- Council Committee Passed the Freeze
- Carol Campbell Passes Away
- My first trip to the public library
- Fight digital exclusion
- What if half of Philadelphia didn't have roads?
- You know, let's not even worry about the City Commissioners office messing up voter registration processing
- Bold ideas to fix the budget
- Mayor Nutter's Town Hall Meeting Schedule
- City Releases Library Information to City Council
- Size of Philadelphia government?
The Rationale for Full Disclosure
Submitted by Rep. Mark B. Cohen on Sat, 03/17/2007 - 2:11pm.
In a long-ago novel,probably War and Peace, a soldier ruminated "They're shooting at ME. Me, whom everybody loves." Over the years, I found that air of outraged innocence common among people whose nomination petitions were challenged.
A lot of people are against political corruption. It comes as a great shock to many of them that the minute they start running for office they are suspected of corruption.
The Ethics Act requires disclosure of sources of income over $1300 and debts over $6500 and businesses where the candidate has a partnership interest because the legislature wanted to deter corruption.
Nobody introduces legislation entitled "An act to increase the prevalence of evil" or "An act to maximize the incidence of political corruption." Instead we have pieces of legislation that may benefit specific property owners or specific economic interests--tenants, landlords, attorneys, accountants, small business owners, stockholders, large business owners, etc.
The purpose of the Ethics Act is to learn what people's economic interests are, approximately how extensive their economic interests are, and to provide a point of comparison from year to year. Some one who dramatically gains in sources of income after being elected to office may be subject to investigation as to the reasons for their newfound success. (The common pattern is for sources of income to decline among elected officials over time, however.)
Because of the perceived legitimacy of these generalized requests for information (no specific dollar sums are required), both the State Ethics Commission and the Pennsylvania courts grew frustrated over time at the large numbers of candidates who skirted these requirements by giving overgeneralized answers.
The Anastasio case in 2003 gave the Supreme Court an opportunity to make new law. It then ruled for the first time, as the State Ethics Commission had urged in frustration for some time before, that failure to fully answer any of the questions on the financial disclosure form was a fatal defect for a nomination petition.
There has been general disbelief in the political community that full disclosure really means full disclosure. Candidates have been knocked off the ballot in 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007 have often been incredulous about the rulings.
Occasionally, a candidate has persuaded the courts to relent by timely filing of a correction or by failure of the challanger to fully meet all the legal standards of a proper challenge. But, at the very least, a credible challenge based on the Ethics Act is a major political headache that undermines the momentum of just about any political campaign.
In any individual case, the information withheld may be common knowledge, and the debate may seem to be just over an obscure technicality of the law.
But in totality the Ethics Act does send a strong message that elective officials have to be cognizant of the potential conflict between their financial interests and important public interests. In its nearly thirty years of existence, it has helped raise the consciousness of elective officials that "street smart" methods of making money may well be illegal and against the public interest.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
That is a really nice view
That is a really nice view of the ethics law--and, I think you are correct it does force a candidate to to think about the public interest.
It is my hope, however, that this consciousness will extend into when people are actually in office and will disclose information related to where public dollars are going. I know when I work for a client, I have bill with specificity for driving places, time, etc.
Wouldn't you agree that "ethics" and disclosure should not stop once someone steps into office?
Then why were you the lone
Then why were you the lone "no" vote for the recent legislation for more disclosure of expenses? (I can't recall the bill, but I am sure Rep Cohen and others do.)
Here it is:
My personal favorite, putting all expenses online, won commission approval by a vote of 23-1. The one "no" was Philly's Mark Cohen, the Babe Ruth of spending, the king of per diems, he who built a personal library with taxpayer money.
(Gotta make ya proud that the sole opponent is a Philadelphian. What? Working to maintain the city's ethical cesspool image?)
Cohen says making expenses easily accessible provides "a wonderful source of gossip . . . reporters can write endless stories on this."
The Question Is What Kind of Society We Want to Have
The question is what of society we want to have. Do we want to have a society in which we try to reduce poverty, or do we want to have a society in which we try to reduce the number of cell phone calls made by state legislators? Do we want to have a society in which we try to improve education, or do we want to have a society in which we try to reduce the amount of money spent by legislators on office furniture?
No, these goals are not directly in conflict, but, as a practical matter there are only so many hours in the day and only so much visible space available in the print media and in internet communities like this one. There is only so much attention most people can pay to public affairs.
John Baer, whose attack on me was quoted above, is hardly a neutral observer. He was was the strongest advocate for the candidacy of Rick Santorum among the Philadelphia newsmedia. He has called for the total abolition of all welfare spending in Pennsylvania, a position that places him far, far to the right of the Republican Party.
This whole line of attack on government spending large and small is part of the attempt by the right wing to discredit government and the idea that government can be a part of the solution to our nation's problems. I believe that government is an essential part of the solution, because the market system is fundamentally about personal choices and not about societal choices.
John Baer's attack on my "personal library" is an example of the way the right wing plays fast and loose with the truth. He is referring to books relevant to public policy that are in my offices in Harrisburg. Having had it "exposed" that I probably read more books than any other legislator, and that I probably do more work in the state capitol than any other legislator (that is what per diems are about), I am well aware of the propagandist nature of public reporting on this issue and I am not eager to have my legislative colleagues get the same treatment.
I voted for the final package of reforms, which I co-authored as a member of the Speaker's Commission on Legislative Reform, and which passed the House unanimously. Anybody will soon be able to pore through House expense accounts and nitpick our expenses. Those however who are interested in truly building a better society will likely find they have other more important things to do.
Those people who want more and more and more disclosure of governmental expenditures should also consider following Gandhi's advice of "Be the change you want to see in the world." There is no reason why advocates of disclosure cannot further the goals of an open, fully transparent society by consistently disclosing their full names.
Gimicks
I'm reading your reply, and I'm thinking--gee, does he really think we are this stupid!
The purpose, Representative, is accountability. If you are using the public dime, then you are responsible for ensuring you use it wisely. Without disclosure--how would we ever know.
And, by the way, building a better society does not depend on how nice your furniture is. It likewise does not depend on the access to cell phone records. What it depends upon, honest legislators doing their job, being accountable to the public and ensuring that the money they spend has both purpose and restraint.
Let's compare out jobs. You do not make a profit for the Commonwealth--you serve it. I directly make a profit for my firm. Everytime I go somewhere, I have to account for clients who are paying. I have to bill my time. Yet, I'm still able to find the time to do a tremendously stressful job and be successful at it. I'm still able to help prepare a case for trial, write important motions and protect the rights of my clients. Yet, you seem to think that accounting for what you spend is not okay.
If I can find time in my 70 hour work-week to do it, I'm sure you can--and still build the great society you want.
Respectfully, Representative, your argument above is a gimick. You readily admit its absurdity--they are not mutually exclusive. Don't put this on the "right wing" either. I'm sorry, but I consider myself a shareholder in Pennsylvania. If I want to look at the books, you should let me. Otherwise, my assumption is--you have something to hide.
And, if you did vote for such a reform in government--welcome to the 21st Century. It is time to change how things are done in Harrisburg. You are either for good, responsive and accountable government or you aren't.
Does Any Lawyer Publicly Post His Record of Billable Hours?
Does any lawyer publicly post his record of billable hours?
Does any judicial candidate publicly post his record of billable hours?
Does any court system publicly post the record of billable hours of attorneys assigned cases by judges?
Does any judge insist on publicly posting the record of billable hours of attorneys in his court?
If the answer to all of these questions is no, is this an indication of a massive coverup or are there legitimate concerns of what people who have no responsibility might do with this information?
I think these are already
I think these questions are already well-answered by Gaetano:
If any of those people were employed by the commonwealth, instead of by private firms and clients, then yes -- they could and should disclose.
Wow, Representative good
Wow, Representative good one.
No, but my bills are looked at by the people who pay them. I'm sorry, who pays your bills. Or are you not an elected official? If you don't like good, accountable government, just say it. Don't waste our time with gimicks.
Please come to the table with something better than that.
When I see stuff like
When I see stuff like this--politicians using the progressive label to keep themselves employed--I think maybe somebody needs to start calling them on it. Break out the term limits please!
--------
Supporting Michael Nutter for Mayor.
The question is what of
You would get more sympathy for your position if it wasn't the fact politicians are creating this environment with continual reports of corruption.
I don't think it is any more or less than politicians from 50-100 years ago. The only difference is now technology allows for more efficient reporting and distribution of information.
Accountability and being an avid reader
Those who are interested in building a better society will in fact be busy doing so. We will be happy to be joined, advised, and represented by someone as literate, well-spoken, and well-read as you. But if you (or a colleague) appear to be just taking up space, we will be very glad (and entitled) to investigate just what it is you have been up to with our money. And we know that you (or your colleague) might be very clever at making it appear as if you are doing the people's work while not really doing much but enjoying a well-financed nice lifestyle, so we will want to know that, if we want to, we can get itemized reports.
The media and the people of Pa. did not make this problem, Representative. This problem came from your colleagues jamming paper clips in their voting mechanisms to register votes in their absence; passing pay raises (retroactive) in the middle of the night; and using state employees as their personal go-fers and home decorators.
You seem like an honorable and thoughtful guy, and I am glad you are in Harrisburg. I am sorry if being accountable to your employer is a burden. But please recall from whence this movement sprang.
Supporting Micheal Nutter for Mayor
Political Doc
does anyone know
Does anyone know where we can find a full list of the books he bought? I keep reading "AOL for Dummies" listed in the news coverage but I'd love to know what else was bought.
Spelling
I cannot believe I spelled Michael wrong. Sorry. I do not know how to edit old posts. :)
Political Doc
It happens to everyone
You can't edit your post after someone's already replied to it -- which is a bummer when you're in a hot thread and people are replying right away. Inversion of an a and e is the most venial of typographical sins.
Reform Contributes To Social Justice
Why can't we have a government that improves education and one in which the legislative process is transparent enough that it is difficult for special interests to get benefits they don't deserve from government? In fact, wouldn't we be better off if those benefits were curtailed and the money went from them to schools?
And couldn't you say the same thing about excess cell phone usage and about government paid cars and libraries? The money spent on those things would be better spent on schools.
The Question Is One of Proportion
The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania spends over $1 billion a year on the Philadelphia School District, about as much as it spends on Penn State University. I would favor increases both amounts. The House expense budget is not a very promising source of additional revenue.
There is not a heck of money to be saved on cell phones. I would guess the total state house cell phone bill is about $200,000. I have not used a cell phone, but I do intend to learn how to use a Blackberry and that is a from of cell phone and hand/held computer.
Nor is there a heck of a lot of money to saved on cars, books, meals, or other similar expenses. These things are a very small percentage of the House budget, which, in turn, is a very small percentage of the state budget.
Philadelphia provides cars and cell phones for city council members. If it is Dr. Stier's intention not to accept a city car or cell phones for himself and his staff, he is free to make that pledge as a candidate for City Council. I doubt such a pledge is consistent with his focus on major issues, but that is for him to decide.
Most cities don't provide a
Most cities don't provide a vehicle to their elected representatives. Governments aren't Fortune 500 corporations, so they've sort of cut back on those kind of perquisites. FYI, Councilman Nutter never took a car and I believe that Councilman Kenney turned his in a few years back. It's not about proportionality to other items in the budget, Rep. Cohen - it's about propriety. Is "percentage of budget" the metric for legislative focus? You spend more of your focus on budgetary line items that cost more?
It is the tone
Mark,
I respect your focus on many progressive issues. The question generally is one of tone. The payraise issue was the same thing: I don't care that the PA Govt necessarily got a payraise. Sometimes, if you want good people, you have to pay for them. But, I cared that amidst a minimum wage that had not gone up in years, you guys did that. It simply seemed wrong.
Even if your specific money does not break Pennsylvania's bank, the problem is that far too many people are struggling these days for legislators to be appear to be living it up on our dime. (Hello, PHEAA, for example.)
It isn't about nickle and
It isn't about nickle and diming our elected officials.
It is about them knowing they are being watched and held accountable. It helps to instill the culture of what is and isn't excess, which helps translate to the bigger items.
I liken it to enforcing littering, parking and dumping laws. In the scheme of things they aren't as serious as rape, burglary and murder, but if people know they are being monitored and kept in line with the small stuff, they are less willing to take the chance on the bigger things and it creates a culture of morality and "law abidedness".
Ultimately people are like two year olds. They always push the boundaries. You set up those boundaries at a low level and less people cross them.
Seconding Dan's comments
and adding a bit more.
I also respect your political focus, and beyond that, I feel you provide much progressive leadership on a number of issues.
But I am struck by a tone deafness in your position on this issue, just as I was with the Congressional pay raise issue.
You had many rational justifications for the pay raise, and I feel you made a very strong argument that progressives jumping on the rabble-rousing bandwagon on that issue could contribute to negative, unintended consequences. But I felt then that you just didn't get how much of your argumentation came across as elitist - and I feel that you're just not getting how here, much of your argumentation comes across as self-serving and defensive.
Regardless of whether or not I trust your intentions at a more basic level, I continue to be perplexed that you can't see why people are going to be skeptical about politicans' intentions, and want systems put into place that ensure transparency.
Indeed, you are not unique in such a tone deafness: In fact, when challenged on issues of accountability here at YPP, defensiveness seems to be a very common reaction of "progressive" holders of the political trust.
But I hope that you at least consider, whether you agree with their perspective or not, how your positions sometimes alientate citizens who are otherwise supportive of your politics.
I own a car and a cell phone. I don't need two of each.
And I don't think the city needs to pay for them.
But I won't turn down a parking space for my car. It's not always easy to park near City Hall as I've discovered during my numerous trips to testify and lobby there in the past few years.
An Honorable Profession That Can Be Used For Great Purposes
I believe that, as John F. Kennedy said about fifty years ago, politics is an honorable profession. I can believe it can be used for great purposes. I disagree with raider.adam that people in general anywhere are like two year olds; I believe that there are intelligent and decent and farsighted people in Pennsylvania who are interested in coming to grips with major issues.
We are residents of a city with many college students, the vast majority of whom did not grow up in Philadelphia. Every school district public school in this city has at least 37% of its students living in poverty. For the vast majority of the residents of our city, having a child attend Community College of Philadelphia is financial sacrifice; having a child attend Temple is a great burden; and our wonderful group of private colleges might as well be on another planet because they are completely unattainable without massive scholarship aid.
Philadelphia does not have a state college. State colleges cost less than one half of Temple, but the closest widely attended one to Philadelphia is West Chester State University, the state college with the most competitive admissions situation because of the great demand.
I would like to work to establish a state college in Philadelphia and/or make Community College of Philadelphia a four year college, as some other community colleges have become. I would like there to be public support for such an effort throughout the city and would like people here to part of such an effort.
Philadelphia has a good Fairmount Park system which is dramatically underfunded and which has not kept up with developments in parkland expansion and enhancement around the country. The debate in Philadelphia has been disproportionately around governing structures, with relatively little attention paid to the park system itself. I would like to help change that and would welcome the support of people here.
I am deeply proud of having led efforts to raise Pennsylvania's minimum wage by 113% since I began focusing on the this issue in 1987. I was a national leader in reviving the minimum wage as a national statewide issue (that is as a state issue in many states) in the late 1980's, and have continued that into the present time.
I am well aware that 11 states so far have set minimum wages higher than Pennsylvania's new, improved minimum wage (the highest is Illinois' ultimate figure of $8.25 and Vermont's current $7.53 with a minimum 5% a year increase), and that there are another 7 states that appear poised to pass Pennsylvania in the forseeable future, and there are organizing efforts to raise the minimum wage higher in many other states.
I have introduced legislation to raise the minimum wage to $8.15 in 2008, $8.75 in 2009, and $9.35 in 2010, with cost of living increases annually thereafter. We may not be able to reach these goals--they are ambitious in the context of politics although modest in terms of people's lives--but it would be helpful if people would rally behind them.
I can go on and on but will not. I would very much like to work with progressives and be seen as who I am and not--metaphorically or otherwise--as a two year old.
From working with members of the General Assembly over a 33 year period, I think important victories are possible if we can get concerned citizens to focus on important issues.
Can we begin?
This all had to do with the
This all had to do with the disclosure topic, how?
Sure we can. But, I just do
Sure we can. But, I just do not understand why legislators can't multi-task.
For instance, I took a deposition today. That meant, I got into my car--drove 30 miles. Deposed the witness. Drove all the way back. Got back at 12:26 and ate a brief lunch. Submitted my mileage and parking recipts to my assistant. She filled out the form. I reviewed it and signed it. I also prepared the number of hours I was working on the matter.
Now, I am sitting here with my reimbursement scratch in my pocket, having been accountable to a client. Now, I take a break from that to write on YPP and am about to dive into my third project for the day.
I consider that a moderately productive day (and, at quarter to 4:00, I still have a few hours left!)-oh, and I just happened to be accountable to the people who pay my bills.
I know, it's hard. But, again we are smart enough on here to realize that you are a professional and this shouldn't be too time consuming an endeavor.