Opinion: Let key reform produce more
July 07, 2009
OPINION
The [Scranton] Times-Tribune Editorial
Pennsylvania's new Open Records Law is far from perfect, but it proved its worth recently when the Associated Press used it to obtain previously secret records on legislative initiative grants - infamously better known as "walking around money."
Some of what the AP found was known: The grants are an instrument by which legislative incumbents gain politically at public expense. But the AP also detailed that, even in that context, the grants unfairly are distributed based on the political power of particular lawmakers rather than on the basis of need or merit.
For example, tiny Greene County ranked first in the state last year with $82 in WAM money per county resident, and sixth in total money with $3 million, even though its population is ranked 56th of the state's 67 counties. There is only one reason for that: former House Majority Leader H. William DeWeese represents the county.
Carbon County, 40th in population, ranked second with $50 per person and seventh in overall dollars. No secret there, either. It's the home of Rep. Keith McCall, the Democratic whip last year and now the speaker of the House.
Delivering WAM checks is a bipartisan activity. According to the AP, Jefferson and Delaware counties received substantially more WAM money than counties of similar size. They are the homes, respectively, of Minority Leader Sam Smith and Rep. Mario Civera, ranking Republican on the Appropriations Committee.
WAM money is not specified in the budget. Legislative leaders meet in private, sift through WAM requests and send on their selections to administrative agencies.
The WAM process, in the various forms it has had over the decades, is dubious at best. It diminishes the independence of individual lawmakers by making them dependent upon caucus leaders for project money. It helps those caucus leaders to create in-house fiefdoms. It is utterly opaque, and it determines the use of state money by political clout rather than merit or need.
It is telling that the misuse of WAM money played a role in the conviction of former powerful Sen. Vince Fumo for abusing his office and in the arrest of former House Democratic Whip Mike Veon of Beaver County.
New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine froze a similar program when an analysis showed that disproportionate shares of the money went to the districts of legislative leaders.
At the very least, Pennsylvania's wayward system should be reformed to establish minimum standards of transparency and accountability.
The [Scranton] Times-Tribune Editorial
Pennsylvania's new Open Records Law is far from perfect, but it proved its worth recently when the Associated Press used it to obtain previously secret records on legislative initiative grants - infamously better known as "walking around money."
Some of what the AP found was known: The grants are an instrument by which legislative incumbents gain politically at public expense. But the AP also detailed that, even in that context, the grants unfairly are distributed based on the political power of particular lawmakers rather than on the basis of need or merit.
For example, tiny Greene County ranked first in the state last year with $82 in WAM money per county resident, and sixth in total money with $3 million, even though its population is ranked 56th of the state's 67 counties. There is only one reason for that: former House Majority Leader H. William DeWeese represents the county.
Carbon County, 40th in population, ranked second with $50 per person and seventh in overall dollars. No secret there, either. It's the home of Rep. Keith McCall, the Democratic whip last year and now the speaker of the House.
Delivering WAM checks is a bipartisan activity. According to the AP, Jefferson and Delaware counties received substantially more WAM money than counties of similar size. They are the homes, respectively, of Minority Leader Sam Smith and Rep. Mario Civera, ranking Republican on the Appropriations Committee.
WAM money is not specified in the budget. Legislative leaders meet in private, sift through WAM requests and send on their selections to administrative agencies.
The WAM process, in the various forms it has had over the decades, is dubious at best. It diminishes the independence of individual lawmakers by making them dependent upon caucus leaders for project money. It helps those caucus leaders to create in-house fiefdoms. It is utterly opaque, and it determines the use of state money by political clout rather than merit or need.
It is telling that the misuse of WAM money played a role in the conviction of former powerful Sen. Vince Fumo for abusing his office and in the arrest of former House Democratic Whip Mike Veon of Beaver County.
New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine froze a similar program when an analysis showed that disproportionate shares of the money went to the districts of legislative leaders.
At the very least, Pennsylvania's wayward system should be reformed to establish minimum standards of transparency and accountability.
