ShareThis Page
News

Rendell wants it both ways

| Thursday, May 10, 2012, 10:24 p.m.

HARRISBURG - The Rendell administration says the state auditor general doesn't have the authority to conduct performance audits.

Performance audits are reviews that go beyond mere number-crunching; they look at how well a program operates. Are taxpayers getting what they paid for•

The auditor general, Robert P. Casey Jr., is an elected statewide official. He just happens to be the Democrat who lost to Gov. Ed Rendell in the bloody 2002 Democrat primary for governor.

Casey is trying to find out how well state and local police have kept track of child molesters under Megan's Law. But the state police and Rendell's lawyers put up a roadblock.

They said in court documents filed last Monday that the auditor general "does not have the power or duty to conduct performance audits under Pennsylvania law."

Kate Philips, Rendell's press secretary, contended the administration wasn't really trying to take away the auditor general's ability to conduct performance audits. She said performance audits are beneficial. She said the administration in this case was only trying to limit their scope.

Her spin contradicted statements made by Rendell's lawyers in a legal filing.

What counts is what's filed in court.

"They want it both ways," said Karen Walsh, Casey's press secretary. Casey put out a blistering statement Tuesday, saying the Rendell administration made a "blatant attempt" to stop Casey from auditing Megan's Law.

Legalese loophole

Following that flap, the Rendell administration filed another court paper Thursday saying it is not trying to block performance audits. But there was still a loophole in the legalese; apparently the administration still is asking the court to rule on the scope of the auditor general's powers.

It's yet another blunder by the Rendell administration. But what if the governor wins• He wants to protect the privacy rights of convicted child molesters?

The governor and auditor general square-off Tuesday in Commonwealth Court. Casey is scheduled to meet Monday with Rendell's Chief of Staff John Estey.

Casey needs addresses and release dates of child molesters to determine whether police are monitoring them. The administration contends that flies in the face of the Criminal Histories Record Information Act. That law provides only criminal justice agencies can view non-public information. Casey says he has no intention of improperly releasing information.

"Find me the taxpayer who believes the rights of convicted sexual offenders are more important than protecting children," Walsh said.

The attorney who filed the legal documents is Rendell's chief counsel, Leslie Anne Miller. On Thursday, Miller appeared with Casey at a news conference - three days after filing the first legal brief - where Casey announced results of a performance audit of the state's inspection of mammography facilities. They appeared together with other officials at Lankenau Hospital in Montgomery County.

Casey said the mammography monitoring is working fine.

Miller attended as honorary chair of the Pennsylvania Breast Cancer Coalition, days before she appears in court.

Talk about trying to have it both ways.

Is Rendell really trying to limit the power of the next auditor general in case a Republican is elected• Clearly, the governor's troops would not want a fiscal watchdog from the opposing party monitoring their every step.

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 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