OPINION

The Centre-Daily Times

We support a bill before the state House of Representatives that would put state-related universities — including Penn State — more fully under the Right-To-Know law, and we oppose any amendments that would take the teeth out of this measure.

State Rep. Kerry Benninghoff, R-Bellefonte, is primary sponsor of House Bill 61, which would eliminate language in the Right-To-Know Act that exempts state-related schools from full public disclosure. State-owned universities already are subject to broad public scrutiny.

HB 61 recently passed the House State Government Committee and is before the full House.

It would affect Pitt, Temple and Lincoln University in addition to Penn State.

Benninghoff argued that there should not be two different levels of transparency, even though the so-called state-related universities get a smaller percentage of their annual revenue from state tax dollars than would a state-owned school such as Lock Haven or Clarion.

“To me, it seemed odd that any entity that receives public dollars would be exempted out,” Benninghoff said in a meeting with the CDT’s editorial board and reporters.

“The public seems to get it,” he said. “I have not received much push-back from the public.”

The Right-To-Know Law, adopted in 2008, was born out of a state government reform commission convened two years earlier.

The law makes available to the public all documents or records of transactions involving those organizations that rely on state funding.

At the time, an exemption was granted to Penn State and the other state-related schools that required that they divulge only tax documents and the salaries of top officials, limited to the 25 highest salaries overall.

Co-sponsors listed on HB 61 include Scott Conklin, D-Rush Township, and Mike Fleck, R-Huntingdon.

“We just need to get the bill out, get it on the floor and have a discussion. That should be done this session,” Benninghoff said. “I would like to see it in the Senate by the end of June.”

So would we. However, there may be a fly in this ointment.

Benninghoff said an amendment has been proposed that would limit the Right-To-Know changes to organizations receiving at least 10 percent of their funding from state tax dollars.

That would essentially make the bill pointless. Penn State gets about 9 percent of its funding from the state, and the other state-relateds are slightly lower, Benninghoff said.

A question could be raised about the constitutionality of such an amendment, as changes to bills must not alter their original intent.

“It’s silly to say you’re going to limit to groups with a certain percentage to make it relevant,” Benninghoff said. “You either are or you’re not (receiving state funding).”

We agree.

We have long pushed for greater openness for all organizations that function on or receive support from tax dollars.

Given recent events, the need for Penn State and other state-related universities to open their records to public scrutiny has never been greater.

Benninghoff’s bill is necessary.

The House should kill any amendments that would insert funding-level limits, and pass this legislation now.

Read more here: http://www.centredaily.com/2013/05/30/3634288/our-view-taxpayers-have-a-right.html#storylink=cpy