[Re-posted from the Pennsylvania Order of Liberty Blog]
In this edition of Democracy Rising News:
- Tick, Tick, Tick
- Pay and Pay and Pay
- It's Audit Time
- Our Open Supreme Court
Tick, Tick, Tick
- 682 - Days since the Pay Raise of 2005. See the ticker on our home page.
- 1 - Law enacted to improve government
- 0 - "Best-in-America" laws enacted
Pay and Pay and Pay
How many times and how much money should citizens pay to get public officials to work with each other? That's the bottom-line question about recent reports of tax dollars being used to hire lobbyists so that some public officials can gain access to other public officials.
Strangely, it has become common for local governments to hire lobbyists to talk with the state and federal governments. State agencies also hire lobbyists to talk with other state agencies. And substantial sums are spent on having conversations in places that are "conducive to doing business."
For example, WGAL-TV's Ben Simmoneau reported earlier this month on two such deals in "Money Merry-Go-Round:"
- The PA Turnpike Commission pays Bravo Group more than $26,000 per month to lobby the legislature and governor not to privatize the Turnpike.
- The PA Higher Education Assistance Agency (PHEAA) pays more than $1 million a year to eight lobbying firms, including $235,000 to a single lobbyist ($70,000 more than the governor's salary). By law, PHEAA has 16 lawmakers serving on its board of directors.
Among the expenses Simmoneau discovered are $600 for two nights at the Ritz-Carlton in Naples, FL, and a $92 bar tab for one event.
Questions:
- Don't we already pay public officials to talk with each other? Isn't that their job?
- Why should we have to pay lobbyists to get public officials to do what we're already paying them to do?
- Wouldn't it be a lot cheaper for agency staff to lobby other public officials if the head of the agency can't do it?
- Do legislative leaders pay lobbyists to lobby other members of the legislature? To do campaign! research that would be illegal if done directly with taxpayer dollars?
Isn't It Time for A Real Audit?
Perhaps this is one reason why legislative leaders have resisted for so long any meaningful audit of their use of our money. There are annual audits, but they employ the lowest standards of the auditing profession.
Yesterday, Senate President Pro Tempore Joseph Scarnati, III, R-Jefferson, was the featured speaker at the Pennsylvania Press Club. Responding to a question about whether he would support high-quality audits of leadership accounts for the past two years, Scarnati said he would support only a one-year audit, which would include only the last six months of the previous leadership of the Senate and the first six months of the current leadership. He did not say whether he would support an audit using the highest standards of the profession or continue the practice of audits us! ing the lowest standards.
The capitol is full of speculation that a thorough audit will disclose relationships and uses of taxpayer money to benefit campaign contributors or favored lobbyists or some other indiscretion such as using tax dollars to conduct campaign-related polling for incumbents.
Citizens ought to know for sure whether such fears are unfounded or are part of the culture that begs for reform. The only way to know that is with a state-of-the-art audit that goes back for a period of years.
Questions:
- Should the "Scarnati Standard" be the standard for other audits? The Auditor General routinely audits more than one year in the past when auditing school districts and executive agencies. Should that stop in favor of just the most recent year?
- Or should the more rigorous standard of accountability imposed on other government agencies finally apply to the legislature as well?
Our Open Supreme Court
Last week, on the eve of Election Day, the state Supreme Court issued a news release saying a new procedure takes effect on July 1 for "providing open, public access to its financial and related administrative records."
The news prompted DR to ask to be added to the distribution list for future news releases. But in the spirit of "providing open, public access," here's the response we got from the Court: "We are unable to accommodate individual requests for distribution of news releases. But you can find all AOPC news releases dating back to 1993 posted on our Web site." That's here .
Questions:
- Is that what they tell reporters from news agencies other than DR?
- How hard is it really for the Supreme Court to add names and addresses to its email lists?
- How often should citizens have to check the Court's web site to find out whether there's any news? Daily? Hourly?
- How often will the Court check with citizens to learn their attitudes about stealth legislation like the pay raise?
Tim Potts, Co-Founder
©Democracy Rising Pennsylvania 2001-2007. All Rights Reserved.
Liberty
Copyright © 2007, Pennsylvania Order of Liberty Blog; All Rights Reserved.
No comments:
Post a Comment