statement by Earnie Porta
The Prince William County Republican Committee has recently initiated a series of personal attacks against me regarding my record at Georgetown University. There's truth and there's politics. The truth is that this was a frivolous lawsuit brought almost ten years ago by an individual that was fired. I was not then and have at no time ever been accused of personally harassing anyone. In fact, the United States District Judge trying the case, Judge James Robertson, absolved me of personal liability, ruling that "no reasonable juror could have found clear and convincing evidence of evil motive or actual malice on the part of either Mr. Porta or Georgetown." Those are the facts.Now the politics. This deliberately misleading personal attack on me makes it clear that the County Republican Committee believes my opponent, Michele McQuigg, cannot defend her record without resorting to these types of despicable campaign smear tactics. Their hope is that voters will be distracted from focusing on the real issues that are affecting our district. It is my hope that Michele McQuigg had no role in this contemptible smear campaign. While I disagree with her positions as a delegate, I have always respected her as a decent person and I would hope she would distance herself from this type of vicious personal attack. In fact, I call on her, publicly denounce this type of negative campaigning.
Three more points from the Porta campaign:
1. At no time was Earnie Porta accused of sexual harassing anyone. Instead, the plaintiff asserted that she had been subjected to a hostile work environment, initially citing that two of her coworkers, not Porta, on two separate occasions, had directed comments toward her that she found offensive. In both instances they were reprimanded immediately to the satisfaction not only of my female supervisor and the Office of Human Resources, but also to the stated satisfaction of the plaintiff. Only later, as the trial was delayed and Georgetown continued to refuse to settle, did the plaintiff escalate her claims against Georgetown, claiming generically that a "locker room" environment existed in the office.2. Porta followed Georgetown?s progressive discipline procedures prior to making the discharge decision, and Georgetown?s Human Resources Department was actively involved in, and approved, both the progressive discipline and the termination decision, as did University Counsel. The two Human Resources professionals who advised Porta are women. The termination decision was approved by his immediate supervisor, who also is a woman. It was only after receiving a negative performance appraisal, being counseled for continued poor performance, receiving a formal disciplinary warning, and being asked to resign or face dismissal, that the plaintiff made her allegations, boasting that this would insulate her from termination.
3. Georgetown University conducted a thorough internal investigation of all the allegations and found all the charges to be entirely without merit. Throughout the case Porta had the full support not only of the University, but of both the Office of Human Resources and the Office of Affirmative Action.
The bottom line here is that Earnie Porta - like all Americans -- is innocent until proven guilty. And, in this case, it looks like he's completely innocent of any wrongdoing. So why is Michele McQuigg, as Porta asks, "resorting to these types of despicable campaign smear tactics?" Fascinating.