INSIDE

Check us out online atwww.Capital-watCh.com

have a news tip or story suggestion? New hires? Births, engagements, sightings? Got a better idea? Know of an interesting state or local government program that addresses a real need or solves a problem in an innovative — and widely replicable — way?

Know of a study, report, guidebook, website or other resource that would be helpful to your peers in state or local government? tell us about it. E-mail the information to goodwinpin@comcast.net. anonymity is assured.

CAPITALWATCH

Pennsylvania’s #1 Online Source for Political, Legislative and Public Policy NewsFor a free trial subscription, please visit our web site at www.capitolwire.com.

Capitolwire coma service of GovNetPA, Inc.

PRSRT STDU.S.POSTAGE

PAIDPERMIT 280

LANC., PA 17604

www.CAPITAL-WATCH.com

VOL. 4 NO. 11

Senate approves red-light camera legislationPAGE 3

No compromise in sight on Sunday hunting PAGE 4

Activist says Senate Bill 1282 will “suck the blood out of Pennsylvania” PAGE 6

Senate passes low-income school vouchers bill PAGE 8

Democrats protest preliminary redistricting plan PAGE 11

Pennsylvania is just one step away from joining the majority of states that ban texting-while-driving. All that is needed is the signature of Gov. Tom Corbett who is expected to sign the bill.

The state Senate voted 45-5 to approve changes to legislation that the House passed 188 to 7.

The law would make tex-ting while driving a primary offense, meaning police could stop a driver they see texting and issue a ticket punishable by a $50 fine. With Corbett’s signature, the law would go into effect in March 2012.

Opponents consider a tex-ting ban an infringement on personal liberty. But support-ers, including state police, the insurance industry and highway safety officials, say the law is necessary to save lives.

According to the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, “PennDOT recorded 13,790 crashes involv-ing distracted drivers, which resulted in 66 deaths. Cell-phone use accounted for 1,093 crashes and 11 traffic fatalities.” Agency data do not distinguish

between texting or talking on a cell phone.

Pennsylvania would become the 35th state to ban texting for all drivers, according to Gover-nors Highway Safety Association.

Nationally, 95 percent of respondents said they viewed

texting or e-mailing by other drivers as a serious safety threat, according to the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety’s annual Traffic Safety Culture Index, which was released in October. One-third of those

respondents also admitted to texting while driving.

A study conducted by the National Highway Safety Administration in which col-lege students text messaged while operating a driving simu-lator found that text messaging

increases crash risk by a mul-tiple of 8.7

In addition, as reported by the New York Times, pre-liminary findings from a natu-ralistic study of a sample of heavy-truck drivers suggest

that text messaging while driving increases truck driver crashes and near-crashes by a factor of 23.7

However, another study released last year showed that road crashes increased slightly in states where texting bans had

been adopted.“The laws are well meaning,

and texting while driving is obviously dangerous, but there is no evidence that texting bans enacted in other states have reduced crashes,” said Russ Rader, a spokesman for the Insurance Institute for High-way Safety, the Washington, D.C., the group that conducted the research.

Drivers from around the Har-risburg region said they would support a texting ban, even if they doubted it would eliminate the practice.

“While I doubt if texting-while-driving is going to stop altogether, it probably will crack down on the practice,” said state employee Hilary Johnson. “I sure hope it does.” CW

NOVEMBER 2011

No more texting- while-driving in PA

“PennDOT recorded 13,790 crashes involving distracted drivers, which resulted in 66 deaths. Cell-phone use accounted

for 1,093 crashes and 11 traffic fatalities.”

This is my home.This is my experience.

This is my natural gas drilling company.

– Bob White and Family Leaseholder

MyRangeResources.commy natural gas drilling company

RANGE RESOURCES

When Range Resources drilled a natural gas well on Bob White’s property, he was able to observe the process from a unique perspective. Bob works out of his home, so he was there every day to witness the task first-hand, from start to finish: “I found the entire process extremely fascinating.”

Bob says that for a period of time the well area was like any other active construction site — with heavy equipment and a lot of activity. But he’s happy to say that was all just a temporary inconvenience: “Now that the drilling is complete, we have no noise, no dirt, no trucks — all done. They’ve reclaimed the land. It’s back to normal. All we deal with now is the royalty checks.”

Let Bob tell you the whole story in his own words at MyRangeResources.com.

NOVEMBER 2011 CAPITAL WATCH 3

PUBLISHER/AD DIRECTORJim Laverty

(717) 233-0109, ext. 122

EDITORIALEditor-in-chief

Jacqueline G. Goodwin, Ed.D.goodwinpin@comcast.net

(717) 418-3366

Contributing WritersChris Comisac

Peter L. DeCourseyKevin Zwick

News ServiceCapitolwire

Graphic DesignLisette Magaro

ProductionShawn Skvarna

Capital Watch is published every month.

Reproduction of this publication in whole or part is prohibited except with the written permission of the

publisher. Capital Watch is non ideological and nonpartisan.

(717) 233-0109, ext. 114

NEWS

CAPITALWATCHwww.capital-watch.com Senate approves red-light camera legislation

Nineteen cities across Pennsylvania would be authorized to enact ordi-nances to use red-light cameras to improve traffic safety at intersections under Senate Bill 595, approved by the state Senate.

“Red-light running killed an estimated 676 people in 2009 and injured another 113,000 across the United States, accord-ing to a recent report from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety,” said Sen-ate Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi, the bill’s prime sponsor. “My legislation will make Pennsylvania roads safer, and it will save lives.”

Senate Bill 595 permits Pennsylvania cities with a population greater than 18,000 and a full-time police force to install red-light cameras. Cameras are already used in Philadelphia; this bill would permit Pittsburgh, Scran-ton and 17 third-class cities to use the cameras, if approved by the local city council.

A red-light violation under this pro-gram would result in a civil fine of $100 unless a lesser amount is set by local ordinance. No driver’s license points will be issued for violations, and violations cannot be considered in ratings for car insurance.

No city can use the fines to enhance its general budget. All funds generated by the program will go to the state’s Motor License Fund and will be used by the Department of Transportation (PennDOT) for transportation safety projects. Half of the fines will be used for local projects in the cities that implement the systems; the other half will go to municipalities across the state. Addition-ally, total collections in a particular city are capped at five percent of that city’s annual budget.

Approximately 500 cities in 25 states now use red-light cameras. According to the report from IIHS, an indepen-dent, nonprofit organization focused on reducing deaths and injuries from traffic crashes, there was a 24 percent reduc-tion in fatalities caused by drivers run-ning red lights in cities where cameras are installed.

The IIHS estimates that 150 lives have been saved over the past five years just in the largest 14 cities with red-light cameras.

The legislation also makes more records available to the public under Pennsylvania’s new Open Records Law, including the number of vio-lations in a given city and annual reports required from any city that used red-light cameras.

Before installing any cameras, cit-ies will be required to consult with PennDOT.

Senate Bill 595, approved 35 to 14, now moves to the State House for con-sideration. CW

4 NOVEMBER 2011 CAPITAL WATCHNEWS

No compromise in sight on Sunday hunting Supporters of a bill to expand Sunday hunting said adding an extra hunting day could have economic benefits, increase the ranks among younger hunters, and allow for greater property rights.

But a compromise might be far off in the distance, as signaled by the hard-line opposition of the state’s largest farm organization.

“You need to talk to the grassroots; they set the direction,” said Pennsylvania Farm Bureau’s Joel Rotz on Oct.27 dur-ing a four-hour House Game and Fisher-ies Committee hearing.

Rotz told lawmakers who were look-ing for a compromise that the bureau’s 53,000 members guide its policy, and he was not in the position to change the organization’s stance, he said.

The bill, sponsored by Chairman John Evans, R-Erie, would repeal the state’s Sunday hunting prohibition law, which dates back to 1873. Pennsylvania is one of

11 states that have some type of restric-tions on Sunday hunting. The Game Commission would regulate how many Sundays would be opened for hunting.

Carl Roe, executive director of the Pennsylvania Game Commission, said they would take “a very conservative approach to adding Sunday hunting.” He said the agency would monitor the effect on game populations and the possible impacts of increased hunting.

Brent Miller, of the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation, said the Game Commission could use Sunday hunting as an additional wildlife management tool.

Rotz said the repeal would restrict those who wish to be outdoors on Sun-days without concern of interfering in the hunter’s sport. “These citizens are not unlike the farmer who is saying to the hunter, ‘you have six days and can’t I have one?’” he said.

Democratic Chairman Ed Staback,

D-Lackawanna, said the Farm Bureau is not helping themselves by staying away from negotiations.

Some lawmakers on the committee touted a recent Legislative Budget and Finance Committee study, conducted by Southwick Associates, which estimat-ed that Sunday hunting could generate $804 million in economic activity, sup-port 7,439 jobs and generate $56.8 mil-lion in state and local taxes.

Rep. Kevin Murphy, D-Lackawanna, said the bill is “a jobs bill, as well as a Sunday hunting bill.”

Rep. Dan Moul, R-Adams, said he would offer a “compromise amendment” that would open Sunday hunting to pri-vate lands only, which should limit the interference between hunters and other outdoor enthusiasts.

“All we’re asking for is the opportunity to do it with our land,” he said.

Miller said the present ban is an

infringement on how private landowners manage their property.

“Allowing farmers and other landown-ers to diversify their income source by allowing an additional day of hunting on their land will provide a large capital influx to rural economies that are hardest hit by the current recession,” Miller said.

Rep. Jeffery Pyle, R-Armstrong, said he wasn’t so much concerned with the economic benefits of a bill, but said he was concerned about the dwindling ranks of hunters.

Rep. Marc Gergely, D-Allegheny, said that those opposed to Sunday hunting should not be espousing a “perception of danger.”

“We aren’t the bad guys out there,” he said. “We are your friends not your enemies.” CW

Pay Less with

1-877-736-6727 • paturnpike.com

E-ZPass Saves Time and Money

E-ZPass Customers Pay 7% Less than Cash Customers

Available at your local…

BY KEVIN ZWICK, CAPITOLWIRE

House returns juvenile court reform bill to Senate The state House of Representatives on Nov. 1 unanimously approved legislation to address problems with the state’s sex offender registration requirements.

Senate Bill 818’s original focus, as sent to the House by the Senate, was related to the Luzerne County “Kids for Cash” scandal. The underlying legisla-

tion seeks to require courts to make cer-tain information available before handing down a sentence in a juvenile proceeding.

Seen as moving toward becoming

law, the bill was amended in the House Judiciary Committee to attach language that closes a loophole in Pennsylvania’s Megan’s Law by requiring convicted sex offenders without a residence to register every 30 days with the Pennsylvania State Police as transients. The amend-ment would also establish specific crimi-nal sentences for sex offenders who fail to comply with registration requirements.

“Convicted sexual offenders continue to roam the commonwealth with abso-lutely no accountability,” said Rep. Ron Marsico, R-Dauphin, bill sponsor and majority chairman of the House Judi-ciary Committee, told the House.

The committee’s minority chairman, who helped craft the changes to the bill, said the new Megan’s Law provisions are necessary to prevent the state from los-ing federal funding.

“This is a mandate by the federal gov-ernment that this been done” and federal dollars will be jeopardized if the bill fails to become law, said Rep. Tom Caltagi-rone, D-Berks.

Legislation that contained the loophole provisions was vetoed by Gov. Ed Rendell on Nov. 27, 2010. That bill also included provisions to expand the state Castle Doctrine – opposed by the governor - and Rendell said the inclusion of the two separate subjects made the legislation unconstitutional, requiring his veto.

Responding to that veto, the House approved similar Megan’s Law legisla-tion in February, but those bills have not yet been considered by the Senate.

“I’m asking members to once again send a message over to the Senate that we’re supporting the bill, as amended, overwhelmingly, and ask them to get the job done,” said Marsico just before the final House vote. CW

NOVEMBER 2011 CAPITAL WATCH 5NEWSADVERTORIAL

Hugh C. Long, II Regional President for Pennsylvania

and Delaware Executive Vice President

Eastern Community Banking Group Wells Fargo Bank

CW: What are your firm’s major products and services?

HL: Wells Fargo & Company is a

nationwide, diversified, community-based financial services company with $1.3 trillion in assets. The company was founded in 1852 and has its head-quarters in San Francisco. We provide banking, insurance, investments, mort-gage, and consumer and commercial finance through more than 9,000 stores—about 300 of which are here in PA—12,000 ATMs, the Internet (wellsfargo.com), and other distribu-tion channels across North America and internationally. We have more than 270,000 team members, including more than 8,000 here in PA. Wells Fargo serves one in three households in America and is ranked No. 23 on For-tune’s 2011 rankings of America’s largest corporations. Wells Fargo’s vision is to help our customers succeed financially.

CW: Under what circumstances did you join the firm?

HL: I joined a bank in Georgia in

1973 after listening to some great ad-vice my father gave me. I had gradu-ated from Virginia Military Institute and then served in the U.S. Army, but I wasn’t sure what I wanted for my ca-reer. My father suggested that I go work for a bank because in banking I would learn about many types of busi-nesses and might get exposed to an industry that interested me. This was something that he had done in his life and it had worked out well for him.

I did discover an industry that I

thought was intriguing, where I could put my skills to good use—it was banking. I enjoyed learning about new companies and new opportunities, but what I really loved—and found a pas-sion for—was helping individuals and companies succeed and grow. That’s been my focus for 38 years now, and while I have never left my job, the small bank I started with is now Wells Fargo and I am proud to now be with one of the largest banks in the United States.

I have had the opportunity to meet

many fascinating individuals and help companies throughout the east coast. My company has given me the oppor-tunity to serve in Atlanta, Washington, D.C., and Philadelphia and I have en-joyed every minute of it, especially the last eight years in PA.

CW: What are your near-term and long-term goals for the firm?

HL: Our most recent near-term goal

has been to complete the Wells Fargo/Wachovia merger in PA and Delaware with no disruption in service. Our local retail conversion took place back in April while the final retail bank conver-sion—in the Carolinas—was just com-pleted a few weeks ago. I am proud to say that the conversion, both locally and nationally, went off as flawlessly as one could expect. It is now up to us to deliver on the complete Wells Fargo experience of helping all our customers succeed financially while capitalizing on the goodwill the Wachovia brand had built over the years across PA.

Our immediate attention is turned to

helping our customers—both individu-als and businesses—deal with the econ-omy. For us that will be putting really good bankers in front of our customers and coming up with great ideas and providing best-in-class service.

All of our competitors claim to have

good people—we have the best people. Our competitors claim good service—we have great service. We have more than 80 lines of business, with a depth of product and service solutions that is unmatched. That is what we’re really good at as a company.

Long term, our job is to deliver good

value to our customers and sharehold-ers and help our communities become stronger. To reach this long term goal, we are doing all we can to keep credit flowing and to help customers in finan-cial distress find solutions.

CW: Are your customers local, re-gional, national, global? Where else do you have facilities?

HL: We are proud to provide bank-

ing services to individuals, small busi-ness, middle market companies, gov-ernmental entities and Fortune 500 firms, including some of the largest companies in the world. We hold the second largest share of deposits in the Commonwealth and are by far the larg-est depository institution in the eastern third of the state where we have the majority of our community banking stores. We are honored to count many of PA’s most revered companies and organizations as major clients and are proud of our position as the nation’s #1 SBA lender, and #1 small business lender.

November 2011 CAPITAL WATCH NEWS 5

Policy Roundtable Spotlight The PBC Policy Roundtable, like its national counterpart in Washington, is a forum in which CEOs meet on a peer-to-peer basis to formulate public policy proposals to the most pressing issues of competitiveness. The Policy Roundtable provides senior managers the opportunity to interact extensively with policymakers, policy experts, media, and other stakeholders; participate in policy evaluation; decide upon long-term public policy strategy; and guide policy education/advocacy efforts. Corporate Chairpersons, CEOs, COOs, CFOs, and Presidents are invited to become members of the PBC Policy Roundtable. For more, see: www.pabusinesscouncil.org.

While our decision making is lo-cal, our company is global, with more than 40 representative offices around the world including a major presence in Hong Kong, London and other financial centers to serve the overseas banking needs of our cus-tomers. And as the needs of our customers expand, so will our pres-ence in foreign markets.

In the United States, we have

community banking stores in 39 states and the District of Columbia. We also have hundreds of Wells Fargo Home Mortgage and Wells Fargo Advisors stores across the country, including offices in states where we do not have a community bank presence.

CW: Would you invest more in PA? What would you do to im-prove PA’s competitive business climate?

HL: We recently made a substan-

tial investment across our PA market as all of our community bank stores were completely refurbished, with new furniture, fixtures, paint, land-scaping and signage. We have also hired close to 300 team members in PA since the merger and will con-tinue to hire additional bankers, ex-panding our employment in business and consumer banking in 2012.

There is a strong need for trans-

portation infrastructure improve-ments and continued upgrades of our airports. Additionally, we need to provide more support for education at all levels. Our business customers are talking about uncertainty: around healthcare costs, around taxes, and around where new customers for these businesses will be coming from. A business is not going to take out an expansion loan or hire addi-tional workers if they don’t think there will be customers to buy their product or service or if they do not know how much it will cost them to deliver the product or service.

We must continue to promote a

pro-business climate in PA. The Pennsylvania Business Council is a key driver in this effort as are the effective partnerships that have been built between the business commu-nity and our local, regional and state-wide chambers.

Hugh Long has been a banker since 1973 serving currently as Regional President for Pennsylvania and Delaware and Executive Vice President of the Eastern Community Banking Group within Wells Fargo. Long provides executive leadership to Wells Fargo’s retail, small business and busi-ness banking in Pennsylvania and Dela-ware. He is based in Philadelphia. Long came to Pennsylvania with Wachovia Bank that was later acquired by Wells Fargo. He had been Wachovia’s Regional President in Atlanta before his transfer to Philadelphia where he managed the bank’s activities throughout the mid-Atlantic region. Long had served as a Regional President with successively large responsibilities for First Union Bank in Washington, DC; Atlanta; and Richmond. He began his career with the Georgia Cor-porate Banking Group. Long is a board member of the Pennsyl-vania Business Council, a member of the board and executive committee of the Greater Philadelphia Chamber, and a member of the board of the Philadelphia Orchestra Association; Boy Scouts of America, Cradle of Liberty Council; and Drexel University. Long served in the US Army Reserve ris-ing to the rank of Captain. He holds a B.A. in History from the Virginia Military Institute.

6 NOVEMBER 2011 CAPITAL WATCHNEWS

Activist says Senate Bill 1282 will “suck the blood out of Pennsylvania” “He wants to suck your blood,” says political activist Gene Stilp of Taxpayers and Ratepayers United characterizing Sen.Dominic Pileggi’s proposed legisla-tion, Senate Bill 1282, which, accord-ing to Stilp would “suck the blood out of Pennsylvania’s national standing” by changing the Electoral College method of electing a president by electing a pres-ident through the congressional district results in the state.

Stilp and Baylor and the organizations they represent want to drive a stake though Pileggi’s plan before it sees the light of day.

As a swing state with 20 electoral votes at stake, Pennsylvania is a draw for Pennsylvania candidates -- and their campaign dollars, says Stilp.

If “Count Pileggi’s plan is approved,

then the state would lose campaign dol-lars that would otherwise be spent. It just doesn’t make sense.”

The proposal by Pileggi would assign 18 of the state’s electoral votes to the winner in each congressional district, and two to the at-large winner. Stilp and Dennis Baylor of Citizens Account-ability Project, say a popular vote count is a better method of selecting the president.

Using a large photo of what they called “Pileggi” Stilp and Baylor voiced their disapproval of the Senate bill pro-posal inside the State Capitol on Oct. 27. However, Stilp and Baylor’s protest was short lived. After delivering the photo depiction of Sen. Pileggi to his senate office security was called and Stilp and Baylor were told to leave. CWGene Stilp is optimistic that the legislature will drive a stake into Sen. Dominic Pileggi’s

electoral bill before it sees the light of day.

Sen. Pileggi’s electoral bill still slated for Senate voteAs legislation on Marcellus Shale, vouch-ers, state redistricting and congressio-nal reapportionment heat up and are debated, public notice of Senate Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi’s electoral bill has largely died down.

So much so that John Gizzi, honcho of the conservative publication Human Events on Friday wrote: “Nervous Penn-sylvania GOP House members kill elec-toral college change.”

Gizzi quoted no one actually say-ing this, and after summing up the issue from the viewpoint of the state’s congressional GOP delegation, which opposes the bill, he wrote: “For now, however, signs are strong that electoral vote-by-district will not be taken up or even debated by the Republican legisla-tors who originated the idea in Pennsyl-vania and, for that, the blame (or credit) must go to some nervous Republican congressmen.”

Mr. Gizzi’s venerable weekly conser-vative tabloid is reading very different signs than those held up by the Senate GOP here. Unlike the congressional Republicans, they have jurisdiction over the issue, and three sources here say Pileggi will move his bill for a floor vote and Senate passage.

That bill, of course, would change the apportionment of the state’s electoral votes from its current winner-take-all status, to awarding them by congressional district. That would change the 2008 election from 21-0 for President Obama in Pennsylvania electoral votes to 11-10 for Obama, for example. A similar 21-0 win by Sen. John Kerry in 2004 would have been 12-9 for

Kerry if this had been in effect.If it had been in effect since the found-

ing of the nation, it would not have changed a single presidential election, scholars say. But critics say it could do so in the future, and that make it a GOP power grab.

Pileggi and others say it is wrong to use 10 or so GOP congressional dis-trict’s voters as ballast to double the prize that voters in Philadelphia and the 10 or so Democratic districts can bestow.

When will a vote on the bill happen? That is not clear, and Pileggi’s office did not comment or make him available to do so, an extraordinarily unusual lack of

response for them, although they were up to their eyeballs in Senate redistrict-ing, facing today’s deadline for a prelimi-nary plan.

The other comment made by Gizzi in his piece that I am not sure is true is that if this dies, the congressional Republican delegation will have killed it.

This issue has divided the Republican establishment at the highest levels. Gov. Tom Corbett is for it. His close friend and ally and campaign supporter, former Allegheny County Executive Jim Rod-dey, is not. And other pillars of the GOP establishment, east and west, are against it, while Pileggi is for it.

House Speaker Sam Smith, R-Punx-sutawney, and House Majority Leader Mike Turzai, R-Allegheny, have both said they are for it. But many House members, including a surprising number of Republicans, would rather let this issue pass them by.

Plus, folks have just gone quiet on it.When Capitolwire tried to find out

if Sen. Chuck McIlhinney, R-Bucks, was going to even schedule the bill for a committee vote, nobody responded. Corbett, after answering questions about the weather, declined to discuss the issue, much less restate his sup-port for it.

His staff restated his backing of the plan to its supporters, but the longer Corbett is silent on it, the more momen-tum the plan could lose.

Plus, while I believe those who say Pileggi will bring it before the Senate and pass it from that body, if that is to be more than a show vote, it needs a couple of other things to happen:

It needs not to be a Perzel Special. If this is left on the low-down for another month, then brought up and passed in three days in the Senate and then jammed into the final fall deal, along with shale, etc., without more meaning-ful public discussion, it will raise a stink.

The major part of the meaningful discussion has to be to refute an effective counter-campaign run against it so far by Republican State Committee Chair-man Rob Gleason. In addition to his practical argument that this will cost the state GOP too much money, Gleason has made a persuasive case to House GOP conservatives. Many now say the bill contradicts the intentions of the framers of the U.S. Constitution.

I don’t understand that argument, since back in the first half of the 19th century, this was an oft-used system for apportioning electors, back when people paid attention to the framers, not just lip

service as they do today.But Gleason has made it well so far,

and that is another debate that ought to be made in public.

Of course, it is hard to say that a Penn-sylvania legislative proposal that has drawn editorials in the New York Times and Washington Post has not been pub-licly vetted.

But if it pops up again late in the process after a long quiet period, as the result of an end-of-the-year deal, it could help opponents continue to say it carries an unsavory flavor, which is the biggest reason the Legislature may not swallow it. CW

BY PETER L. DECOURSEY, CAPITOLWIRE

That bill, of course, would change the apportionment of the state’s electoral votes from its current winner-

take-all status, to awarding them by congressional district. That would change the 2008 election from

21-0 for President Obama in Pennsylvania electoral votes to 11-10 for Obama, for example.

NOVEMBER 2011 CAPITAL WATCH 7NEWS

Liquor store privatization could generate $1.6 billionBetween $1.1 billion and $1.6 billion in one-time revenue could be generated from selling the state’s retail and whole-sale liquor system, according to a report released Oct. 25.

And if maximizing up-front revenue is the “paramount goal” of selling the state’s liquor system, then license avail-ability should be limited to 1,500, which would increase the value of each license, according to the nearly 300-page study conducted by Public Financial Manage-ment, Inc. (PFM).

“…Privatization would mean new wholesale and retail business opportunities for entrepreneurs, which in turn will create thousands of private-sector job opportuni-ties throughout the state - something a government agency truly cannot mimic,” House Majority Leader Mike Turzai, R-Allegheny, said in a press release.

His Democratic counterpart, Demo-cratic House Leader Frank Dermody, D-Allegheny, said the PFM study shows that privatizing “does not raise enough money” and will cost jobs.

“The report confirms what we have said. Privatizing liquor sales in Penn-sylvania does not raise enough money to make it worth giving up one of the state’s most valuable assets. It will cost thousands of Pennsylvania workers their jobs and pensions,” Dermody said in a statement. “It means higher prices and reduced selection for consumers who want to buy wine and liquor, and it does nothing to change the way beer is sold.”

The study found that 3,200 current liquor store employees “will be separated from service,” 780 of which might be trans-ferred to other state employment. But those workers have a “minimal” chance of finding employment with new private liquor license holders, according to the report.

Wendell Young, President of the Unit-ed Food and Commercial Workers Local 1776, a union that represents 3,000 state liquor store workers, said: “We have to review the entire report, obviously, but the executive summary alone raises enough red flags to put an end to this farce.”

“Rep. Mike Turzai’s bill would raise taxes and prices – and we know this from media and witnesses who have testified before the House Liquor Control Com-mittee,” he said. “The PFM people have reached the same conclusion. In order to match the revenues we already have today, taxes are going to go up and con-sumers will be forced to pay more. That makes no sense whatsoever.”

Gov. Tom Corbett in a statement said that Turzai’s plan is a “place to start” and said he supports “taking the state out of the liquor business and putting it back

into the free market.” Turzai’s bill privatizes the state’s retail

and wholesale liquor system. The state’s 18 percent Johnstown Flood Tax and 30 percent markup would be eliminated in favor of a “gallonage tax,” which could range from $8.25 to $12 per gal-lon, based on types of liquor or alcohol content.

“Finally,” said Rep. Mark Mustio, R-Allegheny, a House Liquor Control subcommittee chairman. “As far as I’m concerned, it’s a piece to the puzzle.”

Mustio and other legislators on the House Liquor Control Committee stated concerns concerned earlier this month about how the beer industry could be adversely affected by privatization.

House Liquor Control Chairman John Taylor, R-Philadelphia, said recently that he was waiting for the PFM study to be released so the committee could have more hearings about the fiscal impacts.

“The PFM report, issued earlier today, took many months to prepare and includes a great deal of information,”

said Erik Arneson, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi, R-Del-aware. “Senator Pileggi looks forward to studying it over the next few weeks.”

Among ways that the study suggests the state could maximize revenues from selling the retail operations is limit-ing the number of licenses available. The study suggests issuing 1,500 retail licenses to increase the value of each license with criteria based on a two-tier approach that distributes licenses based on square footage and shelf space. CW

CREDIT UNIONPENNSYLVANIA

ASSOCIATION

200 high school

students getting

hands-on experience in

managing finances in

real-life situations at

12 Reality Fair booths

Wednesday, November 16, 2011East Rotunda of the Capitol9:00 a.m. - 3:00 p.m.For more information, contact Christina Mihalik, Vice President, Governmental Affairs, PCUA, at 800-932-0661, ext. 5282, or email christina.mihalik@pcua.coop.

8 NOVEMBER 2011 CAPITAL WATCHNEWS

Senate passes low-income school vouchers billThe state Senate has passed a taxpayer funded private school voucher plan on a 27-22 vote.

Senate Bill 1, sponsored by Sens. Jef-frey Piccola (R-Dauphin) and Anthony Williams (D-Philadelphia), passed fol-lowing a more than four-hour debate.

Governor Tom Corbett applauded members of the Senate for passing the bill.

“I want to commend the members of the state Senate for passing a strong education reform package that will help improve opportunities for thousands of school children throughout Pennsylva-nia,’’ Corbett said.

Under the plan children from households making less than $29,000 a year would be eligible to receive a full voucher of equal to what is spent in the district in which they live. Students from households earning less than $41,000 would get a voucher equal to 75 percent of the subsidy amount. On aver-age, a family would receive $7,700 for each student, but could get as much as $13,000.

Both the PSEA (Pennsylvania State Education Association) and the PSBA (Pennsylvania School Board Association) strongly oppose Corbett’s plan. They were disappointed with the state fund-ing cuts which forced already strug-

gling school districts to increase class sizes, decrease course offerings and cut programs. The PSEA and the PSBA say school vouchers will take even more money away from public schools.

The ACLU (American Civil Liberties Association) also released a statement accusing the PA Senate of ignoring its obligations to the state legislature by passing private school vouchers.

Promoters of the plan, such as REACH Alliance & Foundation and Common-wealth Foundation believe that the com-petition created by the voucher plan will ultimately improve schools.

For students from low-income back-grounds, especially black and minor-ity households the voucher plan would provide an opportunity to get out of some of the states worst schools. Despite the widening achievement gap nation-wide, students will have the chance attend more competitive schools, take Advanced Placement courses, and ulti-mately become more viable candidates for competitive colleges and universities.

Advocacy groups like Dropout Nation expect the passage of this plan will start a conversation about expanding voucher plans to middle-class households, espe-

cially in the suburbs.The bill now goes to the House for

consideration where support for the tax-payer-funded voucher system remains

uncertain. House Speaker Sam Smith, R-Jefferson, told the Patriot-News he doubts that the House will pass the edu-cation reform plan. CW

Sen. Hughes says vouchers will make school financial problems worseState Sen. Vincent J. Hughes (D-Phil-adelphia/Montgomery) expressed his dismay at Senate approval of legislation (Senate Bill 1) that would institute a school voucher program in 144 Pennsyl-vania schools.

“The voucher plan will make the finan-cial problems of the Philadelphia School District and other struggling districts across the state that much worse,” Hughes said. “The financial burden of this plan will strain the budgets of school districts and cost taxpayers millions.”

Hughes noted that the Philadelphia School District just announced another $22 million in budget cuts.

“It is disappointing that this legisla-tion passed the Senate,” Hughes said. “Not only is the plan costly to taxpayers and public schools, it does not put into practice proven reforms that have a track record of success in education.

“All children and all schools should benefit from education reform.”

Hughes said the plan would cost $133 million in 2013-14. Gov. Tom Corbett’s

budget slashed public school funding by $1 billion this year. He added that there is no new money to fund school vouchers.

“On top of last year’s basic educa-tion cuts, we are demanding that our public schools cut even more from their resources for the 90 to 95 percent of children left in low-performing schools,” Hughes said. “It offers no commitment to provide additional dollars for charter school reimbursement in Philadelphia – and across the state.

“On top of that, this school voucher concept no track record of success. School reform is necessary — and should be a top priority — but it needs to be done with proven solutions like longer school days, Saturday classes, smaller classes, inter-vention and parental involvement, not through costly initiatives that benefit only a relatively small number of students.”

Hughes offered an amendment that would establish so-called “Hope Acad-emies” that included many of the con-cepts that he said were successful in raising student achievement. The West

Philadelphia lawmaker’s amendment was rejected on a party line vote of 20 to 29.

Senate Bill 1 offers taxpayer-fund-ed vouchers to low-income students in poorly performing public schools. The vouchers would first be available to low-income children enrolled in the bottom 5 percent of the worst-performing schools. In the second year, the plan would then be expanded to include private-school students who live in the districts of those failing schools.

By the seventh year, vouchers would be offered to low-income students at any public school where half of the students are performing below grade level on state math or reading exams.

The measure would also expand the state’s Education Improvement Tax Credits — a program giving tax breaks to businesses that donate to private-school scholarships or public-school pro-grams.

Hughes said that this costly mea-sure would short-change real education reform and take much needed funding

from public schools.“There is no doubt that reform is

needed to improve education in low-performing schools, but it cannot take funds from public schools because that disadvantages the students left behind in the public school,” Hughes said. “We need reforms that help all students in all schools.”

“Reform should start with using ideas in education that have a long record of success and not rely on concepts where the evidence of academic achievement is inconclusive. That is why I offered my plan – the Hope Academy concept – that would have implemented proven educa-tional solutions.”

Hughes, who serves as the Democratic chair of the Appropriations Committee, said public schools are already strug-gling with severe budget cuts as a result of Gov. Corbett’s budget and do not have the resources or the latitude that private schools have in adjusting policy.

The bill now goes to the House for consideration. CW

Senate Bill 1 was sponsored by Sen. Jeff Piccola and passed the the Senate on a 27-22 vote.

NOVEMBER 2011 CAPITAL WATCH 9

PA Chamber applauds Senate’s education reform billThe Pennsylvania Chamber of Business and Industry applauds the state Senate for advancing legislation (S.B. 1) that would ensure that the state’s public edu-cation system better meets the needs of all students.

“Passage of Senate Bill 1 is a good first step toward making sure public educa-tion is delivered in a way that matches students’ ability to learn; fostering over-all student achievement; and ensuring that Commonwealth taxpayers receive a good return on investment for money spent on education,” PA Chamber Presi-dent Gene Barr said.

Barr said the reform measures con-tained in the bill – specifically the cre-ation of an opportunity scholarship pro-gram for low-income students in the Commonwealth’s poorest performing school districts and an expansion of the Educational Improvement Tax Credit program – infuse fresh thinking into the mindset that the only way to improve education is to spend more.

“The reality is that achievement results

have not matched taxpayer money spent on education in recent decades,” Barr said. “Providing an effective and efficient system of public education is an essential function of state government; it’s simply time for a new approach to how this is accomplished in the Commonwealth.”

Barr said consumer choice and competi-tion help drive business success in the pri-vate sector. Those same concepts applied to education give options to students who would benefit from alternatives to the status quo, while encouraging struggling schools to take steps to improve.

Barr said the business community supports the governor’s and lawmak-ers’ educational improvement efforts because today’s students are tomor-row’s workforce.

“Having a workforce that offers the skills employers require starts with a strong educational foundation in the early years of learning,” he said. “Ulti-mately, Senate Bill 1 will lead to a quality education system that works for every-one.” CW

PSEA says school vouchers will cost taxpayers $200 million by 2012-14A new government program approved by the state Senate to provide tax-funded tuition vouchers to students attending private and religious schools would cost Pennsylvania taxpayers more than $200 million by 2013-14.

Costs to taxpayers are likely to rise as the program expands says PSEA President Michael J. Crossey. Crossey says the costs of the program created in Senate Bill 1 would come at the expense of students attending public schools, who began this school year suffering the impact of $860 million in state fund-ing cuts.

“Senate Bill 1 is a bad choice for Penn-sylvania’s taxpayers, public schools, and the students who learn there,” Crossey said. “This legislation would drain more resources from public school students who are already feeling the consequenc-es of brutal school funding cuts. Even though two-thirds of Pennsylvanians oppose vouchers, this bill would put the burden of this very bad and costly choice on the backs of taxpayers, schools and students.”

A fiscal note released by Senate Demo-crats indicates that Senate Bill 1 would cost the taxpayers $73 million in 2012-13, and $133 million in 2013-14 for the voucher program.

“Public schools educate every student

who comes through their doors and are accountable for everything they do and every nickel they spend,” Crossey said. “This voucher bill spends the taxpayers’ money on schools and programs that don’t live by those rules. It is a terrible choice that couldn’t come at a worse time.”

The voucher scheme under Senate Bill 1 is also flawed with a lack of accountability measures. Schools receiv-ing vouchers would not be required to report on student progress using the same standardized tests Pennsylvania public schools are required to administer to students.

“Pennsylvanians don’t want tuition vouchers and they don’t want funding

for their public schools cut,” Crossey said. “This bill does both. It is definitely taking public education in the wrong direction.”

Crossey also pointed out that several

pro-voucher organizations last spring publicly advocated for rapid expansion of such schemes. “That means the cost to the taxpayers would only increase,” Crossey said.

The recent Terry Madonna Opin-

ion Research poll shows Pennsylvanians oppose tuition voucher plans by a wide margin. The same poll indicated that 69 percent of respondents opposed Gov. Tom Corbett’s $860 million in public

school funding cuts, which have forced school districts to increase class sizes and eliminate programs that work for students.

In contrast, polling indicates that more than 80 percent of Pennsylvanians sup-port initiatives like early childhood edu-cation, school safety and class size reduc-tion. These are among the initiatives in PSEA’s Solutions That Work package, a set of recommendations backed by research and based on classroom experi-ence. Crossey sent these recommenda-tions to every member of the General Assembly.

A recent study released by the Penn-sylvania Association of School Adminis-trators and the Pennsylvania Association

of School Business Officials showed that state funding cuts have forced school districts to increase class sizes, eliminate course offerings, and cut tutoring pro-grams. CW

“Pennsylvanians don’t want tuition vouchers and they don’t want funding for their public schools cut,” Crossey said. “This bill does both. It is definitely taking public education in the wrong direction.”

10 NOVEMBER 2011 CAPITAL WATCHNEWS

.

Working to reduce programmatic costs, the state Department of Public Welfare has trimmed from its Medicaid rolls more than 100,000 people found to be ineligible for the publicly-funded health insurance program.

“The fact that this went on for so long is shameful, and I think the taxpayers have a right to be outraged that it occurred,” Tim Costa, the department’s executive deputy secretary, told lawmakers during a House Republican Policy Committee hearing.

But advocates for welfare recipients aren’t thrilled with the news.

“So it’s come to this. Cutting 100,000 cases from Medicaid is celebrated as a good thing. In fact for many people it could be life threatening,” wrote Richard Weishaupt, a senior attorney for Community Legal Services, Inc., in an e-mail.

Weishaupt, claiming that department staff has dropped by 16 percent during the last few years, wrote: “Suddenly re-determining all these cases with no increase in staff and no overtime means that tens of thousands of people who are eligible are being cut off even though they have complied.”

He said the reductions were due less to ineligibility and more to these individuals being “the victims of a system that

has ceased to function effectively and efficiently.”

Costa, too, said the system is broken, but to the detriment of taxpayers and those who truly need medical assistance. He noted recent data shows 2.2 Pennsylvanians pay for every one person enrolled in the Medical Assistance (MA) program, something he said is “unsustainable.” According to the department, there are currently 2,189,695 enrolled in Medicaid.

Costa said the Corbett administration inherited a backlog of more than 154,000 cases requiring eligibility review. Those cases included people who had things change in their life that could impact their eligibility for Medical Assistance (MA).

“Unfortunately, for whatever reasons, some of those [cases] were never looked at and, over time, would just go away,” becoming part of the backlog of eligibility reviews, said Costa.

He explained that some of the closed cases involved deceased former recipients, people who moved out of state, and “a lot of them were just no longer eligible to receive services.”

But that’s not the case, said Weishaupt.“While there may be a few cases that

should have been closed, our experience, confirmed by DPW data, is that the number of cases closing has shot way up for alleged failure to provide information,” wrote Weishaupt. “Yet when we talk to clients, many have receipts showing that they brought up the paper work and others detail their desperate attempts to call the Department to provide the documents that they are accused of not supplying.”

The reduced enrollment numbers will go a long way to helping the department stay within its current budgetary allocation, Costa told the committee. He said the department does not plan on asking the Legislature to allocate additional funding for the agency during the current budget year.

“Enrollments and the number of recipients served drive much of the department’s budget expenditures,” said Costa.

Costa said the current downward enrollment trend was encouraging: the number of Medicaid recipients have declined by 20,000 in July and another 15,000 in August. The 100,000 case closures were done during the last three months, Costa said.

When asked by lawmakers about the fiscal impact of those reductions, Costa and the department’s budget director said the savings might not be instant, but they would eventually be significant.

“The majority of those recipients were enrolled in managed care, which means we [DPW] were paying a per member per month fee [to managed care providers],” so recovering money from those providers for cases that DPW should have closed could be difficult, said Costa.

“I’m not sure that in the majority of those cases that we can do that,” Costa explained. “I think that it’s the department’s responsibility to make sure its rolls are cleaned up … that burden really doesn’t fall on them [the providers], it falls on us.”

Dave Spishock, director of the department’s budget office, said the enrollment reductions, going forward, are “slow to equate to savings” in Medicaid spending.

But the reduction in the MA Managed Care program’s rolls by roughly 12,000 recipients in September “is a significant drop” and “is probably saving roughly $22 million in state funds,” said Spishock.

He said the savings will occur at the back end of the fiscal year, as long as enrollment continues to drop.

“If we see a continued decrease in MA enrollment, it’s going to slowly translate into savings, especially on our managed care side,” said Spishock. Currently, 1,618,722 individuals are enrolled in the MA Managed Care program in all but 17 of the state’s 67 counties.

He added that “a significant portion” of the $200 million in fraud, waste and abuse the department has been tasked with finding by the current state budget “will be attributed to the efforts that we’re making on the eligibility side [of MA].”

Spishock said the department is hopeful that it will have more data in the coming months to be able to present more specifics about enrollment reduction cost savings.

As part of the state budget that was approved in June, the department was tasked with finding $471 million in savings within its expenditures. Approximately $271 million of those saving were spelled out in legislation passed in conjunction with the budget. The other $200 million is to come from reducing waste, fraud and abuse within departmental programs. CW

100,000 ineligible recipients trimmed from PA’s Medicaid rolls BY CHRIS COMISAC, CAPITOLWIRE

NOVEMBER 2011 CAPITAL WATCH 11

@PAWineSpirits E-mail signmeup@pa.gov

Capitol Watch_ThanksgivingWines_Halfpage_11.2011_OUTLINES.indd 1 10/24/2011 7:49:57 AM

NEWS

.

The Legislative Reapportionment Com-mission voted 3-2 to approve a prelimi-nary state redistricting plan that House and Senate Democrats said was a parti-san and possibly unconstitutional plan to cement GOP majorities in power.

A hearing will be held on that plan Nov. 18 at noon, and there is now a 30-day period to negotiate further before a final approval vote can be held.

Democrats pressed for more time, say-ing they had just seen the plans offered by the GOP but on another 3-2 vote, former Judge Stephen McEwen, the chairman of the commission, voted to proceed. McEwen declined to say when he first saw the plan or answer any other question, saying the other commission-ers would offer the only explanation of his deciding votes.

Barry Kauffman of Common Cause/PA backed that view that the plan was partisan. Kauffman said of the commis-sion chairman, former Judge Stephen McEwen, elected to the state Superior Court and as Delaware County district attorney as a Republican, “Well, I think it was what was expected now. He was appointed by the majority party. The Supreme Court is controlled by the

Republican Party and I think that was an outcome which was pretty much expected.”

House Democratic spokesman Bill Patton said: “The commission voted 3-2, along party lines.”

Kauffman said the vote showed: “We really need to get serious about reform-ing this whole process so that we protect the interests of communities and citizens … instead of the political careers of the self-interested people drawing the maps.”

Senate Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi, R-Delaware, and House Major-ity Leader Mike Turzai, R-Allegheny, both defended their maps as fair to the Democrats and constitutional.

They both said districts had to be moved from the west to the east and cen-tral parts of the state to match the state’s population flow over the last two decades.

The biggest surprise when the GOP plans were unfurled came in the House when the House GOP plan spurned part of their tentative deal with House Democrats, and saved the seat of Rep. Bud George, D-Clearfield.

Instead of the House Democratic plan to move George’s seat to Coatesville and

Downingtown in Chester County, Turzai instead combined the Allegheny and Washington County districts of Demo-cratic Reps. Nick Kotik and Jesse White, putting them in the same district. The combined district slightly favors Kotik, the Republican redistricting staff said.

The plan also moves the home of Rep. Adam Ravenstahl, D-Allegheny, into the district of Rep. Dom Costa, D-Allegheny.

The same maneuver occurred to Rep. Dan Deasy, D-Allegheny, whose home is now in the district of Rep. Matt Smith, D-Allegheny. Democrats said it was intentional and protested it.

Asked if that was intentional, House GOP spokesman Steve Miskin said “No.”

Miskin said the House GOP staff “is working to fix the Ravenstahl district” and planned to fix the Deasy district so both members lived in their districts again.

He declined to call it a mistake but said wrong addresses were input for both men, and the House GOP would submit a fix to the commission.

Democrats remained unconvinced. Patton wrote: “It is well known that Rep. Adam Ravenstahl lives in the city of Pittsburgh where his brother is mayor.

Mr. Miskin wants you to believe that it was simply ‘a mistake’ for the Turzai map to put the 20th District entirely outside the city of Pittsburgh. Give me a break. The majority leader cannot be that incompetent.”

Turzai told reporters that the infor-mation regarding the home addresses came from the Democrats. “That’s why you have a 30-day period, to make cor-rections in the process,” Turzai said.

The other three House seats were moved as expected: those of departing Reps. Denny O’Brien, D-Philadelphia, to central-western York County, Chelsa Wagner, D-Allegheny, to Allentown, and John Evans, R-Erie, to central and west-ern Berks County.

Turzai said once it became clear that George did not want to retire, and George angrily said Republicans were “taking me out in redistricting because they can’t beat me at the polls,” Turzai switched gears.

An equal concern, Turzai said, was that of the 106,000-voter drop in west-ern Pennsylvania, 6,000 came from northwestern Pennsylvania, and 100,000 from southwestern Pennsylvania, far from George’s North-central district.

Democrats protest preliminary redistricting planBY PETER L. DECOURSEY, CAPITOLWIRE

Continued on page 13

12 NOVEMBER 2011 CAPITAL WATCH

This is the part of the legislative year when lots of things are baking, but when you stick a fork in them, it comes back gooey and gloppy, because nothing is close to being done yet.

Roberts Rules of Legislative Delicacies or Mr. Redistricting, Judge Stephen McE-wen may say things are supposed to be cooked by now, since we have had plenty of time and temperature, but, as I told my 6-year-old Ellie, “if it isn’t ready when the cookbook says it is, you cook it some more.”

“How long do you have to cook it, daddy?”

“Until it’s ready to eat or has to be tossed in the garbage.”

Here is a look at two bills that appar-ently landed in the slow-cooker rather than the broiler. Their backers just hope that slow-cooker’s plugged in. And one of them needs the chief cook’s touch if it is to get to the table, not the trashcan.

Sen. Joe Scarnati’s Marcellus Shale natural gas environmental provisions still industry opposition

Last week, Senate President Pro Tem Joe Scarnati, R-Jefferson, who stopped a shale tax bill for two years, then has spent this year trying to create a fee-and-regulation bill, brought out the environ-mental regulation part of his bill.

As we wrote, he is still negotiating with his own caucus and Senate Democrats to

see how he can count to 26 votes for his package, with revenues of about $200 mil-lion. Democratic leaders initially signed off on that, but once they felt deceived and betrayed over redistricting, and decided they had leverage here, they wanted more money and more for the non-shale dis-tricts. To be fair, those were always their goals, although Senate Minority Leader Jay Costa, D-Allegheny, said Scarnati’s fee levels were appropriate. But until the redistricting snafu, few thought the Sen-ate Democrats would stick to those goals.

Scarnati won’t discuss those negotia-tions, but industry sources say the Dem-ocrats may end up having to swallow the kind of bill Gov. Tom Corbett proposes, whose revenues will take a projected seven years to reach Scarnati’s $200 mil-lion for year one.

So that is one problem for Scarnati. The other is that his 60-page-plus draft proposes lots of new restrictions and requirements for drillers. And they are mad about it, mad enough they say, to take their jobs and play elsewhere.

The drilling companies say they were surprised by the number and extent of the proposed rules, and have started a campaign to oppose them. Not to fix a few here or there, but to try to junk most of them, despite Scarnati backing them.

For example, there is a fracking water re-use requirement of 30 percent, but in

some wells, not that much comes back up, drillers say. But again, their point is not that they want a few lines dropped here or added there, but they feel assaulted.

They have lobbyists telling lawmak-ers that if this is the bill, they’re against it and will take their drills and jobs to Ohio. That is what Scarnati said about the bills proposed by House Democrats and former Gov. Ed Rendell. Now the industry is whispering it, and is poised to shout it, about him.

He says he will work with everyone to keep the jobs and environment both safe.

He wrote in an e-mail: “90 percent of the amendment we put in was from the Shale Commission report. The other 10 percent is within the “strike” zone. As I have said repeatedly, this is a process which has a long way to go yet. The issues of a fee and zoning will complete a final product. After that is completed, as I have said before, we must have a pack-age the Governor can sign. The industry has been included in this process right up to this point. I welcome their input publicly or privately.”

But if the industry is pushing back on stuff from the Marcellus Shale Commis-sion Report – which essentially was a compilation of what the governor and his folks wanted and what the industry wanted – that is a big hurdle.

Because that will make it harder to get

the Democratic or southeastern Repub-lican enviro senators Scarnati needs to pass his fee, when the fee level and the zoning requirements are already prob-lematic enough.

The new House bill on this that Rep. Brian Ellis, R-Butler, sponsored - and his leaders are backing - is essentially Cor-bett’s proposal, and will have trouble pass-ing the Senate, to put it gently. And right now, Scarnati’s bill has the same problem.

Plus the industry, which has generally acted as if it knows it wants a fee or tax and “strong safety standards” before next year’s electioneering starts, now looks like it may pull the rug out from under legisla-tion for the third year in a row.

Vouchers takes big step forwardFor months, House GOP leaders have

been saying the Senate needed to pass a vouchers/education reform package and send it to them, and the governor needed to be clear and lead on the issue. Now that the Senate has done so, the chances of vouchers passing this session are real, no longer unlikely.

Once one chamber passes a bill on an issue that is big with the party in power, it is hard for the other chamber to ignore it, even if it wishes to do so. That was the story of the pension bill of 2010, passed in the House by Rep. Dwight Evans, D-Philadelphia. He had to negotiate the final bill after that, but if it had not passed the House, it had no shot in the Senate.

Same thing here. The House can amend the bill, and may well take out the expan-sion of vouchers to another 140 schools, the so-called “Year Seven” provision. That would mean the $6,000-to-$8,000-a-year vouchers would not go, in 2018-2019, to kids in schools that still had 50 per-cent of kids under proficiency levels in reading or math. Plus, statewide charter school oversight is probably headed back into that bill. And House members may demand a new, higher funding formula for cyber-charters. And Gov. Tom Corbett may want to have more elastic targets for increasing the Educational Improve-ment Tax Credit. He wants to raise it, but doesn’t want to be locked into the kinds of raises the Senate bill proposes.

The key here, though, is Chef Corbett. If he does his usual public silence on this issue, answering questions only when asked, it will go nowhere. If he starts inviting lawmakers to watch the Steelers game with him to get their voucher vote, and works a call list to get their votes, it could pass.

Like a fine sauce, vouchers need to be stirred constantly by Chef Corbett. If he just stands there, they will burn in the pot, and he will have to start over again.

He needs to play a similar, though less active role, in Marcellus, in that he has to start saying what he will actively support: what provisions he needs to be in the bill so he will tour the state touting a propos-al, start charming lawmakers and making promises and releasing projects, etc.

Because that is what past governors did when it came to their legislative feasts, and that is what lawmakers expect Corbett to do for his Voucher Flambe’ and his Shalicacies. CW

OPINION

.

Vouchers, Marcellus bill, pushback, Oh MyBY PETER L. DECOURSEY, CAPITOLWIRE

NOVEMBER 2011 CAPITAL WATCH 13NEWS

WidenerLeadershipWorks

Today leadership is at a premium.

It’s expected of those who lead our justice

system. Leadership separates the good from the

irreplaceable. Especially real-time, real-life leadership

in law, business, and within our communities.

Widener University does more than talk about

leadership. With over 143 judges in 18 states who

graduated from Widener Law, it’s clear we’re

successfully educating our students to be leaders.

To learn more visit law.widener.edu

Here.

Democrats protest preliminary redistricting plan

So it was more demographically fair to take a second Allegheny County seat and move it, rather than move an incumbent from a region with much more modest population losses, Turzai said.

And, he said: “We were not going to be accused of moving him when we were not, and this is more reflective of the population changes.”

Patton said: “I think Chairman George’s unhappiness is genuine. Mike Turzai’s plan to preserve that seat is not. It is pre-meditated and part of a plan to conceal his political objectives and to win that seat.”

White said he was surprised.Kotik said: “This map makes Machia-

velli look like a piker. This is blatant ger-rymandering at its worst. At its worst. Beyond comprehension.”

Kotik said of McEwen that he engaged in a “whole charade of bipartisanship ... the so-called distinguished gentleman referee didn’t show me much bi-parti-sanship.”

Patton said of McEwen and the upcoming hearings: “There is an oppor-tunity to fix some of the damage in this plan. But only if we have a fair arbiter in the process.”

Turzai said the plan reflected about 80 percent of the Democratic-GOP agree-ment, but diverged on the George seat and in Philadelphia, where the plan cre-ates two new majority-minority districts. Those are now held by Rep.s Babette Josephs and Rep. Maria Donatucci, both Democrats.

The Senate plan moves the seat of Sen. Jim Brewster, D-Allegheny, the second biggest population loser in the state, down more than 33,000 residents from the population ideal of 258,000 voters per district. It is moved to a Monroe County seat. Pileggi said the new dis-trict had an 11.1 percent Democratic advantage, so he was moving a senate district held by Democrats to one with bigger Democratic voting performance for president and 2008 attorney general than the old district.

But Costa said: “We just got it this morning, so I have to take a look at this, but it looks to me like a Republican district they drew for [Monroe County GOP state Rep. Mario] Scavello,” which has been a Senate GOP redistricting goal.

Brewster will now be in the district of Sen. Tim Solobay, D-Washington, and have little or no base to mount a chal-lenge to Solobay if he chose.

That plan had long been known as

a Senate GOP objective, but said to be unfair by Costa.

Costa also said the new district was molded to not only elect Scavello in a seat Brewster now holds but to weaken Sen. John Blake, D-Lackawanna, who won his first term with 63 percent of the vote in 2010.

Pileggi said he sought to see if there were any senators vacating their dis-tricts in the west and “unfortunately there is no vacancy.”

Costa said an example of the unfair-ness of the plan is “How they treat the Upper Darby area, … to us that is pure unadulterated politics. The split improves the electoral prospects of Sen. Erickson and Sen. Pileggi,” and keeps African-Americans from voting against

either by moving the Delaware County residents into a Philadelphia district.

Upper Darby has more than 80,000 residents, and Erickson has lost it but gotten at least 45 percent in his last two elections.

In the entire state, only three contigu-ous municipalities are being split into multiple Senate districts: Philadelphia, Pittsburgh and Upper Darby. Darby Twp. is the fourth split municipalities, but its halves are three miles apart.

Costa said commission counsel and former Judge Joseph Del Sole wrote an advisory opinion that the commission should not split municipalities.

McEwen responded: “Any number of municipalities have multiple House seats.” Therefore, he said, quoting Penn-sylvania House Speaker and founding father Ben Franklin, “what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.”

McEwen also dismissed the argument that “it’s never been done before.”

“Where would we be” if Columbus fol-lowed that view, he asked?

Costa responded: “We are guided by our case law” and that splitting munici-palities is not allowed by law “unless abso-lutely necessary. The plan today devised by our Republican colleagues” did not prove it was “absolutely necessary.”

McEwen said that Philadelphia has lost considerable population, and needs, as it did in the last redistricting to add territories to make up Senate seats. He said the two areas had much in common and that part of Philadelphia’s scenic Fairmount Park was in Upper Darby.

“What more appropriate place for a Philadelphia seat to move than where Fairmount Park is?” CW

Continued from page 11

Kauffman said the vote showed: “We really need to get serious about reforming this whole process so that we protect the interests

of communities and citizens … instead of the political careers of the self-interested people drawing the maps.”

14 NOVEMBER 2011 CAPITAL WATCHOPINION

Put the brakes on red-light cameras BY JACQUELINE G. GOODWIN, Ed.D.

The Senate has approved a bill to expand the use of red-light cameras throughout the state, sending the bill to the state House of Representatives for consideration.

Last session, a similar bill didn’t even make it out of committee in the Sen-ate. But now that it has gotten out of one chamber, opponents are urging caution as lawmakers move forward on the proposal, which was mentioned by Gov. Tom Corbett’s transportation fund-ing advisory commission as a potential source of transportation revenue. And if the suggestion is adopted, it’s the “Got-cha!” flash that no driver will want to see.

Red-light cameras automatically pho-tograph vehicles whose drivers run red lights. The cameras are connected to the traffic signal and to sensors that moni-tor traffic flow just before the crosswalk or stop line. The system continuously monitors the traffic signal, and the cam-era captures any vehicle that doesn’t stop during the red phase. The person or business to whom the vehicle is regis-tered receives a ticket, regardless of who was driving the vehicle at the time.

At present, only Philadelphia is allowed to use red-light cameras, under a pilot program begun in 2005. The cameras are at 19 intersections and generated 141,571 citations in the year ending March 31.

Careless drivers running red lights are a serious hazard, and the desire to catch these dangerous drivers and motivate them to be safer drivers is a good one. Unfortunately, the use of red-light cameras is fraught with some very disturbing problems.

First is the issue of constitutionality. In our legal system, one has the right to face one’s accuser, per the Sixth Amend-ment. No defendant can subpoena a cam-era and cross-examine it, yet it is allowed to give testimony in a legal proceeding.

Red-light cameras are exact instruments that don’t have any judgment, intelligence or consideration for the current environ-mental or physical conditions. The exact millisecond a light turns red, the camera takes a picture. The computer doesn’t take into consideration the conditions (wet or icy roads) or extenuating circumstances (fragile or heavy load in your vehicle or a vehicle that is tailgating you).

Driver identification, gender mismatch or other conditions that don’t allow for a cita-tion to be issued account for almost 50 per-cent of tickets not being issued. If an officer were to make a traffic stop for an intersection violation they would issue a citation to the violator, NOT the owner of the vehicle. The officer can also make a decision based on cir-cumstances whether or not that person will receive a citation, warning or arrest.

Second, the motives of equipment ven-dors, and those cities that use them, are suspect at best because neither makes any money unless someone breaks the law. This puts cities in the position of being tempted to arrange yellow lights and other factors to trap motorists. While this may sound like a far-out assertion, it is exactly what was shown to be the case in Baltimore. If it happened there, why not Pennsylvania? In a time of financial constraint, do we really want to allow even the possibility of abuse?

Third, we have every right to ask ourselves this: Do we want to live in a society where cameras record our every move? At the end of the day, these are our streets and our corners and our red lights. As taxpayers we should have the final say about having our every move monitored.

Free people are not lorded over by faceless ones issuing citations from desks, on evidence the faceless ones can-not personally vouch for. Free people drive their cars, not looking over their shoulders for cameras.

And the jury is out on whether the camera systems actually increase safety any better than conventional traffic engi-neering. One study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety found that the Philadelphia system helps to reduce

accidents. But another study in Virginia found that red light cameras actually produced a 27 percent increase in rear-end collisions as drivers slam on their brakes at monitored intersections.

Other studies have found decreases in right-angle collisions but increases in rear-end collisions. According to the Federal Highway Safety Administra-tion, T-bone crashes have been reduced in places where red-light cameras have been installed, but rear-end collisions have increased

Before moving for cameras, PennDOT and local governments should ensure that yellow caution signals are timed prop-erly. A study in Philadelphia found that increasing yellow light timing by one second alone decreased red light-running by 36 percent. Subsequent installation of red light cameras further reduced it at those intersections by 96 percent, but of the already-reduced number.

Rather than accepting a safety recom-mendation from a commission tasked with funding, lawmakers should require PennDOT to make a specific case for the systems, based on safety, and to demon-strate that it has implemented design features to make intersections safer.

There is growing evidence that the cam-eras can provide much-needed revenue.

Let’s be honest. In addition to safety, red light cameras are being pursued because of their ability to generate rev-enue during a time of tight budgets.

That’s being disingenuous. If cities need to generate additional revenue they need to raise taxes or fees to help pay for services. Don’t turn Big Brother loose to spy from above on motorists.

Let’s hope the Legislature applies the brakes to a bad suggestion before red-light cameras come to an intersection near you. CW

Jacqueline G. Goodwin, Ed.D. is the edi-tor of Capital Watch. She is also president of Capital Commuications, a full-service public relations and lobbying firm based in Har-risburg, PA.

Jacqueline G. Goodwin, Ed.D.

Events & SpecialsHappy Hour Monday - Friday 4:30-5:30

Relax and enjoy our complimentary munchiesHouse Wine $3 • 1/2 Priced Mixed Drinks

2 Trout TuesdaysBuy one Trout and get

50% off the second!

Monday 4:00-11:00$2.00 Bud Light Bottles

“Prime Time” ThursdaysEnjoy a Prime Rib Dinner for $14.99

(regularly $20.00)

Bachelor & Bachelorette Parties Parties of 8 or more adults, the guest of honor. (The Bachelor or Bachelorette) eats free!

Black FridaysWear an all black outfit and receive 10% off your food bill

Limited to meals of individuals wearing black

Birthday SpecialFree dinner on your Birthday with purchase of second dinner of equal or greater value.*Offer is limited to a value up to $20.

NOVEMBER 2011 CAPITAL WATCH 15OPINION

Gov.’s appointees should take “Integrity and Accountability Pledge”BY REP. MIKE HANNA

Every two years the newly elected mem-bers of the Pennsylvania General Assem-bly take an oath to support, obey and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the Com-monwealth of Pennsylvania.

No such oath is required of Gov. Tom Corbett’s hand-picked appointees to his various advisory commissions and coun-cils – despite the fact that these positions often carry with them great power and influence with regard to the governor’s public policy direction.

Public service is a privilege that demands strict adherence to core values, including accountability, integrity and personal responsibility. Yet, the gover-nor continues to hide behind appointed advisory councils and commissions – which require no oaths, pledges or ethi-cal standards by their appointed mem-bers – to determine his administration’s policy positions on some of the most pressing issues facing Pennsylvania.

Since Gov. Corbett took office in Janu-ary, he has appointed three high-profile policy advisory commissions or councils. They include: The Governor’s Marcellus Shale Advisory Commission, which was stacked with natural gas industry execu-tives and campaign donors; the Gover-nor’s Transportation Funding Advisory Commission, which was charged with

developing a plan to fix Pennsylvania’s crumbling roads, bridges and transit systems; and now the recent creation of the Governor’s Advisory Council on Privatization and Innovation, which is again loaded with Gov. Corbett’s corpo-rate friends and campaign donors.

The members of these appointed coun-cils and commissions take no oaths to ensure their actions are bound by a sacred commitment to protect the inter-ests of the people of Pennsylvania and to swear they will not use their appointed position for personal financial gain.

That is why I have introduced House Resolution 469, urging the members of Gov. Corbett’s most recent adviso-ry council to sign an Integrity and Accountability Pledge. The pledge reads:

“I, as a member of the Governor’s Advisory Council on Privatization and Innovation, do hereby pledge that nei-ther myself, my spouse, my parent, my brother, my sister, or child nor any busi-ness in which I, my spouse, my parent, my brother, my sister, or child is associ-ated with, will benefit financially, in any manner whatsoever, from the actions taken by the council of a period of not less than five years after the enactment of any recommendation.”

As an elected member of the Pennsyl-vania General Assembly, I am charged

with protecting the public trust – a responsibility I don’t take lightly.

It is clear that we must institute stron-ger ethical safeguards for members of high-level state policy advisory commis-sions. We must ensure these members are held to the same high standards of ethics and integrity as other public officials.

During his gubernatorial campaign, Gov. Corbett promised the public that “cronyism” and “pay-to-play” politics would be relics of the past under his administration.

Yet, within two months of taking office, he appointed some of his largest campaign donors to serve on his first advisory commission to study the issue of natural gas drilling. Last month, he named influential lobbyists and cam-paign donors to his privatization council, where they will have the ability to pick winners and losers for potentially lucra-tive contracts to privatize various state functions and assets.

I urge Gov. Corbett to hold his own appointees to the same standards he has set for himself and his employees. He should require the members of his Council on Privatization and Innovation to sign the Integrity and Accountability Pledge in my resolution. Also, House Majority Leader Mike Turzai should

immediately allow my resolution to get a vote by the full House.

After all, if members of these com-missions cannot pledge to uphold core ethical principles, such as integrity and accountability, then they have no busi-ness advising our governor on any public policy matters – let alone the most criti-cal issues facing our commonwealth. CW

Rep. Mike Hanna is the House Demo-cratic Whip who represents Clinton and Centre Counties.

Rep. Mike Hanna