Despite the public and prolific announcements of legislative leaders that open-records reform is at the top of their to-do list for the fall session, there remain a good many doubters around the state about how much – if any – reform we may actually see.
• Take, for example, John Baer, whose column in Monday’s Philadelphia Daily News was entitled, “’Race to Reform’ sputtering to Nowheresville:”
Last week, the Washington-based Center for Public Integrity released a survey on state laws governing financial disclosure by public officials. Pennsylvania got an “F.”
You can’t be surprised.
Campaign-finance reform, an open-records law, merit selection of judges, an end to gerrymandering and lame-duck legislative sessions, a reduction in the size of the legislature and adoption of term limits (even if only for committee chairmen) remain tasks untouched.
So Pennsylvania remains a bastion of the politics of its past.
Its legislature remains a costly bloated institution better at putting issues off than delivering on-time solutions.
And the ‘07 “Race to Reform” – that started with promise and possibility – idles in neutral and threatens to stall.
• Across the state, Tom Barnes and Tracie Mauriello of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette also had “Questions over just how ‘open’ House has become.” Their answer was a measured one:
Making the state House of Representatives more “open and transparent” has been the mantra of Democratic leaders ever since they took control of the chamber in January.
But how did they do?
Terrific, if you listen to House leaders like Bill DeWeese and Keith McCall.
Terrible, if you talk to Rep. John Maher, R-Upper St. Clair, or Tim Potts, leader of a citizens group called Democracy Rising PA.
“The first six months of this two-year session were punctuated by serious and substantial changes in the way we do business,” said Mr. DeWeese, D-Waynesburg, a 30-year legislator who admits he has been slow to take to the new procedures.
But Mr. Potts, who is a former aide to Mr. DeWeese, doesn’t see things as much better than they were under previous leaders, who would keep rank-and-file members in the dark and use “gut and replace” tactics, sending bills to the Rules Committee for major, last-minute changes and quick votes.
G. Terry Madonna, a Franklin & Marshall College political science professor, said legislative leaders deserve some credit for giving lawmakers, the news media and the public more details of bills before voting.
Bob Butera, a former Republican legislator who was special counsel to the House panel that developed the new rules, said, “Reform is a gradual thing.” He conceded that the new openness was “not perfect.”
“The process provided for necessary discussion,” House Speaker Dennis O’Brien said [of the budget conference discussions]. “Every leader could participate in the discussion. When you appoint a conference committee, discussion is open to a limited number of people.”
But Mr. Potts isn’t buying it. Billion-dollar topics like the general fund budget, transportation and economic development “need a bigger discussion among all the people of Pennsylvania. I’d still flunk them on their new procedures. I don’t think they’ve done anything to improve citizen access to government.”
In an editorial on open records, the Morning Call of Allentown and Barry Kauffman of Common Cause of Pennsylvania, said maybe it was just as well the legislature put off a vote on open records:
The steady drum beat of people pushing for better open-records legislation in this state has picked up momentum in recent months. But it’s just as well that legislation proposed this year didn’t get considered during the prolonged and often messy state budget debates in Harrisburg. That’s the wise opinion of Barry Kauffman, executive director of Common Cause of Pennsylvania, which has lobbied for the legislation since 1990, along with the voices of many newspaper editorial boards, the Pennsylvania Newspaper Association and the League of Women Voters. When your state has the dubious distinction of having the worst public-records law in the nation, it merits the undivided attention of lawmakers long enough to finally get it done right.
This state’s law was written in the 1950s before electronic records and the Internet made it easier to access public documents. But, it’s ridiculous that this discussion is still taking place in 2007. The only good part is that the discussion gained a broader forum in May when the PNA launched its new blog, passopenrecords.org. A quick scan of the blog, which is open to anyone, makes it clear that problems crop up throughout the state with myriad issues, including: access to public officials’ expense reports and the meetings of elected officials, the failure of elected boards to announce the reason for holding executive sessions, the amount of money a school district paid a solicitor, and more.
Taxpayers have earned the right to review budgets and expenditures of public funds.
Meanwhile, a list of legislators who support open-records reform is expected to be posted at passopenrecords.org. People in the Lehigh Valley should keep an eye out for the names of all local lawmakers. Their support will be crucial, and should figure in to voters’ decisions in the next legislative election cycle.