PAWaterCooler.com

State Representatives Michele Brooks and Mark Longietti respond to query . . . Senator Robbins and Representative Stevenson do not

Written by Roberta Biros

You all know how much I enjoy musical references, and today I’d like to refer to a great classic by one of my favorite artists . . . Meatloaf. Today’s musical reference is “Two Out of Three Ain’t Bad”. In our case, I have to modify the reference to be “Two Out of Four Ain’t Bad”.

What on earth am I referring to?

In general, the issue is COLAs . . . cost of living adjustments. Our state legislators typically receive an automatic cost of living adjustment on December 1st of each year . . . a gift provided by Act 51 legislation which went into effect in 1995. In December of 2008, the annual COLA was a 2.8% increase in the salaries of legislators, judges, and the Governor. Many of you may recall that last year the issue of pay raises was front page news. At that time, our legislators were quick to talk to local papers in an effort to get some free press, but only SOME of those same legislators were open to discussing the issue with Mercer County’s own political blogger (that’s me). In December of 2008, the legislators representing Mercer County all pledged to ‘give back’ their pay raises. I applauded them all for it. [you can read all of my posts about COLAs HERE]

In mid-November of 2009, it looked as though there would be another automatic pay raise on December 1st. I published a blog about the issue on December 1st and I contacted the legislators representing Mercer County about the issue [read the post HERE]. I was contacted by Representative Mark Longietti (D-7th) that morning. Rep. Longietti explained that the official word from Harrisburg was that there would be NO raise for legislators in 2009-2010. One question still remained, however . . . what did our legislators intend on doing with the 2.8% increase from last year?

Well it has been a month since I sent my original query to Senator Bob Robbins (R-50), Representative Michele Brooks (R-17), Representative Mark Longietti (D-7), and Representative Dick Stevenson (R-8). This year (just like last) I only received responses from SOME of the legislators that represent Mercer County. This year, only half of our legislators were interested in discussing the issue regarding their annual raise with an interested constituent. I suppose you could say that “two out of four ain’t bad”.

I’m a bit confused, though. With people clamoring for a constitutional convention in Pennsylvania in an effort to cut back our state legislature (read HERE and HERE and HERE and HERE) and voters (and ‘Tea Baggers’) seemingly annoyed with lazy incumbents and ‘business as usual’ in Harrisburg, you’d think that our legislators would be interested in staying in touch with interested voters. It appears, however, that if they aren’t getting press in a prestigious newspaper like The Herald (yes, that was tongue in cheek), then they simply aren’t interested in sharing their thoughts.

Let’s talk about the responses . . . or lack thereof.

WHO RESPONDED? (and how quickly):

Representative Mark Longietti (responded in 15 minutes)

I sent email messages to Senator Bob Robbins, Representative Michele Brooks, Representative Mark Longietti, and Representative Dick Stevenson. Within 15 minutes of sending my original email message, I received a phone call from Representative Mark Longietti. He was in his car on his way to Harrisburg and he decided to devote part of his drive time to a conversation with me regarding COLAs.

Representative Longietti explained first that there would be no COLA in 2009-2010, but he also explained that the 2008-2009 COLA that was received last year will still be included in his check in 2009-2010. Last year (when asked the same question), Representative Longietti explained that he would be donating the amount of his raise to a local charity. This year, Representative Longietti still intends on donating the amount of the 2008-2009 raise to a charity. This year his specific charity is again his local church where he has made a donation (with a specific earmark for the use of funds).

Representative Longietti and I also discussed the process of receiving automatic cost of living adjustments. Representative Longietti and I had a similar discussion last year at this time, and we both realize that we are on opposite ends of the issue as far as our personal opinions. Representative Longietti feels that a COLA is an earned increase and is well deserved. He feels that a cost of living increase simply makes him “whole” as it raises his pay automatically each year to adjust with the increases in the cost of living. Unfortunately, having worked in the private sector for my entire adult life, I don’t agree with the concept. I’ve worked for many different companies during many very difficult times in our economy, and there were quite a few years where I received no such raise regardless of the increase in the cost of living. Raises were based on performance (primarily), and the company’s ability to provide a raise (as a secondary consideration). I, therefore, don’t agree with anything that is assigned “automatically”. Representative Longietti and I have long agreed to disagree on this particular issue, but the conversation was interesting and entertaining. I thanked him for his time and I thanked him for taking the time to call me amidst his busy schedule.

Representative Michele Brooks (responded in one day)

On December 2nd (one day after receiving my email message), I received an email response from Representative Michele Brooks. She stated that she would be giving me a call to discuss the matter of COLAs personally as soon as time permitted. During our phone conversation, Representative Brooks pointed out that in both 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 she returned her COLA to the State Treasury as a direct one-time payment. Although she will not be receiving a raise in 2009-2010, she still intends on ‘giving back’ her raise from 2008-2009. This year, however, she intends on donating the raise to a local charity. Rather than handing the money back to the State Treasury (like last year), Representative Brooks would like to see “100% of the funds make a difference in the local community”. Although she did not name the charity specifically (and I didn’t ask), Representative Brooks was pleased that raise could help a local group directly.

THANK YOU REPRESENTATIVES MARK LONGIETTI AND MICHELE BROOKS

First, a much deserved APPLAUSE! My opinion on COLA give backs is the same as it was 12 months ago. I don’t care how the money is returned, but giving the money back to ‘the people’ is the most important issue and it should be applauded because it is COMPLETELY voluntary on the part of our legislators. In my opinion, both Representatives Longietti and Brooks EARNED their raises (unlike some of our State Legislators . . . or the Governor). It is their money and they can do with it what they wish. The fact that they are willing to give those raises back to people and organizations in Mercer County that NEED the help is honorable.

I would also like to thank Representatives Longietti and Brooks for responding to my inquiry . . . and VERY quickly I might add. It is refreshing to see that there are legislators representing Mercer County that try to make a difference (even when it isn’t front page news). While “Mercer Conservatives” may be seen as the “opinions of one blogger” in the eyes of some, this blog is representative of the voices of many conservatives and independents who support good government, transparency, and refreshing reform in Harrisburg and Mercer County. I am always willing to share “good news about good government” with my friends throughout Mercer County and across Pennsylvania.

WHO RESPONDED . . . BUT DIDN’T RESPOND?

Representative Dick Stevenson

Last year, Representative Stevenson explained to the local press that he would be returning his raise to the Pennsylvania Treasury. What happened this year?

Two days after receiving my email message, Representative Dick Stevenson sent me a response to my original email query. His email message read as follows:

Ms. Biros:
As I indicated previously, and as I have confirmed with our caucus ethics counsel after he reviewed your message, I am prohibited from responding to political emails from this taxpayer funded email account. If your would like to discuss these or any other issues, my home phone number is 724-XXX-XXXX.

Why are we suddenly so formal? Representatives Longietti and Brooks (a.k.a. Mark and Michele) simply call me “Roberta”, and that is generally my preference. “Ms. Biros” is my mother-in-laws name, and it is so ‘old fashioned’. It seems perfectly used, however, if you intended to set the tone for me to be scolded.

As many of you already know, Representative Stevenson has a history of sending these types of messages. Last year he sent a similar message by snail mail on his House of Representatives letterhead [READ THE FULL STORY HERE], and the comments received statewide criticisms. Just like last time, I was annoyed with the response. I sent an email message back to Representative Stevenson as follows:

First, all of the questions that I posed to you are regarding policies and legislative issues. The questions are specifically related to your record, your plans for representing Mercer County, and your legislative activities. If every email that is sent to you regarding policies and legislative issues is considered to be “political”; and you are, therefore, prohibited from responding, then what exactly is the purpose of your “taxpayer funded email account”?

Secondly, I provided sufficient contact information that you could have responded to my query in any other form other than email if you were interested. I invited you to respond to my message by email, phone, mail, or personal visit. Instead, you took the time ONLY to tell me that you can’t answer my question unless I call you.

While you could technically say that Representative Stevenson responded to my email message, I would clearly disagree. His only purpose of writing was to tell me to “go away and don’t come back”. He never responded to my questions regarding COLAs . . . he just said “I won’t talk to you”. I, therefore, classify Representative Stevenson’s response as a “non-response”.

WHO DID NOT RESPOND . . . PERIOD?

Senator Bob Robbins

Last year Senator Robbins took advantage of the local papers to publicize the fact that he was returning his raise. He did not respond to MY inquiry regarding COLAs until mid-January. At that time he sent a letter. Unfortunately, his written response had nothing to do with my original questions [read the full story HERE].

What is the fine Senator up to this year?

I’m sure this will shock many of my regular readers, but Senator Bob Robbins once again failed to respond to my inquiry in any way, shape, or form. Senator Robbins generally doesn’t like to talk to “the press”, so the chance of him responding to a little ol’ blogger like me is about nil. Unfortunately for our fine Senator, Mr. Robbins fails to realize that this blogger is also a VOTER with many FRIENDS (Republican, Democrat, and Independent) THAT VOTE. His repeated lack of responses (now and in the past) have been noted in my little brain . . . and in the brains of my friends. I’m a bit like an elephant . . . I never forget! (No GOP pun intended)

What does it all mean?

The good news for Mercer Countians is that we have hard-working legislators who care about the community, the taxpayers, and our best interests. Those legislators are willing to communicate with ALL OF THEIR CONSTITUENTS regardless of ‘Party’ and without the promise of ‘front page billing’. Those legislators are Representatives Michele Brooks and Mark Longietti.

The bad news for Mercer Countians is that we have an equal number of legislators who aren’t willing to communicate . . . aren’t willing to answer questions . . . and, apparently, don’t feel that the opinions of voters and taxpayers are important. Those legislators are unwilling to take the time to discuss policy unless they have a promise of publication on the front page above the fold. Those legislators are Senator Bob Robbins and Representative Dick Stevenson.

What’s Next, Roberta?

Gosh. I sure am glad you asked!

That was the story about COLAs. It was a short story, but an interesting one nonetheless. It is also a wonderful start to a New Year. It sets the stage for some interesting debate and some entertaining analyses. It is, however, just the beginning. In the next few weeks I will be publishing a number of stories regarding Mercer County’s legislators (and other elected officials). As a Mercer County EXCLUSIVE, I will be publishing the First Annual Edition of the Mercer Conservatives Index. The Mercer Conservatives Index will grade each of our elected officials on their accomplishments, service, and their ability to represent Mercer Countians. You might be surprised to see how Mercer County’s politicians stack up against each other . . . apples to apples.
As always, just my opinion.

~Mercer County Conservatives

.

Email Roberta Biros, Start the discussion or Share This...

The PA Supreme Court made a decision today defending the Commonwealth Constitution. While it is not earthshattering, it is a nice, modest case study of a public servant doing the right thing even when it did not serve his short-term political interests.

Back in 2006, Phoenixville’s Borough Council tried to eliminate the compensation of its members. It was political grandstanding, as the Borough faced a multi-million dollar budgetary shortfall, and the total annual compensation of all of them was less than twenty grand. Kendrick Buckwalter, a councilman, realized 1) That this was unconstitutional, and 2) Would establish a precedent for Council to change compensation levels in the middle of their terms, theoretically permitting them to RAISE their pay as well.

Buckwalter sued, with the help of local attorney Richard Breuer. This is despite the fact that it would make it look like Ken was suing to keep his $200/month before facing reelection during the year of the Harrisburg pay raise debacle. Thankfully, he did end up winning reelection.

But pursuing the case made his reelection more difficult. Ken did it because it was the right thing to do, not because it made his life any easier. The Supreme Court in Kendrick Buckwalter v. Borough of Phoenixville has concurred that he was right all along.

A small victory, sure. But any victory defending the Constitution is one to be applauded, especially when someone puts their political position on the line to do it.

Coverage in the local paper here.

Congratulate Ken at his blog here.

Email KarlBucus, Start the discussion or Share This...

Written by Roberta Biros

BLOG POST UPDATE–CORRECTION:

After contacting my local legislators I received a phone call from Representative Mark Longietti. Rep. Longietti first clarified that there will be NO COLA this year for legislators. The final calculation was made in mid-November, and that calculation determined that there would be NO increase this year. This information was contrary to the details that I had received in mid-November. PLEASE TAKE THIS INFORMATION INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN READING THIS BLOG POST. The issue still remains, however, regarding the pay raise that was automatically applied last year and how to handle possible pay increases in the future. [END NOTE]

Today is December 1, 2009. Today is also the day that Pennsylvania Legislators, Judges, and the Governor receive an automatic increase in their salary. Nice huh?

Background

In 1995, Pennsylvania legislators passed a law (ACT 51) that established cost of living increases (referred to as COLAs) for themselves and other state officials, including the governor and judges. On December 1st of every year since 1995, lawmakers and other officials in Pennsylvania have received the benefit of an automatic pay raise based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI).

It is my understanding that some “upstanding” legislators have voluntarily given back their pay raises back in previous years because they felt it was “the right thing to do”, but the topic of “COLA givebacks” was never so publicized as it was last year at this time. I first wrote about the issue in mid-December in 2008 in my blog post titled “Michele Brooks Gives Back Legislative Pay Raise, but Can More Be Done To Really Save Money in Harrisburg?“, I then wrote about the topic multiple times throughout the spring and summer in an effort to generate support for a repeal of the COLA legislation. All of my posts regarding COLAs can be read HERE.

Where Did Mercer County Legislators Stand on COLAs in 2008?

I corresponded with all of the Legislators that represent Mercer County numerous times last year. Here is where they stood on the issues of Legislative COLAs.

Senator Bob Robbins (R-50)

Did he give his 2008-2009 COLA back to the State?

Yes.

Did he support the repeal of the COLAs?

I received a letter from Senator Robbins last January. In it he explained the issues that he would be concentrating on in 2009, but the repeal of legislative COLAs was not on the list. It should be pointed out that he never states that he is AGAINST the COLAs (or against their repeal) . . . he simply never stated that he would support their repeal.

Representative Mark Longietti (D-7)

Did he give his 2008-2009 COLA back to the State?

No. Instead, he had donated his raise for that period to the Joshua’s Haven City Mission in Sharon.

Did he support the repeal of the COLAs?

No. I spoke to Rep. Longietti regarding the issue of COLAs and COLA repeal by phone and we communicated by email. As per Mr. Longietti’s email response from January of 2008,
“I respect your view regarding the COLA, but I do not think that repealing it is good public policy. ”

Mr. Longietti further stated,

“If the COLA is repealed, you will eventually see bills introduced to provide for a large pay increase. That is the wrong approach. Further, you will subject the whole process to deal making.”

Mr. Longietti went on to state numerous examples where cost of living increases are implemented and he closed with,

“I work hard as a legislator, and I know that I earn my keep, and an increase to keep pace with inflation is as justified for this position as it is for other workers and for Social Security recipients. So, we may part company on this issue, but we respect each other’s point of view.”

[I will refer to Representative Longietti’s comments again later in this post]

Rep. Dick Stevenson (R-8)

Did he give his 2008-2009 COLA back to the State?

Yes.

Did he support the repeal of the COLAs?

Yes.

Although I never discussed the issue with Rep. Stevenson personally, I followed his record on the issue. Representative Stevenson signed on to House Bill 62 in January of 2009. House Bill 62 (read the full text of the Bill HERE) was a bill that was intended to offer a long term plan for the handling of legislative COLAs. Unfortunately, it wasn’t a very good bill. I wrote a blog outlining the details of all COLA repeal Bills HERE (if you are interested).

Rep. Michele Brooks (R-17)

Did she give her 2008-2009 COLA back to the State?

Yes.

Did she support the repeal of the COLAs?

Yes.

I discussed the issues of COLAs and COLA repeal with Rep. Brooks on numerous occasions both by phone and by email. Rep. Brooks signed on to House Bill 633 in February of 2008. House Bill 633 (read the full text of the Bill HERE) rewrote the handling of legislator raises. I wrote about the details of HB 633 (and others) at length HERE (if you are interested).

Were Legislative COLAs Repealed in 2009?

Heck No!

It is true that there were numerous Bills offered by Legislators in an attempt to repeal COLAs, but NONE of those Bills ever made it out of committee. This is a VERY COMMON PROBLEM with Bills authored in the PA legislature. In my blog posted titled “So Much Legislation, So Little Time”, I explained that roughly 95% of all Bills that are presented in Harrisburg “die” in Committee. COLA Repeal Bills all fell into the 95% group in 2009. That hasn’t prevented legislators from continuing to try. As recently as mid-November, new legislation was being authored in Harrisburg. On November 16, Rep. Marguerite Quinn (R-Bucks) introduced House Bill 2097 which attempted to suspend the December 1 pay raises. In her official press release (read HERE), Rep. Quinn states:

“We have an unemployment rate approaching 9 percent in Pennsylvania, and many people who still have jobs have taken pay cuts,” said Quinn. “It is common sense to suspend the COLA for legislators during these tough economic times. How can we accept a pay increase during a year when we have cut so much from the budget and so many others must do with less or with nothing at all?”

Even more interesting, though, Rep. Quinn makes a great point when she states:

“If Pennsylvania’s elderly citizens are expected to go without a Social Security COLA this year, then lawmakers should be expected to do the same”

The statement regarding Social Security COLAs is an important one. According to the Social Security Administration website (read the full press release HERE):

With consumer prices down over the past year, monthly Social Security and supplemental Security Income benefits for more than 57 million Americans will not automatically increase in 2010. This will be the first year without an automatic Cost-of-Living Adjustment (COLA) since they went into effect in 1975.

Why is this so important? Well, individuals who have defended the continued use of COLAs for legislators have specifically pointed out that the raises are “deserved” just like the COLAs that are applied to Social Security. Remember . . . According to Representative Mark Longietti,

“I work hard as a legislator, and I know that I earn my keep, and an increase to keep pace with inflation is as justified for this position as it is for other workers and for Social Security recipients.”

As the economy gets worse, the term “automatic raises” or “raises” (in general) are going to become obsolete. Legislators may feel that their raises are still “well deserved”, but the truth is that many of their constituents are lucky to just have a job or steady income at this point. Businesses are cutting back, individuals are cutting back, and it’s time for our legislators to feel the pain too.

Where Do We Go From Here?

So here we are again . . . back at the beginning. As of today Legislators, the Governor, and Judges will receive an automatic pay raise. It seemed inappropriate last year, but this year “inappropriate” just doesn’t seem harsh enough. Maybe the term WRONG or even CRIMINAL would better describe the situation?

Last year I took an enormous amount of time and effort to contact those legislators that represent Mercer County in an effort to urge all of them to not only give back their COLAs, but to urge them to support legislation that would end the COLAs once and for all. I will begin my efforts again. This morning I sent email messages to Senator Bob Robbins, Representative Dick Stevenson, Representative Mark Longietti, and Representative Michele Brooks. In it I’ve asked if each of them will again “give back” their annual pay raise. I have also asked that all of them support efforts to repeal COLAs through legislative action. My full messages is outlined below:

Senator Bob Robbins
Representative Mark Longietti
Representative Michele Brooks
Representative Dick Stevenson

Good Morning,

Today is December 1st. Today, cost of living adjustments (COLAs) were applied to your annual salaries automatically. Last year I spent a great amount of time and effort in following up with each of you regarding your “give back” of last year’s raises as well as urging each of you to support a repeal of Act 51 to prevent the continuation of the COLAs again this year. Some of you voluntarily gave your raises back to the state through a direct payment to the Treasury, and others donated your raises to a
local charity. I thanked each of you directly for those actions. I also asked each of you to support a repeal of Act 51 through numerous legislative efforts. Some of you signed on to legislation that attempted to repeal or alter Act 51, others chose to concentrate on other projects, and yet others felt that Act 51 was fine “as is” because annual pay raises are deserved “as it is for other workers and for Social Security recipients”.

I urge each of you to review the issue of legislative COLAs once again. Are
automatic pay raises for legislators, judges, and the governor fair when so many Pennsylvanians are taking pay cuts, struggling to make ends meet, or even worse . . . out of work? Are pay increases for “public servants” really fair when the majority of those you “serve” (including senior citizens) are forced to do without? Is it really right for lawmakers to put themselves above the people that they were elected to serve?

I am sure that you are all aware that each and every one of you is up for re-election in 2010. I am sure that you also understand that everything that you do this year will be under a microscope. Some of you may see this as a problem or an inconvenience, but I would hope that some of you see this as an opportunity to shine and to showcase your commitment to the people of the area. Show your constituents in Mercer County that you are committed to “serving” rather than “being served”. Put aside partisan politics and make this an issue of good government and concern for fiscal responsibility.

My Questions For You:

I would like to know your personal plan for doing away with “automatic pay raises for some while others are forced to live with less”.

Do you intend on refusing your COLA this year (as well as the carry-over raise from last year)?

Are you willing to work to see to it that this is not an issue again next year?

What are you willing to do . . . specifically?

I, personally, cannot and will not support any candidate that puts themselves above the people that they serve, and I sincerely believe that most voters would agree. So where exactly do you stand?

Roberta Biros
Taxpayer in Mercer County
Taxpayer in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
Concerned Citizen

I urge each and every one of you to write your legislators, call your legislators, email your legislators and ask them to give back their December 1 pay raise and ask them to support the permanent repeal of future automatic pay raises.

If we yell loud enough and long enough, maybe someone will finally stop and listen.

BLOG POST UPDATE–FEEDBACK:

December 1, 2009, 10:30am:

The first legislator to contact me was Representative Mark Longietti (D-7). As I stated earlier, Reprsentative Longietti clarified that there is NO COLA this year for legislators. Rep. Longietti and I then discussed the issue of COLAs at great length. First, Representative Longietti has already decided that he will donate his LAST YEAR’s pay raise (which will be received automatically again this year) to his local church (with a specific earmark regarding its usage). In regards to a repeal or rework of Act 51 and COLAs in general, Representative Longietti and I still disagree on how raises should be applied to lawmakers. We, again, agree to disagree. I thank Representative Longietti for his time and quick response.

As always, just my opinion.

Roberta Biros, Mercer County Conservatives

Email Roberta Biros, Start the discussion or Share This...

Friends,

I am pleased to inform you that Philadelphia has been selected to host a monthly Center-Right Coalition meeting, following the hugely-successful model of Grover Norquist, President of Americans for Tax Reform (ATR). We will be one of the few non-state capital cities to have such a gathering.

The kick-off meeting, which I will be hosting, will be Thursday, November 12 at the Union League in Philadelphia, with Mr. Norquist in attendance. Light refreshments will be served at 7:00 AM, with the program going from 7:30 to 9:00. The Union League is located at 140 S. Broad Street, just two blocks south of City Hall.

In Grover’s words, the objective is “to get everybody who is center-right to tell each other what they are doing, to share technology and tactics, and to tell stories” regarding issues facing Pennsylvania and the nation.

One key function, according to ATR, is to facilitate collaborative activities of coalition members, many of whom may have not previously known one another, and foster the potential for mutual cooperation.

The rules are simple: Anyone who so desires may speak for three minutes on current initiatives, answer questions, and pass the microphone to the next speaker.

The only prohibition is whining. It is a positive meeting, one that will unify southeastern Pennsylvania.

Attendees will typically include influential political, business, policy and grassroots leaders.

If anyone who would like several minutes on the agenda, please let me know.

You are encouraged to bring any literature for distribution.

I hope to see you next Thursday.

For future reference, the monthly meetings will be held on the FIRST THURSDAY of each month at the Union League, with the same time format as above.

Feel free to invite colleagues and associates. All meetings are off the record.

Steadfast,

Christopher Freind
“Freindly Fire”
Audaces fortuna iuvat
610-659-0098
christopherfreind@hotmail.com (E before I in Freind)
CF@FreindlyFireZone.com

Email Chris Freind, Start the discussion or Share This...

Written by Roberta Biros

With the budget deadline of June 30th only two short weeks away, the negotiations should start getting very interesting, and I’m hopeful that ALL options will eventually make their way to the table. Perhaps this is the time for forward-thinking legislators to start pulling out the stops . . . bring out every cost saving measure now while they have a chance of receiving public attention. Use the budget crisis (and panic) to bring attention to legislation that has the capability of cutting costs in other ways. It is going to happen on both sides of the aisle, so EVERYONE should exploit this opportunity.

This morning I heard that the issue of expanding casino gambling in Pennsylvania into table games has been thrown out as a possible income generator (in lieu of tax increases). Another idea that is being tossed around nationally is the legalization of marijuana as a possible new tax revenue for States. These are just two of MANY ideas that will float around Harrisburg over the coming weeks. Perhaps fiscal conservatives need to take advantage of the dire situation to come up with a few solutions of their own.

One particular issue comes to mind for me . . . the elimination of COLAs for lawmakers. I know . . . I’ve been beating this ‘dead horse’ for months, but maybe now is the time that ‘this horse’ gets up and starts running again. There are a number of House Bills floating around that outline the elimination of cost of living adjustments (COLAs), and I’ve written extensively about all of them HERE. House Bill 633 (my personal favorite), has been sitting in the House RULES Committee for months. This might be the perfect time to resurrect a cost cutting measure like the limitation of future raises for lawmakers in an effort to trim a little more spending from that bloated budget.

This might be the perfect time to pull out any issue that cuts costs . . . no matter how much. Why? Because EVERY LITTLE BIT WILL HELP. Even minor cost cuts add up when they are combined together. I’ve heard numerous suggestions of ways that Legislators could cut costs within their own offices, and maybe now is a time to make all of those ideas public too. I always hear constant complaints that individual cost cutting ideas only account for some “minimal” amount of money, but if you implement enough of them you can make a significant impact across the board. Besides, it would be great to see some good will gestures coming from Harrisburg too.

I’ve said it before, and it doesn’t cost me anything to repeat it again . . . NOTHING SHOULD BE OFF THE TABLE during this budget negotiation. EVERYTHING should be up for discussion! Democrats and Republicans are going to use the budget to negotiate all of their pet projects, so I see no reason why fiscal conservatives shouldn’t jump on the bandwagon in an effort to push through some of their “pet projects” too.

.

Email Roberta Biros, Start the discussion or Share This...

Written by Roberta Biros

Sometimes topics for this blog just end up on my desk like a gift from the “Blog Post Fairy”. I had one such gift arrive on my desk today.

I received an automated email message from Representative Curt Schroder titled “Schroder Introduces Legislative Cost Reduction Package”. As a fiscal conservative, I follow the actions of fellow fiscal conservatives throughout the State Legislature. I subscribe to email updates from Representative Schroder (among others), and I’ve found some of his proposals to be very interesting and bold. Today’s email was no different. It is definitely “bold”, but not in a good way.

In his message, Representative Schroder announces his ideas to “cut pay and perks, make Legislature more cost-effective”. Specifically, he introduces House Bill 1056 [READ THE BILL HERE]. As per Representative Schroder’s email,

“It is important that the General Assembly set the example and lead the way in cost reduction,” said Schroder. “I am proposing a package of bills that will cut the cost of state government, starting with the Legislature. House Bill 1056 would essentially return Pennsylvania to a part-time legislature, saving taxpayers $12.8 million. This would be achieved through a reduction in salaries of House and Senate members from more than $78,000 a year to $30,000, and trimming the amount of additional compensation afforded those in leadership positions. I am also proposing to eliminate state-paid health benefits for lawmakers at an additional savings of $4.4 million annually.”

As my loyal readers know, I’m an advocate for the repeal of the Cost of Living Adjustments (COLAs) for the State Legislature and Judges. I’ve reviewed each and every COLA repeal Bill that has been proposed so far, and I’m only in full support of ONE bill (House Bill 633) [READ THE BILL HERE, read my COMMENTS HERE]. I look at each bill with an open mind. I did the same with Rep. Schroder’s House Bill 1056. Upon review, I find the Bill RIDICULOUS and a waste of the paper that it is written on.

In the introduction of any Bill, it is the responsibility of the authors to make the Bill sensible and PASSABLE. The basis of House Bill 1056 is to CUT the Legislative salaries from $78,000 a year to $30,000. I understand that the job as a State Legislator should be considered a public service, but should it also be a “volunteer position”? These people (at least most of them) give up their personal lives and dedicate themselves to their elected positions for two-years (House) or four-years (Senate) at a clip. They should be compensated for their time, and that reasonable compensation helps to insure that good people are willing to serve. Instead, Representative Schroder suggests that our State Legislators should go out and get secondary “part-time jobs” to fill in the gap financially and to provide them and their families with Health Care coverage.

The Bill is a silly waste of time, and it has absolutely no chance of ever passing. It is, therefore, CLEARLY not worth the paper that it is written on. Moreover, I’m disappointed to see that Representative Brad Roae (R-Crawford) signed onto the Bill too (INTRODUCED BY SCHRODER, CREIGHTON, HARRIS, MUSTIO, ROAE, ROCK AND VULAKOVICH, MARCH 24, 2009). Representative Roae had the right idea on House Bill 633, but by signing onto House Bill 1024, he dilutes the importance of those Bills that have already been submitted.

In my opinion, House Bill 1024 is as useless as 99% of the House Resolutions that clog up the system in our State Legislature. House Bill 1024 stands in the same category as naming April 29th as “Walk at Lunch Day” in Pennsylvania [no, I didn't make it up . . . READ HOUSE RESOLUTION 223 for proof].

In closing, if a Legislator is a true fiscal conservative, they should make every dime count. The time, effort, and paper devoted to House Bill 1024 does not pass that test. Can you be a little more selective?

I make every attempt to be honest in my commentary. I give praise when I think it has been rightfully earned, but I don’t jump on the bandwagon of any idea that “calls itself” fiscally conservative. I call it as I see it . . . and I give this one two thumbs down.

As always, just my opinion.
~Roberta Biros, Mercer County Conservatives

.

Email Roberta Biros, Start the discussion or Share This...

Written by Roberta Biros

On April 1, I wrote a blog post titled “Opening the Lines of Communication and Pushing for Good Legislation”. In it I explained that I had authored and sent an email message to 34 State Legislators regarding the on-going need to repeal the Cost of Living Increases and my support for House Bill 633. The message was sent to the 6 Legislators that introduced House Bill 633, and the 28 members of the “House Rules” Committee that are currently “sitting on” said Bill.

I received my first response from Representative Michele Brooks (R-Mercer). Rep. Brooks is one of the Legislators that introduced House Bill 633. She responded via email within an hour of sending my message on Wednesday, April 1, 2009. Rep. Brooks shared details regarding the reason that House Bill 633 was sent to Rules Committee rather than State Government Committee like the other three House Bills. The details are interesting and I’ll share them later in this story.

I received my second response from Representative Brad Roae (R-Crawford). Rep. Roae is the main author of House Bill 633). He responded via email on Wednesday, April 8, 2009. Rep. Roae was kind enough to provide me with an update on the status of HB633 (which I’ll outline below), and he also provided some additional details regarding Legislative contacts that might be of assistance as well as recent press releases regarding the issue.

I’d like to thank Representatives Michele Brooks and Brad Roae for their attention to this matter. Of the 34 Legislators that were contacted, Reps. Brooks and Roae were the only ones that took the time to respond. You would think that answering questions from concerned citizens would be high on the list of priorities of ALL Legislators, but that is simply not the case. To be fair, the State Legislature is currently on Easter/Passover break until April 20th. It is refreshing, however, to see that “some Legislators” are still hard at work during this “break”. I’ve been in my office EVERY day this month . . . how about you?

According to my review of details provided by Representative Brooks, the House has a really odd way of handling Bills that are introduced. According to the “Office of the Speaker”, there are 25 committees in the House and there is easily some overlap among them. It was determined that the other COLA Bills that were introduced fell under the auspices of Rules, State Government, Appropriations and Finance. House Bill 633 deals solely with the legislature and was referred to Rules. While all of the Bills “could have” gone to Appropriations or Finance, “the Speaker chose instead Rules and State Government Committees, respectively.”

So even through all four of the House Bills were regarding the same issue (repeal of COLAs), the Speaker just “decided” to send them in different directions. It is as though they play a game of “Eeny, meeny, miny, moe” when divvying out Bills to Committees. You’d think it would be more common-sense oriented than that . . . but it is not. It is all just “luck of the draw”, and House Bill 633 drew a short straw.

According to information provided by Representative Roae, House Bill 633 is still sitting in Rules Committee. He has promised to continue to push the issue of COLA repeal and he provided an additional list of contacts that might need a “tickle” to help move things along.

Mercer County Conservatives isn’t alone on this story, though. This week, the story was revived in the Pennsylvania press. There were two stories published on April 7, 2009. One was in the Erie Times News [READ HERE] and the second was published in the Patriot News [READ HERE].

The story from the Erie Times [READ HERE] talks about those local Legislators who “have” and “have not” returned their pay raise since December of 2008, and it also mentions Rep. Roae’s House Bill 633. The article does a half-hearted* job (* – I was going to a use a different phrase here, but I thought it might be inappropirate) of describing HB633, but at least it does give a little attention to the issue. The story from the Patriot News [READ HERE] states that THREE bills have been introduced regarding the repeal of COLAs. Again, I’m glad to see that these Bills are getting some attention in the press, but the fact is that there are actually a total of 5 House and Senate Bills under consideration at present. If anyone would care to read the complete facts, please refer to my blog post titled “Legislator Pay Raise Update” for an outline of all 5 bills along with summaries and links to the text of each Bill.

While these recent stories lack sufficient detail for “this reader”, it is good to know that the concern over Legislative pay raises and Cost of Living Adjustments (COLAs) has not completely disappeared. The most encouraging information that I read in the referenced news stories was a quote from Senate Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi (R-Delaware) regarding the possibility of the COLA repeal becoming a part of the 2009-2010 budget negotiations. Senator Pileggi stated,

“If it’s something that we end up doing as part of the budget . . . it might end up being more logical to make it for the next fiscal year”.

I, personally, would LOVE to see some fiscal conservatives stand up during budget negotiations and TRY to trim expenses wherever and whenever possible. We all know that a budget will eventually pass . . . we might as well do everything that can be done to trim it down as far as possible before that happens.

I will continue to do what I can do, and I encourage you all to do the same. As I pointed out in a previous blog post [READ HERE], proposed Legislation has a “slim to none” chance of every being passed . . . a dismal 5% chance based on my quick calculations. It takes extra effort from concerned citizens and concerned lawmakers (when they aren’t on “break”) in order for any Legislation to even be discussed . . . let alone passed. There is no time for laziness or complacency as an activist or as a public servant.

As always, just my opinion.
~Roberta Biros, Mercer County Conservatives

HUMOROUS SIDE NOTE:

In the article in the Patriot News [READ HERE] it is again confirmed that Legislators representing Mercer County have returned their pay raises. Representative Mark Longietti is not mentioned because his pay raise was returned in the form of a contribution to a local charity. Rep. Michele Brooks, Rep. Dick Stevenson, and Sen. Bob Robbins are listed as having returned their pay raises to the State Treasury. Senator Robbins is specifically listed as “Sen. Robert Robbins, D-Mercer” . . . which I found to be rather funny. It seems that even the Patriot News has heard that Senator Robbins is closely tied to local Democrats . . . so much so that they have decided to represent him as a member of that Party. Allow me to be the first to officially welcome to the Democrat Party, Senator Robbins!

.

Email Roberta Biros, Start the discussion or Share This...

Email Roberta Biros, Start the discussion or Share This...

Written by Roberta Biros

It has been a little while since I last wrote about the status of the Repeal of COLAs. I was able to find and print out all of the proposed House and Senate Bills regarding this issue today, and I’m now prepared to provide my commentary on each.

As of today, March, 9, 2009, there are five proposed Bills on record in the Pennsylvania State General Assembly amending the act of September 30, 1983 (P.L.160, No.39). I’ve printed and reviewed all five Bills. I am providing my own brief summary of each below. I’m also including a list of all Legislators involved in the introduction of each bill along with their District Number and party affiliation. No party bias here!

House Bill No. 62
[READ HERE]
Date: JANUARY 26, 2009

Introduced by PERRY (R-92), BARRAR (R-160), BOYD (R-43), CREIGHTON (R-37), CUTLER (R-100), EVERETT (R-84), GEIST (R-79), GOODMAN (D-123), HARRIS (R-82), HELM (R-104), KAUFFMAN (R-89), KORTZ (D-38), MARSICO (R-105), MELIO (D-144), ROAE (R-6), ROCK (R-90), SAYLOR (R-94), SCAVELLO (R-176), STEVENSON (R-8) AND VULAKOVICH (R-30)

Roberta’s Summary:

This bill establishes a commission to study the salaries of members of the General Assembly, as well as all officials of the executive and judicial branches of State government. The commission members would be selected from registered eligible voters from each legislative district . . . would hold a four-year term with a limit of two terms . . . would be required to attend meetings . . . and would not be permitted to engage in any “ex parte communication” with any public officials.

Roberta’s Comments:

Wow. What a piece of garbage this bill is. First, the idea of creating a “commission” becomes ridiculous and blown out of proportion. Additionally, we are going to “assign” people to the commission? They aren’t going to run for the office or even want the office . . . we are just going to pick them from the list of eligible voters? We are then going to assign these people (who weren’t interested) to a four-year term and limit them to two terms (even though our legislators aren’t limited to two terms)? We then set requirements and attendance rules to a responsibility that is completely voluntary and in which the selected parties were not even interested? Finally, we state that they aren’t allowed to engage in “ex parte communication” with any public officials? No, that is not too much to ask! You must be kidding me!

I label this one as FUBAR.

House Bill No. 113
[READ HERE]
Date: JANUARY 30, 2009

Introduced by PERRY (R-92), CUTLER (R-100), GROVE (R-196), KAUFFMAN (R-89), MILLER (R-93), MOUL (R-91), MUSTIO (R-44), SCAVELLO (R-176), SWANGER (R-102), VULAKOVICH (R-30) AND WATSON (R-144)

Roberta’s Summary:

This bill simply states that no cost of living adjustment will occur if “revenues collected by the Commonwealth as of October 1 of each year meet or exceed projections for the first quarter of the fiscal year according to the final revenue estimates signed by the Governor”.

Roberta’s Comments:

Here is another one that I don’t like. I understand that the purpose of the Bill is to make certain that raises are not applied if the “money isn’t there”, but is that the best they could do? If the money is there “take it” . . . if it isn’t, “wait until next year”?

This bill was poorly thought out and poorly presented. I don’t like it.

Senate Bill No. 244
[READ HERE]
Date: MARCH 5, 2009

Introduced by PILEGGI (R-9)

Roberta’s Summary:

This bill simply suspends the annual cost of living adjustment immediately. The act expires, however, on November 30, 2009.

Roberta’s Comments:

Simple and to the point. It suspends the automatic cost of living adjustments immediately. Unfortunately, having the suspension expire on November 30, 2009 sort of eliminates the whole idea, doesn’t it? So we’d need to go through this again next year? Yuck.

House Bill No. 228
[READ HERE]
Date: FEBRUARY 3, 2009

Introduced by McILVAINE SMITH (D-156), CARROLL (D-118), CONKLIN (D-77), CREIGHTON (R-37), FLECK (R-81), KORTZ (D-38), MURT (R-152), MUSTIO (R-44), QUINN (R-143), ROAE (R-6), REESE (R-59), SHAPIRO (D-153), K. SMITH (D-112), SWANGER (R-102) AND YUDICHAK (D-119)

Roberta’s Summary:

This bill basically ends the cost of living adjustments as of November 30, 2009.

Roberta’s Comments:

Again, Simple and to the point. It does what I had originally wanted done . . . it eliminates the automatic cost of living adjustments. I like it . . . but why wait until November of 2009? If this is our only choice . . . I’d take it and I wouldn’t complain.

House Bill No. 633
[READ HERE]
Date: February 26, 2009

Introduced by ROAE (R-6), BROOKS (R-17), CALTAGIRONE (D-127), MURT (R-152), ROCK (R-90) AND THOMAS (D-181)

Roberta’s Summary:

First, this bill lowers the “additional compensation” received by lawmakers and officers of the House and Senate. The additional compensation received by officers like Majority Leader, Minority Leader, Majority Caucus Chairman, Minority Caucus Chairman, etc. are nearly cut in half.

Additionally, the Bill states that salaries “may” increase, but “only by act of General Assembly enacted prior to the date on which nomination petitions are permitted by law to be circulated for election to the office of member of the General Assembly and provided that such act is not effective until December of the next legislative session”. This basically means that salaries are set at the time an individual runs for office.

As a final safeguard, a “Salary frozen during term” stipulation was added that states that “no member of the General Assembly shall receive an increase in salary during the term for which the member is elected”.

Roberta’s Comments:

I like it. It is more than I imagined, and I appreciate the thought that was put into it. The idea of cutting the “additional compensation” in half is wonderful “icing on this cake”. The concept of assigning a salary at the time someone runs for office (with no raises during their term) is something that should be adopted for all elected positions nationwide. It takes the issue of “raises” out of the game, and allows legislators to worry about legislating and serving their constituents (rather than serving themselves).

At the point raises are discussed, they salary adjustments would be for the next term . . . if they get elected! Brilliant.

A Review of the Mercer County Prospective:

I’ve received complaints that I only focus on Mercer County legislators (three of which are Republicans, with only one Democrat). I suppose some people think that I unfairly discuss Republicans 3/4 of the time because they hold 3/4 of the positions. Well, this is MY blog, and it was originally designed to have a Mercer County prospective . . . so . . . too bad! Please realize, however, that I generally pick on the Republicans 3/4 of the time too. Fair?

To review the Mercer County angle . . .

Sen. Bob Robbins’ (R) name is not mentioned . . . no shock. As per the letter received from Mr. Robbins in January, he had no intention of putting time or effort into such a Bill.

Rep. Mark Longietti is not mentioned . . . again, no shock. Mr. Longietti clearly stated in an email conversation with this author that he did not support a repeal of the COLAs. Mr. Longietti kept his promise. Mr. Longietti and I agree to disagree.

Rep. Dick Stevenson is mentioned in House Bill No. 62 above. Unfortunately, Mr. Stevenson chose to back the crappiest bill of the five that were introduced.

Rep. Michele Brooks is mentioned in House Bill No. 633. Ms. Brooks stated in early January that she would support the “right” COLA Repeal legislation, and she kept her promise.

In Closing . . .

I now have a steady readership of both Democrat and Republican friends. I challenge you all to review the Bills above and compare them. If you agree with my opinions, let me know. If you disagree, feel free to contact me with specifics of where you think I’ve “gone wrong”.

As always, just my opinion.

~Roberta Biros, Mercer County Conservatives

Email Roberta Biros, Start the discussion or Share This...

Written by Roberta Biros

I was asked by email last night if there was any additional information about who HAS and who HAS NOT returned their Cost of Living Adjustments to the State Treasury. Specifically, the reader asked if Senator Bob Robbins or Representative Michele Brooks had sent back their pay raises yet.

I’ve written about the Pay Raise “Give Back” as well as my support for a Act 51 COLA Repeal [READ HERE]. During the last update, it was publicized by the Sharon Herald that Rep. Stevenson had given his raise back and Rep. Longietti had donated his raise to a local Charity. At that time, Bob Robbins was still “waiting” to decide what to do, and Michele Brooks had not had an opportunity to send her money back.

According to WGAL.com (Channel 8 in the Susquehanna Valley), the following is a list Pennsylvania lawmakers and executive branch employees who have made arrangements to return their 2009 cost of living raise to the state treasury as of Feb. 2. It was noted that those lawmakers who are giving their raises back through a donation to charity are NOT included on the list.

CLICK HERE to read the story on WGAL.com

CLICK HERE to view the VIDEO on WGAL.com

State Senators

Baker, Lisa
Browne, Patrick
Brubaker, Mike
Corman, Jake
Costa, Jay
Eichelberger, John
Farnese, Lawrence Jr.
Folmer, Michael
Greenleaf, Stewart
Logan, Sean
O’Pake, Michael
Orie, Jane Clare
Pileggi, Dominic
Pippy, John
Robbins, Robert
Scarnati, Joseph
Smucker, Lloyd
Stout, Barry J
Vance, Patricia
Ward, Kim
Waugh, Michael
White, John
Wozniak, John

State Representatives

Adolph, William
Argall, David
Baker, Matthew
Barbin, Bryan
Boback, Karen
Boyd, Scott
Brennan, Joseph
Buxton, Ronald
Carroll, Michael B.
Casoria, James E.
Causer, Martin
Civera, Mario
Daley, Peter
Denlinger, Gordon
Depasquale, Eugene
Eachus, Todd
Evans, John
Fabrizio, Florindo
Fairchild, Russell
Freeman, Robert
Gabler, Matthew
George, Camille
Gerber, Michael
Gibbons, Jaret
Gillespie, Keith
Gingrich, Maureen
Goodman, Neal
Grell, Glen
Hanna, Michael
Harhai, Ted
Harkins, Patrick
Harper, Kate
Helm, Susan
Hutchinson, Scott
Josephs, Babette
Killion, Thomas
Kortz, William C. III
Kula, Deborah
Manderino, Kathy
Mann, Jennifer
Markosek, Joseph
Matzie, Robert
Murphy, Kevin
Myers, John
Pallone, John
Pashinski, Ed
Peifer, Michael
Petrarca, Joseph
Petri, Scott
Pyle, Jeffrey
Rapp, Kathy
Reed, David
Reese, Michael
Ross, Lewis
Santarsiero, Steve
Scavello, Mario
Schroder, Curtis
Shapiro, Joshua
Siptroth, John
Smith, Kenneth
Smith, Matthew
Smith, Samuel
Stevenson, Richard
Turzai, Michael
Vulakovich, Rudolph
Walko, Don
Watson, Katherine
White, Jesse

Executive Branch
Ed Rendell
Estelle Richman
Steven Kaplan
Robert Lam
Pedro Cortes
James Creedon
Bernard Labuskes
Thomas Renwand
Gerald Zahorchak
Richard Kriebel
Luke Brubaker
Barbara Grumbine
Jack Wagner
Stephen Stetler
Patrick Stapleton
Thomas Goldsmith
Robert Marcus
James Carley
Kimellen Pizzingrilli
Allen Biehler
Thomas Michlovic
Steven Irvin
Jeffery Beard
Michael DiBerardinis
Frank Pawlowski

For the record, Senator Bob Robbins is officially on this list as he has obviously decided to go ahead and make arrangements to give back the raise. Representative Dick Stevenson is on the list, which mirrors the information that had been previously published.

Also for the record, Representative Mark Longietti is NOT on the list as his “give back” was in the form of a donation (which would not be included on the list).

Lastly, and also for the record, Representative Michele Brooks is NOT on the list. I had a brief discussion with Rep. Brooks last week and I mentioned the raise “give back”. She stated that she intended to send it back, but still had not done so. I mentioned my published (and criticized) opinion regarding delaying a “giving back” until the Repeal of COLAs issue had run full-circle. Rep. Brooks did not agree nor did she disagree with my statement. I, therefore, have no choice but to let her actions stand on their own merit.

Because this is an issue of interest to my readers, I will continue to follow up to see what happens. I’ll keep you all posted.

As always, just my opinion.~Roberta Biros, Mercer County Conservatives

Email Roberta Biros, Start the discussion or Share This...

Email Roberta Biros, Start the discussion or Share This...

Written by Roberta Biros

Over the weekend, I published my opinions regarding the delayed “give back” of pay raises by local Lawmakers [READ HERE]. Specifically, I addressed the publicized holdup by Senator Bob Robbins’ and Representative Michele Brooks’ in giving their 2.8% pay raises back to the State Treasury.

I was publicly criticized [READ MORE HERE] for being too “soft” on Representative Brooks regarding her apparent delay when I suggested that the Legislator might be considering the idea of repealing the COLAs before bothering to give the raise back to the state.

Well, folks, it seems that my idea wasn’t so far fetched after all.

I read an article from the Lancaster Intelligencer Journal today [READ THE FULL ARTICLE HERE] that shows that other Pennsylvania lawmakers have the same idea. According to the article:

“three Republican state lawmakers — state Reps. John Bear, Bryan Cutler and Dave Hickernell — said Tuesday that they would either donate their pay hikes to charity or return them to the Treasury. But they’re waiting for pending legislation that might tinker with or repeal the mechanism by which legislators receive annual pay raises.”

Huh? Funny.

The article went on to say:

Bear, Cutler and Hickernell have chosen a wait-and-see approach before parting with their pay raise. One reason is several bills that, if passed, would repeal the COLA — possibly retroactive to Dec. 1. Thus, lawmakers who had already donated their pay hikes could stand to lose more money.

“I’m going to give the money away; I’m not going to keep it,” Bear said. “I’m just waiting to see the legislation out there.”

Now, it is true that this was not the official statement made by Representative Michele Brooks or her office (and I do not intend to imply that it is), so I cannot confirm that she agrees with my suggestion. I can say, however, that it is a sensible approach for any lawmaker that takes the Repeal of ACT 51 COLAs seriously . . . and Rep. Brooks has stated that she does.

In the case of Senator Bob Robbins, Mr. Robbins has given me no information that shows that he has ANY interest in the repeal of the raises, so I cannot (and will not) give him the benefit of the doubt on this issue.

I know it’s wrong . . . I know I shouldn’t . . . but I’m going to quote Judge Judy again . . .

“Of course I’m right; I’m always right. I’m like a truth machine.”

As always, just my opinion.
~Roberta Biros, Mercer County Conservatives

Email Roberta Biros, Start the discussion or Share This...

ADDENDUM NOTICE REGARDING THIS POST:

The post below will remain published with its original text, but MY OPINIONS have been highlighted in RED to make it clear that they are not intended to be the statements or thoughts of any other parties. It is not my intention to put words into anyones mouth, so hopefully, this attempt to distinguish opinion from fact will be helpful.

As my loyal readers know, I have been following the issue of Pay Raises and Cost-of-Living Adjustments (COLAs) very closely since early December. I saw the Herald article and was interested in the content. I had not originally intended to comment. However, upon review of the associated thread in the Herald Forum, I found that I was called out on the issue (by name no less). I responded briefly in the forum (due to lack of time and energy), but I’d like to provide a full opinion here . . . in my forum.

First, let us review the Herald’s findings.

The Herald asked each Legislator if he/she had “officially” returned their pay raise (as promised in their public statements in December). Here are the “short” results:

Rep. Mark Longietti (D-7): He had donated his raise for that period to the Joshua’s Haven City Mission in Sharon.

Rep. Dick Stevenson (R-8): He had submitted the funds for his raise back to the State Treasury on Thursday, 01.22.09.

Rep. Michele Brooks (R-17): She had not yet returned her raise. The reason given by the Herald? “Mrs. Brooks said she has been taking care of personal matters since the death of her mother.”

Sen. Bob Robbins (R-50): He had not yet returned his raise. The reason given by the Herald? “Robbins said he wanted to wait for state leaders to meet and ensure everyone was on the same page.

In the cases of Rep. Longietti and Rep. Stevenson, they have managed to get “off the hook” in the eyes of the voting public. By refunding their raises, they have held to their promises. I have nothing more to say in these cases other than “thank you, Sirs”.

Now let me discuss my opinions regarding Rep. Brooks and Sen. Robbins. In the Herald Forum, I was “invited” to respond being sited as the “Republican Apologist”. I did respond, briefly. However, if I had offered my full opinion I would have taken a written beating for it. So, I saved the good stuff for this blog.

First, in order to have an educated opinion on the action (or inaction) of Rep. Brooks and Sen. Robbins, you must have some additional information. Luckily, I have that information. As many of you already know, after the “give back” was announced, I pressed these Legislators for a move to Repeal the Cost-of-Living Adjustments (COLAs) entirely [READ MORE HERE]. The extra information that must be taken into account at this time are the responses of Rep. Brooks and Sen. Robbins regarding the Repeal of COLAs. Allow me to summarize those now:

Rep. Michele Brooks:

Ms. Brooks responded to this office by phone. Ms. Brooks supports the repeal of the COLAs, and has reviewed multiple variations of proposals suggesting COLA repeal as well as other cost saving initiatives. Ms. Brooks has is being very careful to review the full details of any proposal that is presented to make sure that everything in the package is a benefit for Mercer County and the State of Pennsylvania. She is cautious regarding throwing support too quickly before all of the details are examined. Her motives appear sincere.

Sen. Bob Robbins:

Sen. Robbins responded to this office by letter [VIEW HERE]. While Senator Robbins agreed to return his 2.8% pay raise, he has made NO COMMENT regarding any plans to support a Repeal of the COLAs.

Based on this additional data, my opinions regarding the latest Sharon Herald story and the actions of Rep. Brooks and Sen. Robbins are as follows:

Rep. Michele Brooks:

I am aware that Ms. Brooks has been busy with private matters (on a personal note, I condemn the Herald for making those private matters an issue in a public statement). However, the additional data regarding her commitment to a possible Repeal of the COLAs is important. If “I” were in Ms. Brooks’ shoes, I wouldn’t be sending my raise in just yet either. Instead, I’d be focusing my efforts on pushing through a Repeal of the COLAs that is retroactive to November 30, 2008. If such legislation is passed, the “give back” of the raises will be a moot point. If “I” were in the same situation, I would hold off on sending any money to the State Treasury until the issue has run its course.

That said, I will undoubtedly receive criticism from Herald Forum contributors for being a “Republican Apologist” again. However, I offer my opinions based on a “what would I do” scenario, and I just report my truthful responses. In this case, I have no problem with Rep. Brooks “holding off” on returning her pay raise until the Repeal of COLAs has run full circle.

Sen. Bob Robbins:

Senator Robbins response to the Herald is more “politically motivated”. His statement that he “wanted to wait for state leaders to meet and ensure everyone was on the same page” was construed by Herald Forum contributors as “political side-stepping”. It was actually described as “If the other guys return their raise I’ll return mine, but if they keep theirs then I’m keeping mine too!”. Unfortunately, I tend to agree.

Senator Robbins is experiencing some serious problems with his public image as of late. His responses often come off as being in complete disregard of public opinion. My recent blog post titled “Senator Bob Robbins Pays for Virgin Islands Trip Because He Was Afraid of Getting Caught with His Hands in the Till” illustrates this point rather directly.

Some might say that my criticisms of Senator Robbins are unfair, but I’m simply restating his own words. Mr. Robbins is doing the damage to himself . . .
I’m just reporting it.

Once again, the Sharon Herald has published a piece that tells only half of the story. If they would put forth a little extra effort and provide all of the details, readers could make an educated opinion of their own. I suppose that will remain the responsibility of this forum.

As always, just my opinion.

~Roberta Biros, Mercer County Conservatives

Email Roberta Biros, Start the discussion or Share This...

We watched over 7 hours of football on Sunday. We enjoyed seeing Larry Fitzgerald (former Pitt wide receiver) help the Arizona Cardinals clinch the NFC Championship. We also yelled and screamed as the Pittsburgh “Stillers” put the smack down on the Baltimore Ravens (which I like to refer to as the Baltimore Browns or the Dirty Birds).

Yesterday was almost as great. With the MLK Holiday (and no Postal service) we had an easy work day. After work we headed out to a local High School Basketball game for 3 hours of excitement. We returned home to watch another 2 hours featuring (17 – 1) Pitt Basketball vs. the Orangemen of Syracuse that we had taped on the DVR from ESPN a few hours earlier.

Everything was fine and we were in our glory . . . until the ESPN announcer had to ruin it by mixing politics with basketball!

For a little personal interest story, Jay Bilas and Bill Raferty were interviewing the President of the infamous “Oakland Zoo”. For those of you that aren’t familiar with Pitt Panthers Basketball, the Oakland Zoo is a group of students that transform the Peterson Event Center into a hum of chanting and excitement for each and every Pitt Basketball game in a sea of gold t-shirts. The interviewee was talking about the Oakland Zoo organization. He mentioned that he had been with the Zoo for 8 years since its inception in 2001. Bill Raferty had to respond with “You’ve served 8 years, the equivalent of 2 terms . . . It’s a shame that they were both George Bush’s”.

Where did that come from? I was stunned . . . The interviewee was speechless . . . The secondary announcer, Jay Bilas, even had to say “why did you need to go political”?

What is wrong with these people? Has it become so completely acceptable to bash Republicans that they are now even doing it on ESPN? Is “Obama Mania” so out of control that even a safehaven like ESPN has been invaded and/or taken over by the liberal media? ESPN should be ashamed.

I realize that the bashing of Republicans has ALWAYS been a past-time of the “liberal media”. I realize that I even ruffled some feathers last week when I made some strong statements regarding an apparent lack of response from of our State Legislators Bob Robbins, Michele Brooks, Mark Longietti, and Dick Stevenson regarding the COLA Repeal issue. Some thought that, perhaps, I was unjustly attacking the few conservatives that are left with unreasonable criticisms. Republicans are generally accustomed to getting constant criticisms from “the liberal media”, but they didn’t expect it from “their conservative corner”.

It is true that I felt bad (and still feel bad) about “shooting an arrow” unfairly at some, but there are others that were well deserving of the shots . . . and to them I do not apologize. For those that were openly “disappointed” in me, I have apologized and I can only hope to regain their respect in the future. To the others, they need to regain MY respect.

As a serious conservative, I feel very comfortable criticizing liberalism, but I also feel that it is my responsibility to keep conservatives on their toes (and keep them honest if necessary). Unlike the ESPN comment referenced above, my comments have purpose and facts to back them up. Blatant bashing for the sake of blatant bashing is tiring and it just isn’t my style. Instead, I feel that it is my duty to attempt to be honest and to be truthful in the information that I share with my readers. I never intend to be unfair in any way. . . instead, it is my goal to be completely honest.

Email Roberta Biros, Start the discussion or Share This...

Written by Roberta Biros

I’ve been hammering at the issue of Repealing the Act 51 COLAs for a while now, and it doesn’t look like the need for my activism will be ending any time soon. I published a blog post this week titled “Sen. Bob Robbins, Rep. Michele Brooks, Rep. Mark Longietti, Rep. Dick Stevenson, and Rep. Curt Schroder Respond (or NOT) to REPEAL of COLAs“. In summary, the post noted which legislators had responded to the issue, and which had not. At that time, there was only ONE Legislator that had not responded to our multiple attempts at contact. Eventually, ALL of the legislators representing Mercer County chimed in with responses, and I’d like to review the status of each of those responses at the end of this post.

But first . . . I’d like to address the response that I’ve received from the lone holdout on this issue, PA State Senator Bob Robbins. Today I received a letter from the Harrisburg Office of Senator Robbins date January 15, 2009. The content of the letter is presented here in text as well as through an image linked HERE in an effort to be fair and complete. Please feel free to review either or both versions. They should match exactly (unless I made a error in my transcription). The image version has been edited from its original version to compress the entire content onto one readable page (but the content has remained unchanged). The letter read as follows:

Thank you for your correspondence, which was received in my office January 5, stating your support for legislators who are not accepting their 2.8 percent salary increase.

-Increasing Penalties for Violating the Sunshine Law
-Procurement Reform for Consulting Contracts
-Prohibiting Bonuses for Commonwealth Employees
-Increasing Accountability Related to State Vehicle Use
-Creating an Online Budge Database
-Eliminating Sine Die Sessions
-Posting Government Salary Information Online
-Succession of the Governor and Lieutenant Governor
-The Taxpayer-Funded Advertising Transparency Act
-Improving Access to, and the Information in, State Plane Logs

First, I’d like to thank Senator Robbins for responding to my query. His letter was quite informative, and it will give me all sorts of issues to review further when time permits. Upon reading the letter, you are given the impression that Senator Robbins provided a very complete presentation. Unfortunately, I’m not much for “impressions”. Instead, I prefer to read the details very closely. If you take the time to read the letter, you will find (as I did) that the REPEAL of the COLAs is not mentioned. Based on the careful nature with which the letter was written, I believe that it is safe to assume that this exclusion was not an accident. Mr. Robbins clearly stated that he announced that he would not accept the annual cost of living adjustment, but he never states that he supports (or plans to support) a repeal of the COLA process for this year or future years.

That said, I’d like to summarize the responses from ALL of the Legislators that represent Mercer County:

Representative Dick Stevenson

Dick Stevenson responded by email and simply stated that he is open to discussing the issue with me. Unfortunately, I have not had the opportunity to respond to Mr. Stevenson’s invitation, but I will soon. Based on Mr. Stevenson’s record, I would guess that our future discussion will be a positive one.

Representative Michele Brooks

Michele Brooks responded with a personal phone call. She explained that she supports the repeal of the COLAs, and she has reviewed multiple variations of proposals suggesting COLA repeal as well as other cost saving initiatives. Ms. Brooks went on to explain that she is being very careful to review the full details of any proposal that is presented to make sure that everything in the package is a benefit for Mercer County and the State of Pennsylvania. She is cautious regarding throwing support too quickly before all of the details are examined (in much the same way that I carefully examined Mr. Robbins’ letter above before embracing it’s content, Ms. Brooks is looking at the “small print” which demonstrates a genuine interest in this issue and its importance to the overall fiscal well-being of the State of Pennsylvania).

Representative Mark Longietti

Mark Longietti responded by email and stated that he does not support the REPEAL of the COLAs. In general, Mr. Longietti feels that he deserves the money that he earns, and a cost of living increase is only “fair”. It is apparent that Mr. Longietti will not be interested in voting FOR any repeal that is proposed. It makes me curious, however, as to why Mr. Longietti agreed to “give back” his 2.8% increase this year if he thinks he “deserves” it? You can all read into that as you wish.

Senator Bob Robbins

Bob Robbins responded by mail as discussed in detail above. After reading the content of his letter carefully, I’m forced to assume that Mr. Robbins does not have any plans to assist in the REPEAL of the COLAs. Although it should be pointed out that he never states that he is AGAINST the COLAs . . . he simply doesn’t state that he would support their repeal.

Based on these summaries, my work is far from done. I will continue to do research regarding the “dirty details” and I will attempt to keep the lines of communication open with our Legislators. I sincerely hope that they are willing to do the same.

I thank them all for their time and attention to this matter.

As always, just my opinion.
~Roberta Biros, Mercer County Conservatives

Email Roberta Biros, Start the discussion or Share This...

Written by Roberta Biros

UPDATED

It seems that the suggestion of repealing automatic cost-of-living increases for Legislators (and Judges) is not very popular in Mercer County Pennsylvania. You could even go so far as to say that the idea is completely UNWELCOME.

As many of you already know, I applauded when Rep. Michele Brooks, Rep. Mark Longietti, Rep. Dick Stevenson, and Sen. Bob Robbins made the bold decision to “give back” their 2.8% cost of living increases in December of 2008 (read the details HERE). I proclaimed (through the on-line forum of the local newspaper) my support for this move, and I promised to send “thank you notes” to each of the legislators involved. I did exactly as I had promised.

Unfortunately, the state has NO system in place to “hold back” the raises. Instead, Legislators and Judges have the burden of writing a check back to the state each month in an effort to refund the automatic pay increase. In response to this, some Legislators have decided to donate their raises to charity (rather than give the money back to the state), and others have chosen to do nothing and simply continue to take the pay raise.

This issue has now begun a new set of debates as to the legitimacy of the “give back” if it is not given back directly to the state. There are criticisms of those Legislators that are choosing to give their raises to charity instead. My personal opinion is that anyone willing to “not keep” the raise is a “good egg”. I have no problem with how individuals choose to “give back” their raises. What I do have a problem with are the COLAs in general. If the Legislators are “serious” about their “give back”, they should want to make it official and permanent.

Last week I wrote a post regarding the response of Judges to “giving back” their raises. You can read the details HERE. This is just another example of NOTHING getting done regarding this issue. Everyone seems to have an excuse. The judges can’t change anything, so it is up to the Legislature to confront this issue face on. Unfortunately, it is beginning to look as though the legislators from Mercer County ONLY agreed to “give back” their raises in an effort to get some “good press”. It seems that when it comes to making the change permanent, the legislators are hitting the brakes . . . hard.

I support the Legislature putting through a COMPLETE REPEAL of the Act 51 COLAs. In this way, every Legislator would be given the opportunity to show how SERIOUS they are about the issue. By FORCING all Legislators to provide an UP or DOWN VOTE on the REPEAL of the COLAs, we would clearly see where everyone stands on the issue. If the COLAs were successfully repealed, NO further cost-of-living increases would occur, and the Legislature would be forced to request a raise when it was deemed appropriate.

I contacted the Legislators that represent Mercer County. I sent a letters to the Harrisburg offices of Senator Bob Robbins and Representative Mark Longietti. I also sent a personal email to the House Office of Michele Brooks. Unfortunately, I received no response from ANY of them to my polite request. Hmmm . . . ignored by my State Legislators? I wondered if it was “the subject matter”, “me”, or “the Legislators” themselves that were the problem. To find out, I went one step further.

Over the weekend I posted an email to Rep. Curt Schroeder of Chester County asking for his support on this issue. One of my readers noted that Mr. Schroder supported the idea of repealing the COLAs and he might be of assistance to me in my “quest”. I wrote a short and courteous email to Rep. Schroder and crossed my fingers. On the “first business day” after receiving my email message, Mr. Schroeder responded to me by email.

Good News . . . It seems that Rep. Curt Schroder has plans to put together a comprehensive cost reduction package that will include an elimination of the COLAs. He is still working on the package, but we will keep a hopeful eye on this issue and Mr. Schroder.

What else did I find out? First, I was relieved to hear that SOMEONE in Harrisburg is taking this issue seriously (so it wasn’t the “subject matter”). Second, it was nice to know that someone was responsive to my non-intrusive and polite request for information (so it wasn’t “me”). Third, I was extremely disappointed that my requests were ignored by ALL of the Mercer County Legislators, and I was forced to reach across the state to Chester County to find a Conservative Legislator (it seems that it was “the Legislators” after all).

In disgust, I sent an electronic communication to Sen. Bob Robbins, Rep. Michele Brooks, Rep. Dick Stevenson and Rep. Mark Longietti. I told them how disappointed I was that the Legislators representing my County had no interest in so much as a polite response to a local voter.

Within minutes I received a response. Was it from one of our so-called conservative legislators? No. It was from Democrat Mark Longietti. The fact that he took the time to respond provides me with a new respect for the Representative of the 7th District. Unfortunately, Mr. Longietti DOES NOT agree with the issue of repealing the cost-of-living increases.

As per Mr. Longietti’s lengthy response,

“I respect your view regarding the COLA, but I do not think that repealing it is good public policy. “

Mr. Longietti further states,

“If the COLA is repealed, you will eventually see bills introduced to provide for a large pay increase. That is the wrong approach. Further, you will subject the whole process to deal making. “

Mr. Longietti goes on to state numerous examples where cost of living increases are implemented and he closed with,

“I work hard as a legislator, and I know that I earn my keep, and an increase to keep pace with inflation is as justified for this position as it is for other workers and for Social Security recipients. So, we may part company on this issue, but we respect each other’s point of view.”

It is clear by his response that Mr. Longietti has a “union mentality” and feels that a cost-of-living increase is an “entitlement”. Unfortunately, what Mr. Longietti does not understand is that while a cost-of-living increase seems “fair” for some, not all of us are so lucky to receive one. Those of us that don’t live in the “entitlement society” often-times don’t get a raise. In my 28 years of working for a living, I’ve NEVER had a job that enjoyed the benefit of a automatic cost-of-living increase. Every pay raise that I ever received was based on performance and the financial capabilities of the company that I worked for. As a small business owner for the past 10 years, I can’t count on automatic increases in my pay. Instead, in 2008, I experienced a 14% drop in income. THAT IS A DECREASE IN MY PAY BY 14% IN ONE YEAR.

Apparently, there is NO cost-of-living increase for me! Do I not “work hard”? Did I not “earn my keep”? Unfortunately, if the money isn’t there, I don’t get a raise. In the case of State Legislators and Judges, shouldn’t the same be true? If the money isn’t there, they should also do without. Instead, Mr. Longietti feels that it is fair for the tax payers of the state to give him more money “because he deserves it”.

As Mr. Longietti stated, “we may part company on the issue, but we respect each other’s point of view”. Regardless of our disagreement on the issue, I applaud Mr. Longietti for contacting me by email and taking a stand . . . any stand . . . on this issue. That is more than I can say for our Republican Legislators from Mercer County.

This morning, I also received a response from Dick Stevenson (Republican from the 8th District). Rep. Stevenson was not included in my original round of letters and email messages, so he was not “guilty” of ignoring me initially. He did respond to the first communication that he received from me. Bravo! He responded with a polite email message that stated that he would be willing to discuss the issue with me personally anytime. I will take him up on his offer.

UPDATE: For the record, I received a phone call from Michele Brooks this afternoon regarding this issue. Representative Brooks apologized for the delay in getting back to me. She whole-heartedly supports the repeal of the cost-of-living increases. She is looking very closely at the various proposals that are coming forward to determine which one provides the greatest protections and benefits for the tax payer.

As for Bob Robbins? He is still silent on this issue. I cannot even express my disappointment.

As always, just my opinion.
~Roberta Biros, Mercer County Conservatives

Email Roberta Biros, Start the discussion or Share This...

Michele Brooks, Mark Longietti, Bob Robbins, and Dick Stevenson . . . This is for you!

Do you see the irony here?

It seems that the ONLY solution to this problem is for the Legislature to repeal the Act 51 COLAs (retroactive to November 30, 2008). Unfortunately, this is where we have seemed to run into a Brick Wall.

In mid-December, I sent thank you cards to the four State Legislators representing Mercer County (Michele Brooks, Mark Longietti, Dick Stevenson, and Bob Robbins) for “giving back” their pay raises. Then, at the end of the month I sent letters to the Harrisburg offices of the Legislators for my individual Township (Mark Longietti and Bob Robbins). I also sent an email message to the office of Michele Brooks (although Ms. Brooks represents a District other than my own, I felt that she might be willing to assist me in the pursuit of a repeal in this case).

 I find it interesting what motivates our Legislators. In my blog I attempt to discuss political issues in a polite and constructive manner. Many of the bloggers in my area choose to approach our Legislators with a critical and oftentimes foul manner. If I had written nasty and ugly remarks with disgusting side comments, my phone would be ringing off the hook (and my email in-basket would be overloaded with requests for retractions). However, my remarks receive no complaints . . . no praise . . . no response of interest . . . EVENTHOUGH I know that our Legislators have read every single word of what I’ve written.

 Sort of makes you wonder? Are they more interested in protecting their images than representing the people of this area.

 As always, just my opinion.

~Roberta Biros, Mercer County Conservatives

Email Roberta Biros, Start the discussion or Share This...

Its like a case of political herpes. Experts say that voters have forgotten about it, while legislators try to act like it never happened. But, much like the rash that just won’t go away, the infamous midnight payraise of 2005, continues to rear its ugly head at the most inopportune time for some Pennsylvania politicians.

Earlier today, some of the state’s most fervent political watchdogs issued a stern warning to Rep. David Argall (R-124), who is now seeking the Republican nomination for the 29th Senate district vacancy: PAY BACK THE TAXPAYER!

In a press release first published by The Clarke Report, Eric Epstein, Gene Stilp, Russ Diamond, Tim Potts, and Dennis Baylor, stated “it would be political suicide to seek an open state senate when you owe a very large sum of money to the taxpayers for unvouchered expenses and excess and tax-free per diem money.”

This message is not anything new for Argall, who has been ducking and dodging responsibility for his role in passing the legislation for the past two and a half years. Unlike some of his colleagues like former Senate President Pro Tempore Bob Jubelirer, former Senate majority leader Chip Brightbill, or fellow Schuylkill County lawmaker Bob Allen, who all lost their jobs with 21 other incumbents in 2006, Argall has somehow avoided any culpability among his constituency, despite the fact that he was a member of the committee that drafted the bill. Although. it may have finally cost him a few weeks ago among his peers in the House as fellow leaders unceremoniously booted him from the leadership by refusing to place him on the endorsed slate for the upcoming term.

Will Argall be able to dodge yet another bullet by becoming the new senator for the 29th district or will he finally be forced to the doctor’s office to get some Valtrex?

The full press release can be found, here.

Email Hank Clarke, Start the discussion or Share This...

Proof of the effects of one-party rule again:

Ronald Donatucci, the register of wills, was the first city elected official yesterday to take a cue from Mayor Nutter and cut his $112,233 annual salary by 5 percent.
It’s unclear how many other elected officials will follow suit. In interviews, most said they had not yet made that decision or settled on a precise amount.

“I think it would be very demoralizing if I need to cut employees or something and I don’t give anything up,” said Donatucci. “I think the mayor set the right example.”

Nutter announced an array of grim budget cuts Thursday, from pool and library closures to a freeze in tax relief.

Nutter volunteered to give back 10 percent of his $186,044 salary – as did Chief of Staff Clay Armbrister, who is paid $198,500 – and demanded that his cabinet take at least 5 percent cuts. He also required all exempt employees to take five days of unpaid leave this year and next.

City Council President Anna C. Verna, through a spokesman, said Council would trim its budget 10 percent without cutting salaries. Donatucci said his total cuts were expected to be 6 or 7 percent.

“The City Council agreed to take a 10 percent cut, and we can do it without impacting elected officials’ salaries,” Verna said.

It’s not clear whether Council members will follow Councilman W. Wilson Goode Jr., who cut his staff salaries 5 percent. He has not yet decided about his paycheck.

Well,..it IS clear now,…

As Philadelphia City Council debates Mayor Nutter’s proposed budget cuts, some council members are taking a look at their own books to find places to save money.

Council President Anna Verna says she will cut 10 percent of council’s $17.8 million budget beginning January 1. She will also take a 5 percent pay cut off her $140,864 salary.

“I think it’s a symbolic move,” Verna said. “I think this crisis is very real.”

So far, two other council members have formally notified Verna’s office they will also take 5 percent pay cuts. Councilmen James Kenney and Frank DiCicco will give up $5,611 of their $112,233 salaries.

There are 17 representatives on City Council. Each member makes at least $112,233 and has access to a city-funded car. The Council President’s office says only four council members currently do not use city cars: Kenney, DiCicco, Wilson Goode, Jr. and Bill Green.

It was Councilman DiCicco who first raised questions about city council’s cost-saving measures Wednesday. He criticized Councilman Frank Rizzo for using a city car while asking all of his colleagues to cut $12,000 out of their individual budgets. DiCicco wanted to pool that money to pay for a study of Mayor Nutter’s plan to close seven city fire companies.

DiCicco withdrew his request Thursday.

“There are some council members who don’t have $12,000,” DiCicco said. “They’ve exhausted – and they’re entitled to exhaust – all their employee salary allotment.”

As for taking a pay cut, DiCicco and Verna said that decision is up to each council member.

“I don’t know what my other colleagues’ expenses are at home. We all have different needs,” DiCicco said.

“I think we should do what we can to help in this time,” Councilwoman Donna Miller told CBS 3.

But Miller says she does not know if she will take a cut.

Councilman Wilson Goode, Jr. is not taking a pay cut but is cutting the salaries of his staff 5 percent.

Goode declined an on-camera comment.

I snarkily add:

City Hall rumors abound that Goode’s aide, Latrice Walker, commented by drawing another grammatically-incorrect remark about how much of a skinflint her boss is.

Email Ed Angiolillo, Start the discussion or Share This...

Legislator to Rendell: “End Insider Contracts”

Gov’s Relationship With Ballard Spahr Leads to Questions

By: Chris Freind

Last Friday, The Bulletin published a series of articles and a box chart detailing the intimate relationship between Governor Rendell and his former law firm, Ballard Spahr. The investigative report shed light on numerous conflicts of interest in the awarding of state contracts, leading a state legislator to remark that Gov. Rendell should join efforts to “end insider no-bid contracts.”

Brett Mandel, Executive Director of Philadelphia Forward, stated, “Even if these types of business arrangements are legal, I’m not sure I want my legislator and my governor to be engaged in them. You never want to
have a quid pro quo arrangement in business and politics, or even the
appearance of one.” He added, “Openness and transparency are essential for good government. A little ‘sunshine’ never hurts, especially when it involves taxpayer dollars.” Philadelphia Forward is an organization whose mission is to embrace issues of ethics, governmental integrity, and budgeting, in order to raise the level of public debate surrounding how public priorities are set.

The Bulletin’s repeated calls to the Governor’s office and the state’s Office of General Counsel were not returned. Additionally, several Democratic legislators declined to respond.

State House Reform Efforts

State Representative Doug Reichley, R-134, Lehigh County, has spearheaded the effort to reform how state contracts are awarded. He introduced a bill as part of a reform package aimed at restoring integrity and ethics in how state business is conducted. “The [Gov. Rendell/Ballard Spahr] articles describe a pattern of behavior, although legal, which is disturbing in its depiction of a mindset which looks to loot the public coffers. This is exactly the kind of stuff which is so regularly criticized when it happens at the federal level in Washington. The ethical accountability in Harrisburg and Philadelphia should not stoop any lower than that,” Rep. Reichley stated.

The legislator reiterated his relentlessness in pursuing this type of reform. “Although the legislation introduced by Reps. Turzai, Godshall, Grell, and myself did not move forward in this session, we will be re-introducing the bills again when we reconvene in January.” Rep. Reichley pointed out Gov. Rendell’s inconsistencies on fiscal issues. “The governor is publicizing the need for budget restraints, but seems to have a blind spot on how to reform the abuses within his own spending practices. He needs to get behind our efforts to end these insider no-bid contracts, and bring greater transparency to state government, which would save taxpayer dollars at the same time,” he said.

Rep. Reichley’s bill would require contracts to the executive, legislative, and judicial branches, and the legislative caucuses, with an initial value over $100,000, be subject to the requirements of the procurement code.

The package of bills addressed various aspects of contract reform. One would remove “legal services” from the definition of contracts which can be awarded under the emergency provisions of the Procurement Code.
Another would require extensions to current state contracts be posted on the Department of General Service website before submission to the Attorney General for review. Another proposal would ban contracts from being awarded to anyone who donated to political campaigns within one year of the date a contract is posted for public bidding. The bills are pending in Democratically-controlled committees.

The Representatives said that changes in the Procurement Code are needed “to help restore the integrity of state government against contract abuses.”

Action in the Senate

Members of the senate are planning to make reforming of state contracts a key part of the next legislative session. Since Republicans will control the chamber by a sizable majority (30-20), they are optimistic that such reform legislation will be given serious consideration by Senate leaders and committee chairs.

State Sen. Dominic Pileggi, R-9, Delaware/Chester counties, who serves as Majority Leader, addressed the issue by stating, “As former U.S. Supreme Court justice Louis Brandeis said almost a century ago, sunlight is the best disinfectant. The best way to ensure that government officials are acting in the best interest of those they represent is to make it easy for the public to review their actions.”

Sen. Pileggi sponsored the new Open Records Law, Act 3 of 2008, which includes a provision to post every state contract worth $5,000 or more online at the state Treasurer’s web site. “To my knowledge, Pennsylvania is the only state in the nation that makes so many state contracts so easy to review.”

(The contract database is available at http://contracts.patreasury.org)

“Our new Open Records Law, which dramatically strengthened Pennsylvania’s 50-year-old previous law, also makes it easier to obtain and review other official documents and records from both state and local government agencies,” the Senator added.

Earlier this year, the Senate passed Senate Bill 903 which would prohibit state agencies from contracting with outside individuals or firms for consulting work, unless the contract is reviewed by the Attorney General for legality and conflict of interest, or is opened to a public competitive bidding process. “That is a common-sense reform, and it is unfortunate that the House did not take it up,” Sen. Pileggi said.

“The package of bills introduced by House Republicans, described in one of your stories, also includes significant reforms which would improve the current process. Anyone interested in these kinds of changes should contact their own Senator and Representative to let them know that government reform remains an important issue,” said the Majority Leader.
Sen. John Eichelberger, R-30, expressed concern that the extent of no-bid contracts authorized during the Rendell Administrations is still unknown. “I don’t have any idea about the number of no-bid contracts or their dollar amounts under Rendell or how it compares to any Republican administrations. The Turnpike is another rumored hot-bed for these (types) of deals,” he stated. Ballard Spahr has received over $2 million in no-bid contracts for the Turnpike privatization plan, and performed nearly $800,000 worth of work with no contract at all.

The Department of General Services has stated that nearly all records prior to 2003 concerning no-bid contracts were “lost.” Consequently, there is no manner in which to compare the frequency, number and dollar amounts of contracts doled out under the Rendell Administration with those from prior Administrations. Governor Rendell was sworn in as Governor in 2003.

“I had an amendment prepared in the summer of 2007 to add to the transportation bill, now Act 44, that would require competitive bidding. The Senate leadership did not want it to run, and I did not get it to the floor,” Sen. Eichelberger said. “There was a commitment at that time to develop legislation to force competitive bidding across the board in state government, but it never got done. This is an indication of what the chances are for getting something passed,” he lamented.

When asked how the public views these types of business arrangements, specifically no-bid contracts, the Senator replied, “This business model is what people expect from a corrupt government, and, unfortunately they have become accustomed to it.” He added, “We couldn’t even get a bill passed this year banning bonuses to state employees. The Democrats in the House blocked it despite the continuous headline stories about “Bonusgate”. There appears to be no collective shame on the part of the Pennsylvania General Assembly.” The “Bonusgate” scandal refers to taxpayer-funded bonuses allegedly paid to legislative staffers who performed political campaign work while on state time. To date, twelve have been indicted by Attorney General Tom Corbett, and two are cooperating with prosecutors.

Asked how the average voter can make his opinion known on this issue, Sen. Eichelberger replied, “Interested people sitting at home today should write, email and telephone the Governor, as well as their House and Senate members, and let them know that they are not going to tolerate any unethical behavior on the part of people who’s duty it is to uphold the public trust. People with any specific knowledge of wrongdoing should contact the Attorney General and the State Ethics Commission.”

Chris Freind can be reached at CF@TheBulletin.us

Email Chris Freind, Start the discussion or Share This...