HARRISBURG - It was supposed to be a new era. Rocked by scandal and hounded by an angry electorate, the Pennsylvania Legislature had no choice but to change.
Six years after calls for reform surfaced, some marginal reforms have been made, but the core issues remain untouched.
The public uproar led to the repeal of the controversial legislative pay raise in 2005 and was the catalyst for the calls for reform, which have grown in intensity. Lawmakers of both parties were defeated in 2006 in a reaction to the pay raise, and more followed in November as part of a general anti-incumbment mood, this time targeted mainly at Democrats.
The start of a new session in January produced the usual talk in both the House and Senate about the need to rein in the size and cost of the legislative branch (one of the nation's most expensive), make it more accountable to the public and erase the stigma of recent public corruption investigations.
The first six weeks of session produced agreement by House leaders to tweak how per diems - set at $163 - are paid and new House rules to limit political activities during legislative working hours. There was also movement in the House and Senate on a measure to list all state spending online.
But the reform steps under consideration pale in comparison to recommendations made in a state grand jury report in May.
Issued as part of the Bonusgate investigation into illegal use of legislative staff and resources for campaign purposes, the 23-member grand jury called for ending per diems and overhauling legislative operations. The grand jury recommended dismantling the entrenched four-party caucus system and replacing duplicative caucus print shops and information technology departments with bipartisan offices, but those suggestions were largely dismissed by elected officials.
Meanwhile, longstanding proposals for broader reforms like setting campaign finance limits, banning gifts from lobbyists to lawmakers and public officials, opening up the ethics oversight process and term limits for legislative leaders and committee chairmen or even convening a state constitutional convention to consider changes either languish in committee or have yet to be reintroduced.
Reform may wait
As Harrisburg's preoccupation with the spring budget season looms, some question whether reform will take a back seat. Gov. Tom Corbett's budget address Tuesday will kick off an intense period of focus on the state's finances leading up to the June 30 state budget passage deadline.
Achieving major reforms will be difficult as long as lawmakers are insulated from the trials and tribulations of average people because of their perks and gratuities, said Eric Epstein, coordinator of RockTheCapitol.org.
"Politicians are nibbling at the margins," he added. "They are doing just enough to keep voters off their backs."
That outlook is not shared by new House Majority Leader Mike Turzai, R-28, Pittsburgh, who said a package of House bills addressing spending disclosure, public contracts and lobbying is the "strongest set of reforms in more than 25 years."
The newly ascendant House Republicans steered passage last month of several bills seeking to make state government more accountable. They are part of a package of bills introduced two years ago when the GOP was the minority caucus.
But two measures in the original package with real teeth to attack an entrenched culture of "pay-to-play" politics have yet to be voted on. They would prohibit sole-source contracts and emergency contracts going to campaign contributors at the state and local level and give an existing state board clear authority to approve all sole-source and emergency contracts in the legislative, executive and judicial branches.
Both bills will be voted upon in the near future, said Turzai spokesman Stephen Miskin.
Size of Legislature
Almost a year after Times-Shamrock newspapers published a "Call for Reform" series, the basic fact about Pennsylvania's Legislature remains the same. The series uncovered numerous instances of waste in state government, including the abuse of per-diem payments and the lack of accountability for legislators' expenses. It also closely examined the immense size and cost of state government and gave taxpayers an inside look at what they get for their money.
Pennsylvania still has one of the largest full-time and most expensive legislatures in the nation. Pennsylvania lawmakers are among the highest-paid in the nation and enjoy perks not available to counterparts in many other states.
According to the most recent comprehensive report for fiscal 2009-10 from the National Conference of State Legislatures, Pennsylvania ranks second at $327 million in the cost of its legislative branch despite being sixth in population among the 50 states.
California's full-time Legislature takes the No. 1 spot at $344 million, but it has a population three times the size of Pennsylvania's 12.6 million.
An audit report issued by the Pennsylvania Legislative Audit Advisory Commission in December pegs spending for fiscal 2009-10 at a lower amount of $318 million. This reflects differences with the NCSL in whether several legislative support agencies are considered part of the legislative branch or not.
Pennsylvania's overall legislative budget this year is $300 million with support agencies factored in, reflecting spending cuts made by both chambers.
Despite the trimming, Pennsylvania lawmakers would need to make more dramatic cuts to alter the NCSL fiscal 2009-10 rankings. With a population of 19.5 million, New York spent $221 million on its legislative branch that year to place No. 3. In fourth place is Florida, with a population of 18.5 million and a legislature costing $168 million.
Outside of operating costs, the Pennsylvania Legislature sits on a surplus of $188 million, according to the most recent audit report. This surplus has shrunk by $13 million from the previous year, but it remains a point of controversy with state finances still in the red. Gov. Tom Corbett wants to cap the surplus at 25 percent of the operating budget, roughly in the $70 million range, but his proposal hasn't advanced yet.
Payday
Salaries and benefits account for 70 percent of the Legislature's spending, according to the audit report. Pennsylvania's 253 lawmakers more than double California's 120 lawmakers. House Speaker Sam Smith, R-66, Punxsutawney, plans to introduce a resolution to reduce the size of the House from 203 to 153 members, a change that would require an amendment the state Constitution..
House and Senate lawmakers receive a base salary of $79,623 this year, a 1.7 percent increase from the 2010 salary of $78,314. Lawmakers automatically receive pay increases each Dec. 1 if inflation is above zero.
The 2010 salaries for lawmakers in other large states with full-time Legislatures are: California $95,291; New York $79,500; Illinois $67,836 and New Jersey $49,000, according to the NCSL. With a part-time Legislature, Texas lawmakers were paid $7,200 annually in 2010.
The COLAs have been controversial during a time of recession. Many lawmakers have announced they are giving their COLA to the state Treasury or local charities. Some lawmakers have sponsored bills to end the COLA, but they have made little splash since their introduction.
Costly support
But the real cost comes in maintaining 3,000 legislative support staffers, the largest contingent in the nation, according to the NCSL. The Senate had 858 employees as of Jan. 26. The House counted 2,141 employees in a 2010 staff report. It's not unusual for veteran top-ranking staffers to be paid more than lawmakers.
Legislative staffers point out the NCSL's numbers include some agencies counted as part of the executive branch in other states.
Even noting those discrepancies, Pennsylvania still has more legislative staffers than the next two largest states, New York and Texas, which have much larger populations.
Per diems
While per diems are a small percentage of legislative expenses totaling in the $2 million range, they loom large symbolically as an example of largesse.
In many legislative campaigns last year, getting rid of per diems for meals and lodging was a rallying cry, and a number of candidates vowed not to accept them and submit receipts for actual expenses instead.
While keeping the per-diem system, House leaders, meeting as the Bipartisan Management Committee in a private session recently, decided to require members to sign documents giving the time/date/place and purpose to get a per diem for an overnight stay. They would need additional documentation justifying the legislative purpose of overnight stays that don't involve session days and committee and caucus meetings. The new rule continues to allow a practice where lawmakers can own homes in the Harrisburg area and still collect the per diem at the $163 rate, said Mr. Miskin.
Lawmakers can take per diems under an Internal Revenue Service rule that considers a lawmaker's district to be his or her "tax home," thus making trips to the state Capitol for sessions a business expense.
Mr. Smith and Mr. Turzai said per diems are a more efficient way to handle daily expenses than keeping track of receipts. IRS officials have given a preference for the system the House is implementing, said Mr. Smith. Mark W. Hanson, an IRS spokesman, said it would be inappropriate for the agency to comment about Mr. Smith's point. The Senate also pays per diems for meal and lodging.
These explanations fail to satisfy activists who say the only way expenses can be verified is through receipts.
"It will still be possible for lawmakers to collect phantom expenses," said Tim Potts, founder of Democracy Rising.
One reason lawmakers are wary of submitting receipts is because it could show someone staying at the pricey Harrisburg Hilton rather than a Day's Inn, he added.
Regardless of rules allowing per diems in both chambers, individual lawmakers are taking matters into their own hands.
Fifteen of the 50 senators, including Sen. Lisa Baker, R-20, Lehman Twp., submitted actual expenses in 2010, according to a list provided through a Right To Know Law request by the Senate chief clerk's office.
The House chief clerk's office doesn't have such a list, according to Right to Know Law officer Brooke Lewis. The House provided a 1,118-page document of expenses claimed by members from Oct. 1 through Jan. 28.
Among the Northeast Pennsylvania delegation, Reps. Rosemary Brown, R-189, Middle Smithfield Twp.; Doyle Heffley, R-122, Lower Towamensing Twp.; Jerry Knowles, R-124, Tamaqua; Kurt Masser, R-107, Ralpho Twp.; and Tarah Toohil, R-116, Butler Twp., have submitted expenses on at least one occasion for meals or lodging during this period when the Legislature transitioned into a new session, according to the document. But a full account of transition period expenses is incomplete since lawmakers have a 60-day window to submit an expense after it's incurred.
In recent actions, lawmakers chipped away at some other benefits.
- The House is following the Senate's lead and requiring its members to pay 1 percent of their salary to cover the cost of health care coverage effective July 1. This would amount to roughly $790 and remains far below what most employees in the private sector pay - a percentage of the actual premium costs. Other state employees pay two percent of their salary toward health care. If state employees participate in a wellness program, they earn a one percent discount on their contribution.
- House members will no longer be able to lease a car from the state-owned vehicle fleet after Nov. 30, 2012 and will only be reimbursed for mileage. The current mileage rate for House members and senators is 51 cents.
- The state pension law enacted in November cut retirement benefits for freshmen lawmakers and those elected hereafter as well as future state and school district employees. They have to rack up 10 years of state service, compared to five, to be vested in a pension and contribute a small portion their income to cover investment losses.
Contact the writer: rswift@timesshamrock.com