ShareThis Page
Featured Commentary

Keystone viewpoint: End 'old boys' network

| Saturday, Jan. 13, 2018, 7:24 p.m.

The House Democratic caucus' use of public funds as hush money to protect legislators from the public fallout of sexual abuse allegations is all the more shocking because it illustrates the survival of a poisonous culture that already had been exposed in several ways.

Due to former state Attorney General Kathleen Kane's own transgressions while in office, few people listened when she claimed to be the victim of an “old boys” network. She released a truckload of emails that had been distributed across much of that network, driving the scandal that came to be known as “Porngate.”

The payment of hush money to resolve sexual-harassment claims demonstrates that the old boys' network decried by Kane is very much alive in the Capitol. Gov. Tom Wolf has ordered the state Department of General Services to stop using a self-insurance program, funded by taxpayers, to cover settlements for claims of sexual misconduct.

That's a good start.

Putting lawmakers and other state officials on the hook for their own conduct is a deterrent. The ultimate answer lies at the ballot box.

— The Citizens' Voice,


TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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 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.

click me