- 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?
A rebuttal, Rep. Cohen?
Submitted by zorro on Mon, 06/11/2007 - 8:47am.
In today's PDN, Stu Bykofsky writes a pretty harsh article about Rep. Cohen. To wit...
"When he brings home the bacon, mostly it goes on his plate. A Democrat whose wildly gerrymandered district snakes through the Northeast and into North Philly, Cohen lives high on the hog, using your money."
"Cohen has spent more than half his life in the state House. When first elected, he may have been thinking about public service. Like a goniff, he's turned that into private plunder."
"Maybe not. Previous disclosures haven't shamed Cohen into taking a "no more plunder" pledge.
And that's why he remains a goniff. "
The entire article can be found at the link below:
http://www.philly.com/dailynews/local/20070611_Stu_Bykofsky___State_Rep_...
Rep. Cohen, can you respond to these allegations?
-Z
Bookmark/Search this post with:
I'd imagine he'd blame it on
I'd imagine he'd blame it on a right wing conspiracy or a PR problem. What do you think?
Cohen & RW Tierney's Daily News & Philly Inquirer
No, extreme Right Winger Tierney (a very shady character in the Republican inner circle), new owner of the Daily News & Philly Inquirer, is going after him because he's the most progressive elected representative in Harrisburg. If getting good numbers of books to keep on top of the issues & attending the nonprofit Pennsylvania Convention in nearby NYC on the public dime is the most egregrious of his offenses - and no I don't consider them offenses - then I wish every elected office holder in Harrisburg achieves this standard.
For those of you with any grounding in state government in America, you know that Pennsylvania state government is one of the most corrupt above the Mason Dixon line. Only New York State, Illinois & Nevada give it a run for the money. Tens of millions of Pa. public dollars are spent on projects because major lobby groups have given to elected reps, kick backs are not uncommon, large numbers of reps are busy feathering their own nests.
If this is the best Tierney can do - Cohen has spent some money acquiring public policy books & attended the nonprofit Pennsylvania Convention on the public dime - he needs to give it a rest.
zzzzzzzz
My summation of politics according to Carter and Rep. Cohen: it is okay for elected officials to waste money and look fraudulent because if they get caught, they can blame someone else.
Why is it that politics is the only profession where personal responsibility can be skirted by blaming other people, i.e. the press (no matter their slant) or voters?
Let's look at Rep. Cohen's votes on things like documentation of public spending (remember his absolute view, we can either fight poverty or have a transparent government) as Exhibit "A" as to why, no matter how right wing the Inquirer gets, doing something wrong is doing something wrong.
Gaetano, Why Don't You Elaborate on What Constitutes Corruption
Look, I'm as anti-corruption as anyone. You & Tierney define as corruption what has been a standard for government reimbursement for eons. To whit, if you attend a nonprofit function where policy issues are dealt with pertaining to your office, in which you engage in no fundraising & there's no lobbying, a elected rep is eligible for reimbursement. Similarly, getting books on policy issues is a legitimate area of reimbursement. Cohen dutifully reported both, its all on the public record.
We probably come at this from different perspectives but I greatly believe in getting our elected officials to be highly informed on the subject matters on which they act. Looking at the high level of policy illiteracy among our elected state reps, I applaud Cohen's efforts. I would welcome our state reps attending conferences at the Brookings Foundation, Harvard School of Government etc. on the public dime, to get them to become knowledgeable on the policy matters under their purview.
Let me give you an example where I'd agree with you. About a decade ago, former NJ Governor Whitman attended the Davos Conference (Switzerland), on the public dime. The conference lasted about 5 days. Whitman did not attend any of the policy panels, instead spending nearly the whole time skiing (it got some reportage because she broke a leg skiing). Do you have any evidence Cohen acted similarly.
Why do you think the PI & the Daily News have focused on this when there's so much high level corruption in Harrisburg that can easily be uncovered if they investigated it? On a scale of 1 to 10, how high would you rate Cohen's action as corruption ? On the same scale, where would you rate legislation for campaign contributions? What do you think of Bush's constant use of Air Force One, on the public dime for 10s of millions, for attending dubious events & engaging in fund raising?
Looking forward to your full response.
I never accused anyone of
I never accused anyone of corruption. How about we chalk it up to stupidity (that is doing the same thing that people find distasteful again and again)?
Related to the books, Rep. Cohen refuses to allow us to see what he purchased or to require it by law. If he is buying something on the public dime, I should be able to know what that thing is.
This is pointless, his votes say it all. How about that?
Regarding Airforce One--the President of the United States, who I am no fan of, cannot simply take a commercial flight, or a road trip. I think the difference between the leader of a nation having proper protective measures is vastly different than a man who represents 40,000 people buying books on the public dime with impunity.
Further Examination
Just to reiterate, I'm in favor of legislators going to public forums & getting political/policy books to make them better informed, on the public dime (particularly chump change, which is what we're talking about here). To you this may seem distasteful but to people like me it is a very wise use of public monies (Imagine if Pa. legislators had achieved expertise on electricity deregulation & realized what a rip off it is - I'm leaving aside campaign contributions that made the policy change possible - Pa. citizens would have saved $100 million + at this point) What we badly need is a full blown focus on all the corruption in Harrisburg (We're talking tens of millions of dollars).
The book purchases, which are all in the political/policy arena, are in the public record, & the Philly Inquirer has published a list in one of its articles on Cohen. One of my major problems is that our state government is very corrupt & that Cohen - one of the cleanest legislators in Pa. state government - is the subject of multiple front page articles in the PI that impugn his integrity while legislators who are sleazy as hell do not get any notice from Tierney's PI. What do you think is going on?
Regarding Air Force One use under Bush, which is probably over $100 million in costs at this point, you accept all his trips as legit public expenses. This is very strange for someone getting worked up about $1,800 for attending the Pa. Society meeting. I have no problem with Air Force One for meeting with foreign leaders, attending important nonpolitical events. But so many of these trips have been political or smoke & mirror events, with the real purpose of the trip being a major political fund raiser by the president. As each of these trips' cost is a $100,000+, I'm a bit peeved at the huge cost to the taxpayers. Why doesn't this bother you?
Well, I supposed the leader
Well, I supposed the leader of the "free world" should just fly his own plane, or take a commercial airliner (you know, once everyone on board as been searched thoroughly and/or denied entry, or drive a car across country to a fundraising event, or even better yet, what about just taking Greyhound.
There is much more a legitimate need to protect the executive of the federal government than to either add to Rep. Cohen's library or pay for his way to the PA Society meeting. Sorry, we disagree.
Why does't Rep. Cohen lead the charge against corruption? He can start by giving back money from his illegal payraise. Then, we can move to more transparency. How does that sound for you--instead of comparing Rep. Cohen to the President.
Dodge
You dodged my comment, which was on massive improper use of Air Force One. So I'll repeat:
I have no problem with Air Force One for meeting with foreign leaders, attending important nonpolitical events. But so many of these trips have been political or smoke & mirror events, with the real purpose of the trip being a major political fund raiser by the president. As each of these trips' cost is a $100,000+, I'm a bit peeved at the huge cost to the taxpayers. Why doesn't this bother you?
Well, I'm not dodging
Well, I'm not dodging anything. You think it improper. I don't necessarily agree. I think that, for security reasons, the movement of the President is controlled and restricted. You ignore this concern in a lame defense of someone who is not the leader of 300,000,000 people (whether we like him or not), who's movement is not controlled for security purposes and who, is likely to not be the target for any real significant threat (other than a right wing newspaper conspiracy).
I didn't dodge your comment, I disagree and find it inapplicable. Why waste my time justifying the use of Air Force One when I can sit back and enjoy a lame defense of a gross abuse of the public dime--for no justification.
Hey, again, why doesn't Rep. Cohen just reach into his own pocket sometimes? Are his arms too short?
Nope, sorry
I'm sorry, I am really trying to hear your argument but there is absolutely no legitimate justification for Rep. Cohen to have used public funds to attend the PA Society Event. This group defies every basic instinct of a progressive voice and is nothing more than an opportunity for the fat cats and power brokers to be as lavish as possible and pat each other on the ass for doing whatever it is that they do. Explain to me how PA's power elite sitting around the Waldorf Astoria (funny, an organization dedicated to preserving the "traditions of Pennsylvania" meets in New York City every year... hmmm) congratulating each other is any different than Bush or Cheney attending an energy "conference" or some white-tie NRA event? Talk about a double standard!
I was very excited to see how aggressively the state went after PHEAA for their unbelievably inappropriate activities, lavish conferences, and out of control spending. I find the PA Society to be of that category and was disappointed to read of Rep. Cohen's involvement.
We have a legitimate
We have a legitimate disagreement. I'm not big on the Pennsylvania Society but very knowledgeable people are at the meeting, so I & Pa. State Govt. consider it an event worthy for reimbursement, plus its close to Philly. We could spend our time analyzing every conference/meeting a rep attends but its fruitless because its so insignificant.
If you look at the big picture, Pennsylvania is one of the most corrupt states above the Mason Dixon line. Instead of looking at pennies (the reimbursement was for $1,800), the focus needs to be on all the major corruption/corrupt politicians in Harrisburg that cost the state multimillions of dollars in cronyism contracts, policies that give millions to campaign contributors. Whatever you think of Cohen's attendance, no one charges corruption. There probably should be stricter guidelines for reimbursements for state reps but this is not something beyond the pale. It is small potatoes.
This is your argument:
Because there are more important breaches of the public trust that we don't know about yet, we need to let the little ones go--because they are "small potatoes."
It does not have to be corrupt to be wrong. It is piggish--Stu had it right. And, you can sit here and say Rep. Cohen isn't corrupt all day long and that, until that happens, we have no beef, but the truth of the matter is, when spending our money and opposing legislation to make him more accountable on the issue--we have a legitimate beef.
Right On
I didn't say Rep Cohen's attendance was illegal or corrupt. I am saying it is unethical. Yes, many of the "thinkers" attend this conference. But Mark Cohen is in the House Leadership... my guess is he pretty much has access to whomever he wants. Networking and information sharing is vital to an effective government. But networking at the Waldorf Astoria in a tuxedo, especially from someone who touts his progressive ideology on this and other media vehicles as if it were a badge of honor, has absolutely no justification or validity and is no different than Bush attending some fundraiser with oil executives. Being a State Representative does not make him a dignitary, so I see no rationale to make tax payers foot the bill for a stay at the Waldorf.
I Personally Paid for My Tuxedo; I Did Not Stay At the Waldorf
I personally paid for my tuxedo, and I did not stay at the Waldorf. I did not attend any fundraisers for any political candidate. I only attended free receptions for all Pennsylvania Society attendees and the Pennsylvania Society annual dinner which is televised across Pennsylvania on the Pennsylvania Cable Network. Unlike attendees at PHEAA conferences, I stayed in an inexpensive hotel in an urban area (Newark, just outside New York City), did not bring a spouse, significant other, family member or anyone else with me, and did not charge for frills like massages or lessons in falconry, golf, or tennis. I went to do the job I was elected to do: gain support for measures benefitting my constituency and the people of Pennsylvania by creating greater mutual understanding with others.
Rep. Cohen you HAVE abused the public trust
Sorry, Rep. Cohen you HAVE abused the public trust. Voting the right way does not give you a pass. We must demand that those elected officials who paint themselves as progressive standard bearers do not embarrass us with ethically dubious behavior. We owe that much to the causes to which we have dedicated so much of our lives.
Gaetano is right when he cautions us to look skeptically on Rep. Cohen’s views:
We need transparency in government IN ORDER TO fight poverty.
I don’t think Rep. Cohen is corrupt. Rather he has this amazing sense of entitlement. As Raider Adam put it:
The business about the books really got to me. As the media has pointed out, Rep. Cohen charged $28,200 worth of books to taxpayers over the last two years--more than what the Philadelphia School District spent to stock the library at two high schools and two middle schools in his district.
It’s the accumulation of petty abuses which rankles. I was at a meeting several months ago at which I made this point re. Rep. Cohen. A leading member of the progressive community asked me if I was serious. Was I just pretending to be indignant? I was really taken aback by this. There is real cause for outrage here. (Gaetano, you were at this meeting and may remember this exchange.)
So, Rep. Cohen, you may vote the right way, but you sure don’t conduct business the right way.
I was at the meeting and I remember the exchange.
Let me just say this: Rep. Cohen says he is a progressive. He supports many progressive causes and votes the "correct" way. However, his (and others) abuses of the system and breaches of the public trust are most decidedly non-progressive. I for one would not support for someone because they vote the right way if they are otherwise abusing the system.
The point being made is this, Rep. Cohen, do you think that maybe, just maybe, you will buy something yourself or use a library that is free? Or, if you do not want to do these things, why did you oppose (even if it was initially) State government being more transparent?
You haven't addressed these issues. Instead, you are dealing with the periphery. You are leaving many in the progressive community with a bad taste in their mouth. I know this first hand.
I Have A Very Strong Sense of Public Purpose
I have a very strong sense of public purpose. That is demonstrated in ways that cost no money--such as blogging on this site and other sites more than the rest of the Philadelphia legislative delegation combined, such as attending an extraordinary number of community meetings in my district and outside of it--as well as in ways that do cost money.
I do not think that that voting the right way is enough. I want meaningful changes in how government works. That is why year after year, I am among the most active legislators in participation in committee meetings, caucus meetings, meetings with the Mayor, the head of the school district, and meetings called by community leaders of all sorts.
That is why I initiate legislation and actively work for its passage. It is not that I merely voted to raise the state minimum wage; it is that I initiated national efforts to restore the minimum wage as a state issue for the first since the Progressive era of the Woodrow Wilson Administration.
It is not that I merely voted to aid organ transplantation; it is that working Pennsylvania-based experts and practicioners in the area, I led efforts to push through the House what quickly became a national model for organ transplantation.
It is not merely that I favor stronger open records legislation, but that I contributed to the writing of one of the current leading proposals in this area, repeatedly advocated for key details of the proposal as a member of the Speaker's Commission on Legislative Reform, and I am currently preparing to work as a member of the State Government Committee to help refine a proposal that can pass the House and the Senate and become law.
Last week, the Philadelphia Daily News had an editorial commenting who were "right but irritating." As a recall, the editorial mentioned City Controller Alan Butkovitz, CLS lawyer Jon Stein, Philadelphia Forward leader Brett Mandel,
non-profit leader and former Councilman Ed Schwartz, and one other Philadelphia figure, and Al Gore and one other national figure in this category.
I suspect that both I and my late father also fall in this "right but irritating" category. I have little interest in just taking positions. I have a lot of interest in achieving meaningful change. Meaningful change feels threatening to established interests, and their initial reaction is often to seek to discredit the advocates.
It has only been a few years, for instance, since both daily papers were continuously ridiculing Michael Nutter for daring to serve as Chairman of the Board of the Convention Center Authority without having prior experience managing a convention center. Gradually, it dawned on the media powers that be that what they argued was some sort of scandal was in fact a sign or extraordinary competence and dedication in Nutter's case.
And what does this have to
And what does this have to do with you charging us $28,000 for books in just two years? Again, libraries, Representative, are free.
New category--"right but ridiculous."
Bush's junkets Paid for by the Taxpayer.
As long as you continue to support Bush's political trips, for a 100,000+ a pop, paid for by the taxpayer, I'm having a hard time taking you seriously. Doesn't show consistency, but then you conservatives never have the same standards for yourselves as your political opponents.
Laughing so hard
You are on here to only defend Rep. Cohen. You have no other purpose. Otherwise, your account wouldn't have started two days ago and these two posts are the only things you care about.
You call me a conservative because your guy is unethical. You can't even mount a credible defense other than to point to President Bush and his use of Air Force One. Well, like we already estblished, which is uncontroverted, the travel of the president is restricted--he simply cannot just go anywhere. For good reason too. So, for having a safe executive, we pay some money. You cannot argue this, its been conceded by silence.
Rep. Cohen on the other hand has a direct hand in styming legislation to make elected official spending in PA more transparent. These are not apples we are comparing, friend. These are so much different. As said before, you offer no explanation of his voting pattern on ethical issues.
And, Rep. Cohen isn't an opponent of mine. He is a public figure who is earning his own criticism.
I Have Not Symied Any Legislation For Transparency
I have not stymied any legislation for greater governmental transparency. I cast a preliminary dissenting vote against a proposal's addition to a legislative package, and then helped pass the entire package both within the Legislative Reform Commission and within the House.
Okay
You haven't stymied it. You just don't believe in government transparency.
Or, you voted against it before voting for it.
You know what, who really knows. It seems a lot of people in Harrisburg are doing things out-of-character lately.
Why Did President Have to Attend the World Affairs Society?
If it outrageous that I spend $650 to attend the Pennsylvania Society, why is it not outrageous that President Bush spends $100,000 to attend the World Affairs Society? He certainly can speak on foreign policy issues in Washington, and we will all know what he says.
And why is it not outrageous that, unlike myself, he goes to political fundraisers while spending $100,000 in taxpayer money to make an unnecessary trip to Philadelphia?
What Rule of Ethics Have I Violated?
You say I am unethical. Please cite the ethical rule I have violated.
You're missing the point.
You're missing the point. It isn't about pennies. Cohen has a reputation for running up tabs for expenditures. This is just another one to throw on the pile.
Also, no one being realistic is saying corruption. It is starting to head more along the lines of "abuse of privilege".
-----------------------------------------------------------
"yes adam gave some informative comments but he also seems to sprinkle a little adam dust on it." - merkin
Cohen
Hi raideradam:
My point is that this is very skewed stuff by the PI. Let me give you an example to illustrate where I'm coming from: One of my friends from school went to work for a law firm. They rapped the knuckles of an underling who took home some pads & pens. Yet, a couple of the senior partners was engaging in crazy billing practices that were bringing in $100s of thousands & no one ever said a word.
The Pennsylvania Society Takes No Positions on Anything
The Pennsylvania Society takes no positions on anything. It is like a website: it offers a forum for interaction. Some of the most progressive people in Pennsylvania attend, including labor leaders, education leaders, mayors, city councilmen, and trial lawyers. They even honor strong critics of the state legislature, like businessman Louis Appel, the number one funder of Tim Potts' Democracy Rising.
Carter, let me see if I understand this
Brian Tierney tells Stu Bykofsky what to write? This is more hilarious than you know. I also have a question: How does one do research or keep on top of issues at the Pennsylvania Society? I have attended many times and would be curious to know.
P.S. Stu could've been tougher but he didn't mention about the times when the honorable representative FLEW from Philly to Harrisburg, charging taxpayers for the tickets. That stopped after the newspapers exposed it.
BLAM!!!!
Okay, well Clout has evisorated both you and Rep. Cohen. Let's get back to talking about PR problems and save right-wing conspiracies for another day.
Let Me Explain This
If you've been following the devolution of the paper since Tierney took over, it would be obvious to you that most of the top news people running the paper have been replaced by more compliant & RW people. Tierney has no background in journalism & doesn't seem to hold journalism ethics in high regard. Just this week, the editor of the editorial section stepped down. The editorial section of the paper looks like something out of FOX news, similar kind of stuff.
You have a very simplistic & naive view of newspaper operations. The publisher sets the tone. He gives indications to his chief editors in what direction he wants the paper to go. This filters down to staff reporters. Reporting assignments determine what goes into the paper's news (You know, you send reporters out for specific stories, they don't just wander the streets). I'm still amazed that something as insignificant as Cohen's minor expenses are a story, nevermind a front page story, particularly given the extraordinary high levels of corruption in Harrisburg.
If you're still in denial, let me give you an example. I worked in Ohio for several years. An insider (who I was good friends with) to the Cleveland Plain Dealer, told me about how the paper, at the behest of the publisher, had an ongoing campaign to make then Mayor Kuchinich look bad. They didn't like Kuchinich because he came out of a community organizing background & its politics, compaired to the more staid background of the paper owner. Kuchinich was always portrayed as a mad man rather than the paper just accepting they had major political differences with him. I used to read the Cleveland Plain Dealer regularly. If Kuchinich ever stumbled getting off a plane or going down public steps, the paper would have a picture of it on page one. This occurred during the entire Kuchinich term.
Re. Pennsylvania Society event, there are numbers of people highly knowledgeable on Pa policy issues. Its called picking their brains
Last night, I had drinks
Last night, I had drinks with friends from law school and "picked their brains" about potential legal arguments in a case. Should my firm pay me back for that? Not likely.
Again, politics is the only profession where someone can entirely skirt responsibility by blaming someone else.
Reality Check
My friend, when you get out in the real world you'll find that people attend conferences regularly, paid for by their firm because the view is it makes you a more effective person in the organization.
Also, all of Bush's trips, where he flies on Air Force One to appear before a nonprofit group for half an hour & then spends 3-4 hours in the evening on a Republican fund raising gala, tell me again why you're alright with it. Each one of these trips cost the taxpayer $100,000+. Take Bush's last trip to Philly. he spoke before the Council on Foreign Relations for less than half an hour, then the entire evening at a major presidential fundraiser. Is this a wiser use of the public's hard earned dollars than Cohen's attendance at the Pa. Society meeting.
As stated, Bush, nor any
As stated, Bush, nor any other President, has any other option of travel. It is an unavoidable expense.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"yes adam gave some informative comments but he also seems to sprinkle a little adam dust on it." - merkin
Political Junkets Paid for by Taxpayers
Air Force One trips for conferences/associations (just like Cohen's Pa. Society meeting), public speeches before nonpolitical gatherings, meetings with foreign leaders etc. are legitimately funded by the taxpayers.
What many of us object to are Air Force One trips whose main purpose is fundraising & politics. Why should we the taxpayer pay for these? Particularly, since use of Air Force One is incredibly expensive.
Because Cohen can address
Because Cohen can address those same people without a $2K tab.
Again, the President of the US can't hop on Greyhound or Southwest.
You are also specifically overlooking the fact that this is stemming from the fact Cohen seems to lead the pack in expenditures. He isn't even staying below the radar.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"yes adam gave some informative comments but he also seems to sprinkle a little adam dust on it." - merkin
Not in the Same Day or Same Week
Not in the same day or same week. I have busy schedules, and they have busy schedules. Getting through voicemail and scheduling conflicts isn't easy.
Real world? I've been done
Real world? I've been done school and practicing for a few years now! I think the, taxes and bills I pay and the responsibilities I have qualify me for being in the "real world." I too attend conferences--some of which are paid for by my firm, others of which come right out of my own pocket.
Here is the "real world" difference, my firm is made up of owners (or partners) who decide to send people to these things and use their profits and/or overhead to do it. Tell me, when did the few million owners (or voters) of the Commonwealth come together and make the same determination regarding the PA Society?
Again, why doesn't Rep. Cohen reach into his own pocket just sometimes? Like, when he wants to read a book. Or, why doesn't he just go to the library. Because 30 years ago, he found a cash-cow, that is State Government.
Never Reimbursed for Drinks
In 33 years in the legislature, I have never been reimbursed for any alcoholic beverages.
Carter: I'd like to think I know a few things
about how newsrooms operate. As for the new people Tierney hired being right-wingers, this is quite hilarious. Bill Marimow came from NPR for cryin' out loud. There's nothing right wing about Vernon Loeb either and those were the top 2 newsroom hires. And does Stu Bykofsky, who wrote about Cohen today in the Daily News, seem right-wing to you?
As for picking people's brains at the Pa. Society, you could certainly do that, but it's far less effective than calling them on the phone or meeting them in Harrisburg (where they all are the other 364 days of the year). For one thing it's not so noisy in Harrisburg. For another, they're (usually) sober. Pa. Society is a political event and, in my humble opinion, elected officials who attend ought to use their campaign funds. But then I don't think a legislator ought to bill taxpayers for air fare between Harrisburg and Philly, so what do I know.
I believe in conspiracies as
I believe in conspiracies as much as anyone, but newsrooms are too chaotic for some right wing conspriacy. Ultimately, if the market likes the product, people will buy papers. If not, they won't. I think that bias is a neat academic issue, and I complain about it in the context of political reporting, but not herding cats towards one issue typically.
And the Pa Society is purely political. I have no idea how that can be disputed. As to flying b/w Philly and Harrisburg, I've made that trip a lot and must say that I could see why someone would want to fly. And then I remembered that Amtrak has a train that goes easily both places. If flights were cheaper than train trips, I could see it. But probably not.
But the bigger issue is that there are like 5,000 state elected officials (not that many but way too many.) Most of them drive to Harrisburg (ok get a staff member and a car paid for by tax dollars) but drive and not bill taxpayers (most). Most go to the PA Society and pay out of campaign funds (which is a small slight of hand, b/c you are able to raise the campaign funds b/c of your office, so I don't know that it is morally any different.)
Different People Talk About Different Things
Were I a political reporter for the Daily News, everywhere I went among politicians, people would talk to me about about politics. I am not a prolitical reporter for the Daily News.
Were I the Democratic State Chairman, people would took to me about who they were for in Democratic Primaries for statewide office. I am not the Democratic State Chairman.
Were I a well-recognized heart specialist, people would talk to me about heart problems. I am not a well-recognized heart specialist.
I am a very active state legislator. People do talk to me at great length about state legislation.
Like Act 71?
How bad it is? How poorly it was drafted?
All well and good...
... but I'd like to read Rep. Cohen's response to these accusations.
-Z
He has responded on
He has responded on Phillyblog in two threads.
Phillyblog 1
Phillyblog 2
-----------------------------------------------------------
"yes adam gave some informative comments but he also seems to sprinkle a little adam dust on it." - merkin
What the Legislature Is Like and Why I Read Extensively
When one serves in the state legislature representing a diverse moderate income Philadelphia district, one does not enter the Capitol each day with vast numbers of allies. Other legislators do NOT rush out and say "Please let us know what we can do to get more money for your consituents. Just give us the word, and we'll be there."
Business lobbyists do NOT rush over to us and say,"We heard that Philadelphia has a major poverty problem, and we'd like to help. Just let us know how much you'd like to raise business taxes, and you can count on our support."
Labor lobbyists do NOT rush over to us and say "We know a lot of Philadelphians are unemployed. We would like to give preference to unemployed Philadelphians in all union hiring halls. Just give us a plan to fill as many jobs as you think should be filled, and you can count on our full support."
Newspaper reporters do NOT rush over to us and say "We know it's difficult to get the word out about progressive policy initiatives in the interest of low and moderate income people, and we would like to help you in any way you can. Just give us material and we'll give it prominent coverage immediately."
Other examples could be endlessly cited, but I hope the point is clear: those who seek progressive political change in the interests of low and moderate income citizens have very few and, in raw political terms, very weak political allies. And these political allies all too often have little if any ability to craft proposals that have any chance of passing, and to craft compelling rationales for their passage.
So I have learned that legislators who want to get things done that makes a meaningful difference in the lives of low and moderate income people have to be able to draft proposals, and explain under extraordinary scrutiny to hostile audiences who ask questions both relevant and irrelevant why this proposal is good or not. One has to be explain what the nature of the problem is in global national terms, what the federal government and what other states have done about it, and what alternative solutions there are, and why these alternative solutions are not as good as the ones that the sponsor is proposing. One has to be able to fend off numerous corporate and right-wing think tank paid studies that seek to prove that the focus instead should either be on more corporate subsidies or on something so radical that that it will have no chance of passing in the lifetime of any person.
The $7.15 figure that is now the law in Pennsylvania for the minimum wage (taking effect July 1) came from the state of New York. It was higher than the original target set by either the Pennsylvania AFL-CIO or any Senate Democrat. To sell this figure as acceptable required documentation as to the actions of other states, and documentation as to inflation, and poverty. It required an ability to rebut studies by economists that are solely based on economic models and not on real-life experiences. In other words, it took reading of a lot of books, both for information and the ability to recognize and analyze the disinformation spread by others.
The whole idea that the states should be active in minimum wage issues was something that came to me after reading many books about the Progessive Era in late 1986 and early 1987. I had many, many discussions with Pennsylvania labor officials, other state legislators in Pennsylvania, and national labor officials and legislators across the country before it became generally accepted wisdom that raising state minimum wages was something that both labor groups at a state and federal level and state legislators should get behind.
At the time I began my efforts, the concept of state minimum wage increases was considered absurd by almost all state legislators and labor officials. Before I got involved, neither Pennsylvania nor any of our fellow mid-Atlantic states had ever in the history of our country passed a minimum wage higher than the federal government's.
Reading extensively about the travails of the Clinton health plan in Washington led me to focus on partial solutions to the health care crisis in Pennsylvania. So, with then Senator Michael Dawida, I led the efforts to get the state of Pennsylvania in the business of guaranteeing access of Organ Transplant Organizations to the families of potential donors, actively promoting organ transplants through the use of state drivers licenses and the media. Pennsylvania's plan became the national model, followed by state governments and the federal government.
Reading extensively about legislative redistricting led me, as the lead Democrat with responsibility for Philadelphia House seats, to devise a plan, in consultation with others, that was so unquestionably constitutional that no one at all filed a challenge in federal court, saving the state about $200,000 in legal fees that had been appropriated to litigate such a challenge. The state plan was adopted on time. The Philadelphia City Council, by way of contrast, failed to meet its redistricting deadline, and the members of City Council were engaged in almost a year of bitter conflicts that led, under the Philadelphia City Charter, to members going without pay (the money was held in escrow) and engaging in many increasingly bitter recriminations until their redistricting was finally enacted way, way after it should have been.
The Philadelphia Inquirer gave a sampling of ten the kind of public policy books I read in its attack on me earlier this month. The sampling was weighted enough towards the Democratic Party that the state Republican Chairman issued a partisan attack against me and my choice of books that has been generally ignored by the media. Anyone interested in a further sampling can google search "Mark B. Cohen, amazon.com" for reviews of 36 books posted so far. Other book reviews will be added over time.
I attend meetings of the Pennsylvania for the same reason that many, many other governmental officials (state legislators, Congressmen, local officials, school district officials, authority officials) do: it is a gathering place of a lot of well-informed active people together at the same time. A few days before I went to the first of the three Pennsylvania Society meetings being attacked by the Philadelphia newspapers, the Philadelphia Board of Ethics described annual meetings of the Pennsylvania Society as an "official function." The Ethics Board said:
"For certain officials of the City of Philadelphia, attendance at the Pennsylvania Society has been historically considered to be an official function, and the City has paid for or reimburses for travel and the hotel stay....(We) believe the following describes as a permissible "gift to the City" (in this context the provision of food to City Officials): where the City has designated individuals to attend events as part of the City's institutional efforts in trying to influence legislation in Harrisburg as well as policy (e.g. environmental, safety, storm-water) in surrounding jurisdictions."
In other words, I am from the the only governmental official who attends meetings of the Pennsylvania Society for legitimate governmental purposes in the course of doing my official duties.
So this explains why you
So this explains why you spent 29,000 in books in just 2-3 years and seemingly do not like the use the library?
Honestly, the Penn or Temple library would be just as good--and perhaps contain more information related to these issues above. And, it is either free or one could simply pay a small fee--or hire interns to do the research (work study and copying are much less expensive than all these books!
I like the fact that you read. I just wish you would investigate your resources better and, perhaps, disclose what you purchase. For instance, if you buy Policy for Dummies, State Law Review and Pride and Prejudice, all in one day, as great a book as P&P is--I shouldn't be paying for it. Perhaps the others, I would consider, but without knowing what they all are, on the internet, how do I know?
A break down of costs
A break down of costs legislators run up in Harrisburg.
Unfortunately the link to the Inky chart is no longer working.
Clicky
-----------------------------------------------------------
"yes adam gave some informative comments but he also seems to sprinkle a little adam dust on it." - merkin
Why don't you ask how other people pay for it?
Look, these big awful events are a part of doing business as a politician. Reform junkies would be better off asking the more important question of how the other folks paid for their stuff. If they went and didn't charge it to the state, was Aetna paying for them to go? Was Comcast? Or Glaxo?
And if they pay for it out of their own pockets, doesn't that doom us to solely rich legislators?
Look, I think maybe a lot of reps spend more money than they should, but I'm not going to quibble over every expenditure and I definitely am not willing to nail a guy just because it's possible to see how he paid for something and impossible to see how his colleagues did it.
---
BradyDale OnLine
The R.I.I.C. Blog
The Philadelphia Unemployment Project
I should ask the other
I should ask the other Representative who pays their bill at Barnes and Noble. Perhaps some are truely wealthy enough to afford $28,000 in books over two years.
The point is this: do you remember when Rep. Cohen came on to YPP and told us it is between fighting poverty and a transparent government? That, by filling out expense reports and making them public, we are taking to much of his time away from his purpose. That we should sacrifice a bit of transparency for all the great work he does. Do you also remember when he classified similar misuses of the public trust as a PR problem?
That is the issue for me. What makes him so entitled? Why does he think we are so dumb?
Better yet, you can read this lameness here:
http://youngphillypolitics.com/rationale_full_disclosure
This is kind of scary
This is kind of scary because this issue is very clear cut to me. If you are going to advocate for progressive ideas, you have to come to the table with clean hands. It creates the appearance of using the office for personal gain when legislators get reimbursed/paid for items that benefit the person more than the office, or even as much.
Its the appearance that's damning enough. That's the standard, not actual gain.
But there is no job, not high flying investment banker, not partner at a law firm, not surgeon, not CEO, none, that would allow for the employer to pick up the books in those amounts at that cost. Seriously, none. You could not imagine telling your employer in the private context that you must be well read -- generally speaking -- to do your job, and that the employer must pay for the cost of the books you read to be well read. I understand being a smarter legislator, but the amount of money spent goes well beyond that. Many of those books also have a personal benefit -- I am willing to bet. As a result, it creates the avoidable appearance of using the office for personal gain.
That's why this issue is so clear to me, b/c it allows a steward of our resources to do something that you could not do in the private sector.
As to the criticism that the DN and Inky are biased against progressive politicians, that may even be true, but that's a weak argument for not upholding the public trust to be above the appearance of impropriety and use of the office for personal gain.
If you are going to advocate progressive politics, you cannot allow the opposition to have this as a smoke screen towards getting consensus on important issues. This appearance affects not just the individual legislator, but constituents who need the assistance of government to solve their problems. Their ability to get that help is comprimised -- albeit at the margin -- by a cloud that comes up around their elected representative.
I have railed against what I see as the bias in the Papers on this site. But skepticism does not equal moral relativism. Right is right and wrong is wrong.