Stop! Thief! State legislators feed twice at the taxpayer trough
State records compiled by the Trib show the notion of Pennsylvania lawmakers as gluttonous hogs gorging at the public trough isn't just colorful imagery but appallingly close to the literal truth — at least during budget “crunch time” each June.
During a five-day period as last year's June 30 budget deadline approached and legislators worked long, late hours at the Capitol, House leaders spent $64,000 on catered meals — while members also claimed $105,000 in unaccountable per diems that are supposed to cover their food and lodging. Talk about leaving a foul taste in taxpayers' mouths.
And let's call this what it is — thievery.
These legislative “second helpings” have become an outrageous annual binge: In June 2011, House leaders stuck the public with a $23,000 catering tab while members devoured nearly $60,000 in per diems. Expect this year's budget-crunch food fest to cost even more than last year's.
These binges' costs and lack of accountability — clear abuses of the public purse — rightly stick in taxpayers' craws, especially as many Pennsylvanians struggle daily to make ends meet.
This double-dipping of legislative snouts is emblematic of Harrisburg's ravenous appetite for spending without regard for fiscal prudence, transparency or simply doing what's right. So long as it continues, Pennsylvania will remain the Commonwealth of Corruption.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.