Transparency vs. Corruption: An Investigation in Search of a Rat

Senator Bob Robbins, Representative Michele Brooks, Representative Mark Longietti, and Representative Dick Stevenson hide and duck from important questions

Written by Roberta Biros

In a recent radio interview it was noted that I have a “big thing” with transparency, and that was no exaggeration. Those that know me also know that I am obsessed with the issue of transparency in government and public service . . . so much so that I am now running my second campaign on that very issue [read HERE].

Yes, this post is long (I know that fellow blogger Fred Mullner groaned when he saw it), but it includes details from research that has been going on for well over a month.

Notes from the Pennsylvania Leadership Conference

Last weekend I attended the annual Pennsylvania Leadership Conference in Harrisburg. The meeting brings together deep thinking conservatives to discuss topics of concern. Each year there are top issues of conversation like the budget and fiscal responsibility and there is always a great deal of conversation about politics and upcoming elections. This year there was one panel discussion that was worth the entire cost of admission . . . Beyond Corruption: Transparency, Accountability & Reform.

The panel was moderated by Chris Freind, Columnist. I scheduled my day around this particular presentation and Mr. Freind's opening comments did not disappoint. First, Mr. Freind referred to some politicians as the “business as usual crowd” and he made reference to their desire to “hide and duck” tough and probing questions. However, I was most intrigued when Mr. Freind referenced the recent BonusGate scandals involving Vion (and now Orie) [read more HERE]. Mr. Freind pointed out that some political insiders have stated that some of the investigations are “politically motivated”. Mr. Freind stated “The question is not whether it is politically driven . . . the question is ‘is it true’”. The most amazing part about Mr. Friend's comment is that I spoke the words aloud with him. These are the exact same things that I’ve been saying for quite some time and it was refreshing to hear a panel discussion begin on that note.

The presentation continued on for about an hour and included presentations by Joe Sterns (Citizens Alliance of PA), Curt Schroder (State Representative), Lyndsay O’Herrick (Citizen Activist), and Doug Reichley (State Representative). The details and discussions were too numerous to mention, but the entire conversation was invigorating. I left prepared to push harder for transparency because I knew that I was not alone in my quest.

I left with another specific quote that is worth repeating. This one was from Lyndsay O’Herrick who stated “Corruption is the conscious act of sustaining the status quo at the expense of future generations.” Gosh . . . that’s all really good stuff!

Corruption vs. Transparency in Mercer County: My Investigation

As most of you know, I’ve spent a great deal of time over the past year and a half asking questions of our legislators. Sometimes they answer, and sometimes they don’t. My recent line of questioning of our state lawmakers has left my phone and email empty, but I refuse to let this sleeping dog lie . . . it just isn’t my style. So, allow me to explain what I’ve been up to for the past several weeks as follows:

On Sunday, March 21, 2010, I sent an email message to the taxpayer funded email accounts of our four state legislators (Robbins, Brooks, Longietti, and Stevenson). The email message was titled “"harder" questions regarding the use of your staff”. The email message was a follow up to the earlier message regarding my concerns (and the concerns of others) regarding inappropriate use of legislative staff and resources for campaign activities. In the message I reiterated a number of questions that had been published in The Herald. The questions were very specific and I requested answers in writing by March 31st as a matter of transparency. ALL FOUR FAILED TO RESPOND.

On Monday, April 5, 2010, I sent a letter to the editor of The Herald regarding their lack of response. That letter was published on April 9th.

On Tuesday, April 6, 2010, I contacted all four legislators by fax. This time it was in response to the announced that State Senator Jane Orie was too be indicted on misuse of legislative staff for her sister’s campaign in 2009. As the third ranking Republican in the State Senate (just two notches above Senator Robbins), the news of her indictment hit unpleasantly close to the questions that I had asked each of the legislators. So, I asked the questions again. I stressed that the lack of transparency regarding this issue created a perception of corruption even if no actual corruption exists. I further noted that continued failure to avoid these very direct and specific questions makes many of us wonder what it is that they are trying to hide? ALL FOUR FAILED TO RESPOND.

On Tuesday, April 13, 2010, I contacted all four legislators again by fax. I repeated the same list of questions and noted the following:

“The questions that I’ve posed are not out of line. The questions raise valid concerns regarding the way that taxpayer dollars are used by you and your staff. As a taxpayer, I ask these questions as a matter of transparency, and it is your duty to answer the questions as a matter of accountability and public service. Perhaps transparency, accountability, and public service are a forgotten duty in government, but I feel it is my responsibility to encourage these characteristics from each and every one of our elected officials.”

ALL FOUR FAILED TO RESPOND.

On Friday, April 16, 2010, I began calling the offices of our legislators. First on my list was Senator Bob Robbins. I called Senator Robbin’s office and explained that I had sent numerous email messages and faxes to the Senator and had received no response. I was told that I would need to schedule an appointment with the Senator and that process could take 2 to 3 weeks. It was explained to me that Senator Robbins spends 3 days each and every week in Harrisburg and he finds it difficult to find time in his schedule to meet with constituents. I wanted to say “don’t pee on my leg and tell me it’s raining”, but I contained myself and asked that someone call me back to schedule an appointment.

The next call went to the office of Representative Mark Longietti. I explained who I was and why I was calling. After a few minutes on hold I was transferred to Representative Longietti. Representative Longietti stated that he was aware of my attempted communications and that he considers me to be a “media outlet” and he chooses not to correspond with my particular “media outlet”. He stated that he did not wish to contribute to my blog. I asked if my being a taxpayer provided me the right to answers, and Representative Longietti simply repeated his earlier statements. I thanked him for his time. All I can say is “at least he took my call”.

The third call went to the office of Representative Michele Brooks. I received an answering machine and left a detailed message as instructed. I then called again about an hour and a half later. I explained who I was and why I was calling. I was put on hold for several minutes. When the phone was picked up I was told that Representative Brooks was no longer available for the day and that they would giver her my message on Monday. Hmmmm. Interesting.

I did not bother to call Representative Dick Stevenson as I could see that this exercise was becoming a waste of time.

As of today, April 22, 2010, ALL FOUR FAILED TO RESPOND.

The Probing Questions?

Based on the lack of responses, you would think that the questions that I was asking were “way outside the box”. Well, allow me to review them with you here. They came from a list that was presented in an AP article [read HERE]. The questions that I forwarded were regarding campaign policies and the tracking of work by their staff; use of their legislative staff including caucus staff, bonuses, and over-time work; taxpayer paid mailings; and per-diems (and possible double-dipping related to those per-diems).

The questions were not beyond the scope of what should be open topics of conversation . . . unless there is something to hide.

Why are you pressing this issue so hard?

It is apparent that if we leave the “hen house unguarded”, the fox and the rooster will worry about no one but themselves. That is the case with many of those in our current state legislature . . . and we have four examples of that in Mercer County. If WE the taxpayers don’t hold our elected officials accountable, they won’t do it on their own. It is our responsibility to “keep them honest” (which assumes that they were honest in the first place, but I digress).

I had a discussion with a colleague over the weekend and he pointed out how blurry the lines between legislative staff and campaign staff have become. He noted a recent experience where he was approached for campaign purposes by a member of a local legislative staff. His radar went up and he noted “how can you tell if they are on taxpayer time or free time?”. Even if it is after hours, how do our legislators track the time. When we are having a conversation with a legislative employee, how do we know if WE are paying for the conversation or not?

Allow me to explain the problem that exists with a photo. The picture is posted in a public on-line forum at the website of the Mercer County GOP. They display the photo proudly and think nothing of the problems that it might illustrate. First, here is a screen shot of the website (before the details mysteriously disappear):

Here is a close up of the photo in question along with the published caption.

While this photo may not mean much to anyone outside of Mercer County, I’d like to describe why it is so disturbing. The photo is of State Senator Bob Robbins having a conversation with Diane Helbig. It is clear that Diane Helbig is campaigning for Representative Michele Brooks (the blue and fluorescent logo is hard to miss). However, for those of you that aren’t aware of the details, Ms. Helbig is also Representative Michele Brooks “Legislative Assistant” (I hope I got the exact title right . . . it is usually displayed on an ID tag that she wears at official events).

So when you look at the picture, do you wonder . . .

“Is Ms. Helbig discussing State business or campaign business?”

“Is she campaigning or is she filling some official capacity?”

“Is she on unpaid/donated time or is she somehow being compensated by the taxpayers (either directly or through bonuses or extra compensation)?”

“Is Ms. Helbig doing this voluntarily or is she pressured to do this type of work by her employer, Representative Brooks?”

My point in all of this is, why do we even need to ask the questions? Do our legislators not have enough friends and supporters that they must use legislative staff to fill their campaign needs? Can our elected officials not find enough loyal volunteers that they need to take taxpayer-paid employees to parades and fairs? If they are so comfortable with situations like the ones pictured above, what else do they do that might cross the line?

I don’t propose that we babysit our legislators and their staff. Instead, I demand that they change the laws so that these sort of questions are unnecessary. I made a proposal in a previous post and I’d like to repeat it here . . .

The solution is simple. The staff of elected officials should NOT be involved in partisan political activity of any kind. PERIOD. The Hatch Act of 1939 prohibits federal employees from engaging in partisan political activity. This same concept should be implemented at every level of government. Legislative staff (as well as County and Local) should not be permitted to be involved in any political activity (on taxpayer time or on their own time). For more information about his concept, please read the on-line article titled “Politically Uncorrected : IF MEN WERE ANGELS" which is available for on-line review HERE.

In Closing . . .

It is obvious that our legislators don't want to have this conversation with us (the taxpayers), but is it really their choice?

As always, just my opinion.

~Mercer County Conservatives

.

Uncontested Races Troubling

Guest Column By Denny Bonavita

So, the Tea Party folks are going to force the national government to change its ways, are they? Hot air. Ditto for screamers in Internet chat rooms, for strident espousers of Second Amendment gun rights, for the people who claim our government is spending us into bankruptcy.

We yak about that, but it's simply lip-flapping. Nobody will change the current system of government, despite all the jaw-jabber. Why do we say that?

Look at who is running for election this year: Mostly, it's incumbents, or former incumbents. In area races for the state House of Representatives, there is not one contested race in the May 18 primary election, according to the filings with the Department of State. Matt Gabler (R), Kathy Rapp (R), Sam Smith (R), Martin Causer (R), Donna Oberlander (R), Bud George (D) are all assured of renomination.

Rapp, Causer and Oberlander are all but assured of re-election. No Democrats filed against them, so there probably won't be any major contests in November, either.
On the federal level, first-term incumbent Glenn Thompson, a Republican, is unopposed in both the primary and in the general election. So is Altoona-area Rep. Bill Shuster.

Sure, incumbent U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter is opposed - but by a current member of the federal Congress in the primary, and by a former member of Congress in the general election. More incumbents.

To hear the critics of government tell it, the state and federal governments are poorly run. But the critics are lip-flappers, only. Otherwise, some would have joined in the campaigns.

It doesn't take a lot of money, either. Gabler won the Republican nomination two years ago on a write-in basis. In our system of government, it is impossible to vote "No," or "None of the above," except in judicial retention elections. We can't vote people out of office if there is no opponent to vote in. Don't blame the incumbents. It isn't their fault if they do not have opponents. That is our fault.

Even the best incumbents benefit from having opponents - for the same reason that we learn something best when we know we have to teach about it. When an incumbent knows that he or she will be called to account on an issue, the incumbent rethinks the issue. Sometimes, the incumbent even changes positions, because the circumstances surrounding the issue have changed.

But that won't happen this year. We just don't care enough about our system of government to help to lead it. So the incumbents can just keep on doing what they have been doing.

Tom Corbett, A Contradiction In Terms

GOP gubernatorial front-runner Tom Corbett seems to be getting a little too comfortable as things begin to heat up on the campaign trail this election year. Corbett's gubernatorial campaign has brilliantly masked Corbett's Harrisburg insider status by depicting him as a good government crusader/reformer. Despite the fact that Corbett has been a major political force in Pennsylvania politics since the start of the Ridge administration.

In 1994 Corbet was asked to provide criminal law and policy expertise to the gubernatorial campaign of then-Congressman Tom Ridge. Once Ridge was elected Governor of Pennsylvania, Tom Corbett was asked to fill several key roles in service to the Commonwealth which eventually led to his appointment as Attorney General.

Despite his campaign finance connections to state GOP power players like Governor Ridge, former President Pro Temp Bob Jubelirer and former House Speaker John Perzel, Corbett himself has managed to distance himself from all the political corruption scandals that have plagued many state lawmakers by indicting 12 democratic members of the state legislature and two of their aids who received illegally $4 million in bonuses for campaign work. Despite the pending indictments Corbett still accepted campaign contributions from the very same people he he was indicting. Former Speaker of the House John Perzel even held a campaign fundraiser that Corbett attended weeks before Perzel was indicted.

Perhaps the most laughable pillar of Corbett's my hands are squeaky clean gubernatorial campaign is how he has manage to distance himself from the illegal 2005 pay raise scandal. Corbett has even gotten away with criticizing his primary opponent state Representative Sam Rohrer for voting for both the 2005 pay raise and the 2001 pension legislation. At a recent gubernatorial forum in Philadelphia he blasted his republican primary opponent Sam Rohrer for his support for the pension increase.

From the Philadelphia Daily News: "The only political shot of the night came from Corbett, when asked about the state's burgeoning public-pension crisis. He noted that some of the participants in the forum had voted to raise state pension benefits - a veiled reference to Rohrer."

His criticism of Rohrer's legislative voting record on the pension issue and the pay raise issue is laughable because Corbett himself benefited from both of Rohrer's votes. Corbett gladly accepted the pay raise that Governor Rendell negotiated for executive offices in 2005 knowing full well the pay raise was illegal and that it violated the state's constitution.

At the time the pay raise was passed I didn't hear of any outrage radiating from the Attorney General's office. I don't remember Tom Corbet, the state's chief law enforcement officer, holding press conferences saying hey wait a minute we need to investigate the legality of these unvouchered expenses. We never seen any grand jury indictments from the Attorney General's Office resulting from the overwhelming evidence of collusion between the judicial, legislative, and executive branches of government.

Corbett is a candidate that seems to love having his cake and eating it too. At a recent state budget hearing Corbett warned state lawmakers of potential layoffs if the Attorney General's office budget wasn't increased despite his gubernatorial campaign calling for dramatic cuts in state spending.

But these contradictions are only the tip of the iceberg for Tricky Tom Corbett. I just cannot allow myself to support a candidate where the more you learn about him the more confused you become.

Holden On the Hotspot

From the Lebanon Daily News:

Pennsylvania's Republican committee is criticizing 17th District Congressman Tim Holden for not returning campaign money he received from embattled New York Congressman Charlie Rangel.

On Thursday, the Republican Party of Pennsylvania blasted Holden and five other of the state's congressional Democrats for not returning campaign contributions from Rangel.

Last week, the U.S. House of Representatives Ethics Committee rebuked Rangel....

Since the Ethics Committee's ruling, recipients have donated to charity $383,000 of the nearly $800,000 Rangel contributed to their congressional campaigns in 2008, the National Journal reported Friday. Holden was not listed among them. A call to his office was not returned.

Luke Bernstein, executive director of the state Republican Party, lambasted Holden for holding on to the money.

"For the sake of Congressman Holden's constituents, it's time for Tim Holden to step out of the shadows and return every last penny of Charlie Rangel's 'dirty money'," he said Thursday.

And it's not just the Republicans:

Holden also faces pressure from Democratic leaders who want him to vote for health-care reform. In November, Holden was one of 39 Democrats to vote against the House version of the bill, which passed 220-215.

An article in Allentown's The Morning Call Friday said Holden was noncommittal when asked if he would support the bill being pushed by President Barack Obama

Read the whole thing here.

I'm not sure the Republicans will get far in trying to tie Tim to Rangel. There has to be more substance than that, but the health-care vote is a potential killer. It's not good enough to be "noncommittal" on this thing. It gives the impression that he can be bought. Tim has to take a strong stand against Obamacare and do so soon.

Pennsylvania Lawmakers Don't Want 'Real' Reform

In today's editorial the Harrisburg Patriot-News asks whether or not state lawmakers have the "courage" to push for real reform by cutting state spending. I had to chuckle after reading the editorial. I couldn't help but think to myself just how much legislative leaders in Harrisburg actually hate reform.

For years state lawmakers were allowed to pass expensive legislation and increase state spending without much oversight or accountability. They voted themselves lavish pension increases, illegal pay raises, and bloated budgets that has put us in our current fiscal mess. And the lack of accountability by the voters has resulted in Pennsylvania having one of the largest, most expensive, and most corrupt state legislature's in the country.

How large is our state government? The following is a passage from the article that pretty much sums up the situation.

With 253 seats, our Legislature is the second largest in the United States, but that doesn’t tell the real story. The largest is New Hampshire; its 424 citizen-legislators are paid $200 for a two-year term.

One can only dream.

By contrast, Keystone lawmakers are the second-highest paid in the nation, according to the Pennsylvania Economy League. And California, with the highest salaries, has 120 seats for nearly three times our population.

Click Here To Read More

Pennsylvania voters and good government advocacy groups continue to put tremendous pressure on state lawmakers to reform state government and stop the wasteful spending. A great example of this occurred in July 2005 when state lawmakers got too greedy and passed a middle of the night pay raise that would have raise some legislators salaries by 30%. The outrage by voters ended up forcing legislative leaders to repeal the pay raise four months later.

Although the pay raise repeal was a success, I think Pennsylvania voters need to ask themselves this election year what really has changed since the repeal of the pay raise in Harrisburg? Most efforts to reform state government have been basically ignored by legislative leaders.

The state budget has continued to increase more than the rate of inflation at a time when working Pennsylvanians are struggling to keep their jobs and pay household bills. The current "bonusgate" corruption trial has brought to the forefront how legislative leader's in both parties used the power of their offices for personal and political gain.

The real truth is that most state lawmakers don't want reform in Harrisburg. State lawmakers love things just the way they are. They like the per diems and perks paid for on public dime. They like the lavish pensions they will receive when they retire. They like that Pennsylvania taxpayers pay for their health care plans with no personal out of pocket cost to them.

It's funny that most state lawmakers even after the repeal of the pay raise still believed they deserved it. So I asked this question to the Patriot-News Editorial Board, do you really think our current state lawmakers want "real reform"? It's not a question of courage when the entire legislative process is controlled by greed.

Remember 'Culture Of Corruption'

"Culture Of Corruption" was a phrase commonly used by Democratic Party leaders like Howard Dean, Senator Chuck Schumer, and Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi when referring to the Republican controlled Congress during the events leading up to the 2006 midterm elections.

The phrase began to catch on with the Democratic Party's base after a series of political scandals involving Republican politicians rocked the political landscape in Washington D.C. culminating in the indictment of then House Majority Leader, Tom Delay, by a Texas court for violating Texas campaign finance laws. The phrase began to be repeated over and over again on Countdown by MSNBC's Keith Olbermann and during a statement on Delay's indictment the current Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi stated the following:

"The criminal indictment of Majority Leader Tom DeLay is the latest example that Republicans in Congress are plagued by a culture of corruption at the expense of the American people."

Democratic Party leaders were able to nationalize the election and define the Republican majority as a bunch of crooks that were out of touch with the American people. This eventually led to sweeping victories by democratic candidates across the country as the Democratic Party regained control of Congress for the first time since 1994.

The American People realized that the republican majority lost its way and entrusted democrats to take the country in a new direction. But now we look a head to the 2010 midterm elections and it looks like the same Democratic Party leadership that used the phrase to regain control of Congress is fostering a "Culture Of Corruption" themselves.

Many national news sources reported yesterday that Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY), the embattled Chairman of the powerful House Ways & Means Committee, has been admonished by the House Ethics committee. According to the committee's findings, Rangel violated House rules by allowing corporations to pay for a number of trips he and other members of the Congressional Black Caucus took to the Caribbean in 2007 and 2008.

According to the ethics panel's report, two of Rangel's staff knew the origins of the money but "submitted false or misleading information" to gain the committee's approval. The report also indicated that they were unable to determine exactly what Rangel himself knew of the false information given to the committee.

Fox News covered the press conference held by Rangel at the Capitol late Thursday night after he was informed of the Ethic Committee's findings. Rangel stated the following at the press conference:

"I don't want to be critical of the committee. But common sense dictates that members of Congress shouldn't be held responsible for what could be mistakes by staff unless there's reason to believe the member knew or should have known," Rangel said.

Rangel called the Ethics Committee's ruling "disturbing." He said he wouldn't comment further until he spoke with his attorney.

Click here To Read More

This is the first ruling in a series of House Ethics Committee's investigations that have plagued Rangel since he was appointed Chairman of the House Ways & Means committee by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Apparently Rangel has failed to report over a million dollars worth of assets including a Merrill Lynch account valued between $250,000 and $500,000 dollars. Rengal also is being investigated separately for failing to pay federal taxes on rental properties.

Despite knowledge of these investigations Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic House leadership seem hell bent on allowing Rangel to keep his Chairmanship.

Warning

There is a secret government does not want you to know:

If you do not know your rights, you do not have them.

That is why they get away with laws that are unlawful, like the permit to carry concealed here in Pennsylvania. They get $25 from you, and in return you give up to carry as allowed by the Constitution of Pennsylvania -- without question. Article I, section 21: The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the state shall not be questioned.

Or like the members of the General Assembly taking compensation that defies the Constitution:
Article II, section 8: The members of the General Assembly shall receive such salary and mileage for regular and special sessions as shall be fixed by law, and no other compensation whatever, whether for service upon committee or otherwise. No member of either House shall during the term for which he may have been elected, receive any increase of salary, or mileage, under any law passed during such term.

Hmmm. So no health insurance, per diem, hotel rooms, meals, are legal? Afraid not.

While you scrimped for lunch money, you were paying for most of your elected employees in the General Assembly, both houses, to chow down at your expense. They feel free to take your property to pay for their rooms and lunch, even though they took an oath to preserve and defend the Constitution. By my calculation, about 99% of the General Assembly breaks that law every month, at your expense.

Get your federal and commonwealth Constitutions, read them, and defend them. You send young men to war to preserve and defend the Constitution, how can we dare not do the same here at home???