More Closed Door Politics in Mercer County?

Written by Roberta Biros

For those of you that haven’t been keeping up with the latest local election news, there has been a bit of a stir in Mercer County lately. On February 5th, the Sharon Herald published an announcement of an upcoming public meeting to be held today, February 17th. The meeting was being organized by Democratic Greenville Mayor Richard H. Miller and Republican Greenville Councilman Brian Shipley [READ HERE]. The purpose of the meeting was to gather people that might have an interest in running for office in the Spring Primary.

I read the article, and I found the concept interesting. It was a meeting that they were offering as a public service, but I was skeptical of the “non-partisan” nature of the meeting. Politics (being what it is) generally isn’t a place where Ds and Rs gather in the same room to discuss the prospect of running for office. My initial impression was that it was a way for the incumbent Ds and Rs to find out who the upcoming competition might be. I couldn’t quite sign on to the “Kum Ba Yah” experience. I dismissed it.

The excitement came on February 11th, when the Herald published a follow up story titled “Some aren’t welcome at political meeting”. It seems that after the initial announcement of the meeting, the planners decided to “limit” the people that could attend. The Herald portrayed it as “banning” certain people from the meeting, but I think the twist was a little unfair. The Herald went on to explain who was “not welcome” at the meeting, and their references were pretty harsh.

I again dismissed the story. My personal opinion was that it was a good idea to try to keep the meeting limited to only those people that were actually interested in running for office. I thought that the concept of keeping “looky lou’s” and press out of the meeting would make legitimate candidates feel more comfortable. It seemed like a fair attempt to protect the privacy of those that wanted to attend. I still questioned the motivation for having the meeting in the first place, but I didn’t have a problem with attempting to limit the attendees. Unfortunately, the way that the “dis-invite” was presented turned into a train-wreck. I woke up on the morning of the 12th to multiple email messages from my readers regarding the issue. People wanted to know what I thought and they wanted me to jump on the bandwagon. I really wanted to keep my distance from this one.

Unfortunately, it didn’t go away. The Herald wrote yet another story this past weekend criticizing Greenville Mayor Dick Miller. The opinion piece was titled “Does Miller want to exchange mayor’s gavel for a crown?” and it used the “closed door meeting” topic to open a whole laundry list of complaints against the Mayor. This, of course, just added fuel to the fire for the people that were mad in the first place. I’ve been receiving email communications about the issue, but I stuck to my guns and didn’t comment. Not until today.

This afternoon I received an email asking if I had heard about the “invite only” meeting that was being held in Greenville. It was an honest question, but it was based on a story told to a friend . . . told to a friend . . . told to a friend. My reader finally came to me to ask about it as they figured that I’d have the facts and “the whole story”. I explained the details that I outlined above, and he was satisfied with my explanation. It was at that time that I realized that I needed to take a public stand on the issue for the sake of clarity and fairness.

The meeting is taking place tonight, and I hope it goes off without incident. My opinion? I think it was a good concept. I would have liked it better had the Democrats and Republicans had held separate meetings and leave the “Kum Ba Yah” at home. I’m not sure who is to blame for the train-wreck regarding the “closed door” announcement, but it was unfortunate. It is just another sign of the changing political climate . . . people don’t trust politicians at all, and politicians seem to stumble over their own feet at every turn when dealing with the press. I’m not judging anyone on this one, as I think there is definitely more than one side to this story. I comletely understand the heated opinions on both sides . . . but I remain in the middle.

Some of you may like my opinion . . . others may think that I’m being too soft . . . hopefully many of you will realize that I’m just trying to be fair and call it as I see it.

As always, just my opinion.
~Roberta Biros, Mercer County Conservatives

Politicians and Corruption: Am I Painting With Too Broad a Brush?

Written by Roberta Biros

My recent experiences with the Mercer County PA GOP have me wondering if corruption and complacency are simply a result of politicians being in office for too long. The Republican Party in Mercer is, for lack of a better description, an example of the “old guard run amuck”. They are the “same old faces in the same old places”, and they like it that way. They feel comfortable and they have a sense of invincibility and entitlement . . . two characteristics that are nothing to be proud of (in my opinion, of course).

I thought it was just me . . . but then I started talking to all of you. I started hearing the same opinions admitted openly and with the same distain. Normal tax paying citizens who are sick and tired of being sick and tired . . . Honest, hard-working Joes frustrated by the same old same old. I’ve heard it in Mercer County and I’ve heard it across the State of Pennsylvania. My analytical brain has been busy counting and processing the data. My findings? Corrupt and power-drunk politicians are everywhere! (you’re all shocked by this revelation, right? I didn’t think so)

Are they all bad? No . . . at least I don’t think so. Are there honest, hard-working ladies and gentlemen out there that are really trying to make a difference? Yes. I’ve witnessed it with my own eyes, so I know it too be true. It is my opinion that the longer someone holds a powerful office, the more likely they are to become complacent. It is also my opinion, however, that the propensity for evil needs to be there in the first place (sort of like saying that you are either born with a conscience for “right and wrong” or you’re not). Deep stuff, right? Well, let me get a little deeper for you . . . to quote Lord Dalberg-Action,

“Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

A simple statement, but oh-so true! Lord Action’s quote is from the late 1800’s, but it is timeless. The same thoughts are being spoken today.

Earlier this week, I was watching Glenn Beck on Fox News and he was doing a great interview with Jason Chaffetz, a freshman Congressman from Utah. Glenn mentioned that he’s interviewed the young Congressmen a few times, and he likes interviewing him because he has a fresh perspective. Glenn Beck made a statement that I had to grab onto (I had to rewind the DVR a few times to get it completely). Here it is:

“I have a new theory. I don’t think I’ll take any more applies from the barrel. I’m gonna start pickin’ them from the tree. I’m gonna start listening to the freshman class because you guys, hopefully, haven’t been corrupted yet!”

Did you get that . . . “corrupted YET”. Young faces and fresh ideas are healthy. My feeling is that we should give new faces a chance . . . give them a chance to prove themselves. Let them prove that they are “good guys” or “bad guys”, BUT if they start to stink up the joint, boot their “doopa” to the curb too.

To quote Lord Action again:

“There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it.”

As always, just my opinion.
~Roberta Biros, Mercer County Conservatives

The Pennsylvania General Assembly: Important Lawmakers or Pencil Pushers?

Written by Roberta Biros

I’ve always tried to stay “in tune” with political issues. Lately, I’ve “turned up the volume” a little with respect to my political “education”. In order to stay informed on ALL political issues, I’ve subscribed to lots and lots of email lists. Some of the subscriptions are to other blogs, some are for press releases from State Legislators, and ONE subscription is to the Pennsylvania General Assembly Daily Session Report [if you are interested, you can SUBSCRIBE HERE]. The Daily Session Report is amazing as it outlines all of the Legislation that is handled by our well-qualified and well-paid (tongue in cheek) Legislators on a daily basis.

If you read the Daily Session Report carefully, you will be disappointed to see how useless some of the Legislation seems to be. Now I realize that there is some amount of silliness to be expected, and I don’t mean to be over critical, but some days I just wonder “what are they thinking”. I read a WONDERFUL commentary from the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review on-line HERE. Please take a minute to read it. It is one of those commentaries that I wished I had written first . . . it is smart, it is completely truthful, and it is very funny. It left me PIMP (for those that don’t know text messaging abbreviations, PIMP stands for “peeing in my pants”). It outlines a typical day in the Pennsylvania Legislature, and it had me “laughing out loud” (yes, “LOL” for those texters out there).

With all silliness and criticisms aside, I was VERY interested to read my Daily Session Report for Wednesday, February 4th. For those of you that aren’t familiar with the daily occurrences in the Legislature, I think that an overview of Wednesday, February 4th is a great “learning tool”, so I’d like to examine it in detail with some additional commentary and bits and pieces from other sources. This might help you to understand why the selection of good Legislative leadership is so important for all of us.

An Overview: Pennsylvania House of Representatives, Wednesday, February 4, 2009

Governor Ed Rendell’s Budget Address

Wednesday, February 4, 2009 was a big day in the Pennsylvania General Assembly. First, the Senate and House of Representatives were to meet in a Joint session (at 10:30am) to hear an address by Governor Ed Rendell. The address was the presentation of the Governor’s 2009-2010 Proposed Budget. If you didn’t get an opportunity to see it, you missed a really good time. The “boooos” and “jeers” from the House floor in response to some of the Governor’s statements were very entertaining. It was similar to a response that you’d expect from Steeler Fans as the Cleveland Browns enter Heinz Field . . . very funny.

House Resolutions

The House then started their day by voting on two “less important” pieces of Legislation as follows:

House Resolution 46 — A Resolution recognizing February 7, 2009, as “National Black HIV/AIDS Awareness Day” in Pennsylvania.. Passed unanimously, 198-0.

Comments: Realize that resolutions like this are a common occurrence in the PA House. On one day alone, the House passed resolutions for February 6, 2009, as “Wear Red Day for Women”; January 2009 as “Cervical Cancer Awareness Month”; congratulating the 2008 Philadelphia Phillies who won Major League Baseball’s World Series on October 29, 2008; congratulating the Pennsylvania Young Farmers Association for its outstanding contributions to this Commonwealth; January 2009 as “School Director Recognition Month”; the month of January 2009 as “Radon Action Month”; January 29, 2009, as “Thomas Paine Day”; January 25 through 31, 2009, as “Catholic Schools Week”; and congratulating Wilkes University on the occasion of its 75th anniversary. Enough said?

House Resolution 49 — A Resolution congratulating the National Football League champion Pittsburgh Steelers for winning Super Bowl XLIII and becoming the most successful franchise in NFL history with their record sixth Super Bowl title. Passed unanimously, 198-0.

Comments: You really need to read the text of the resolution to grasp the full drama. So many “WHEREAS” stuffed between football statistics is very comical. I actually read the whole thing out loud to my husband to provide the full effect.

After the passing of the “less than important” Resolutions, the House moved to more important issues . . . the House operating rules for the 2009-2010 term.

Roll Backs of Reform Rules

First,there were a few “roll backs” of reform rules that I find to be particularly disturbing. The reforms were put into place in 2005 after the “middle of the night pay raise controversy”, but they have been “rolled back” by Democrats in a grab for power in the House of Representatives. This issue is outlined in detail in the article from the Lancaster Intelligencer Journal [HERE]. According to the Intelligencer Journal, the three main changes were as follows:

• Expanded power by the House Rules Committee, dominated by the Democratic leadership team, to amend bills that come out of the state Senate for concurrence. GOP legislators say it gives the Democratic majority the ability to dramatically gut the bill.

• Making it easier to extend debates and votes past the 11 p.m. deadline. The previous 11 p.m. rule was put in place two years ago to prevent middle-of-the-night votes while most residents are sleeping.

• Requiring what’s known as a “constitutional majority” to challenge a ruling by the Speaker of the House or to allow bills to be voted on less than 24 hours after the Senate has approved them. During the previous legislative session, challenging a ruling took only a majority of House members present on the floor. Motions to suspend the rules, however, required a two-thirds majority.

It is clear that the Democrats, with their slight majority (104-99), are taking advantage of their power to make it nearly impossible to stop any of Governor Rendell’s plans. As per the statements of Rep. Bryan Cutler (R) in the Intelligencer article:

“That’s what we’re effectively setting up for here, the same kind of ramrodding of bills,” Cutler said. “We’re really consolidating power into the majority and specifically into the leaders, because that’s who makes up the rules committee. This is merely setting up the stage to put the budget and (possible) tax increases through. It’s going to effectively limit debate.”

These changes are disturbing and, in my opinion, a step backwards. VERY IMPORTANT CHANGES FOR ALL OF US TO BE AWARE OF.

Legislators Working For Lobbying Firms

The second, and very important issue that was discussed by Legislators on Wednesday, February 4th was one regarding Legislators receiving pay from Lobbying firms. This issue was discussed beautifully in the Philadelphia Inquirer [READ HERE], but allow me to summarize:

(1) During the discussions regarding the House Rules, an amendment was proposed by REP REICHLEY. The amendment was very simple, actually. You can read the entire text HERE, but it makes one simple and brief statement. “Members may not receive compensation for affiliating with or being employed by a lobbying firm registered with the Department of State”.

(2) At 8:47PM, the House voted to vote on the just-drafted (and very brief) amendment (193-5)

(3) At 8:48PM, Members unanimously voted to accept the simple restriction (198-0)

(4) AFTER the amendment was accepted, the Democrats decided to actually read the one sentence amendment, and they realized that it meant “no moonlighting for Lobbying firms”.

(5) At 9:06PM, the House voted to revote on the measure.

(6) In a vote of 98 – 100 (straight down party lines), it was determined that the measure was “unconstitutional”.

According to numerous news reports, the House remained in session until nearly 10:30PM that evening while all of the “wrangling” was going on. Later, Republicans were accused of “trying to pull a partisan fast one”?

A “Partisan Fast One”? What the **%$#???? That is so funny I’m speechless for just a minute . . .

. . . OK, I’m back. “A Partisan Fast One”? You’re kidding me, right? PLEASE take just a minute to look at the ONE PAGE amendment that was the center of the “Partisan Fast One” HERE. Believe me, this is not a complicated scheme by any stretch of the imagination. It is essentially ONE SENTENCE, and the Democrats failed to read and understand it? I’m not a specialist in “Constitutional Law”, but this particular amendment isn’t exactly “rocket science”.

Silly, silly, and did I mention SILLY?

So What Does All Of This Mean For Us, The Tax Payers?

I hope that this little summary gives you some idea of the things that go on in Harrisburg on a daily basis. So much plotting, so much political wrestling . . . but, deep down, VERY IMPORTANT STUFF. Sure, there is a certain amount of “Pencil Pushing” that goes on . . . but deep down there are very important decisions being made that will eventually affect all of us.

Regarding the changes made to the House Rules, I find some of them bothersome. The Democrats in the House have essentially set themselves up to push through anything of their liking . . . in the middle of the night and all. This is not good public policy.

Regarding allowing Legislators to work for Lobbying Firms, I find this particular topic also bothersome. In a blog post that I will publish in the next few days, I will explain why it is my opinion that Legislators should be working full-time for their “full-time pay”. IF, they feel a need to work other jobs in addition to their Legislative duties, I think it is absolutely wrong that they can work for and receive payments from any Lobbying firm. Again, poor public policy.

As always, just my opinion.

~Roberta Biros, Mercer County Conservatives