Pileggi Mask Comes Off On Pension Reform

Pileggi Mask Comes Off On Pension Reform
A switch by Sen. Dominic Pileggi on pension reform would certainly explain why the PSEA is pushing for him for Delaware County Common Pleas Court judge in the DEMOCRAT Primary.

State Sen. Dominic F. Pileggi is now actively opposing pension reform, we have been told.

The former Majority Leader who represented the 9th District since 2002 had long given lip service to the need but as he is now on the outs and looking for a Common Pleas Court judgeship, the mask has been removed.

Why?

Was it sour grapes at those who removed him from power? Or was it a a ploy for the registered Republican to win on the Democrat primary ballot for his judicial race hence obviating a campaign for November? Judicial candidates are allowed to cross file in Pennsylvania.

If the latter, it appears to be effective.  He has gotten a rousing endorsement from the PSEA, the teachers union that is biggest obstacle for real reform. The union is asking Democrats to vote for him.

But does it matter? To fail to see the need for drastic changes to our public pension system is political malpractice at the highest level. It is the very definition of injustice to ask a working class homeowner to ante up another thousand or two so someone can keep a $477,591 public pension.

How can anyone be so callous as to be unwilling to fight this corruption?

Pileggi Mask Comes Off On Pension Reform

 

Pedro Cortes Ignored Gosnell

Gov. Tom Wolf’s nominee for Secretary of the Commonwealth will face the Pennsylvania Senate’s State Government Committee at 11:30 this morning, May 12 and Pedro Cortes has serious baggage. Pedro Cortes Ignored Gosnell

Among the agencies for which the post is responsible is the Bureau of Professional and Occupational Affairs which certifies doctors and makes sure they maintain standards.

Cortes had been Commonwealth Secretary under Gov. Ed Rendell from 2003-2010. He pointedly looked the other way while Kermit Gosnell committed his atrocities despite being fully empowered to step in and stop them. He does not deserve a second chance.

The Delaware County Patriots note that the 9th District’s Dominic F. Pileggi, who represents much of Delco, is the committee’s vice chairman and is expected to be a swing vote. They ask that he be contacted and encourage to deny Cortes a second chance.

He can be reached at 717-787-4712 or by email here.

Pedro Cortes Ignored Gosnell

 

Pamela Geller Defending A Friend

Pamela Geller Defending A Friend

Pamela Geller Defending A Friend
This is the cartoon that the establishment media is reluctant to show to help understand what the fuss is about. Mohammed’s balloon says “You can’t draw me”. The cartoonist is replaying “That’s why I draw you.”

By Don Adams 

ISIS has issued a fatwa against a dear friend of the Independence Hall Foundation, Pamela Geller.

Just writing these words seems so bizarre.

Ms. Geller keynoted our 2012 American Exceptionalism July 4th Celebration held at the Independence Visitor Center.

The event location had to be moved in doors, from the original  location on Independence Mall, due to threats that had been made against Ms. Geller (even then) in relation to her appearance.

Occupy Philadelphia was hosting a national gathering on the Mall and some of their attendees had  also threatened to interrupt our program.

In the end, over 300 friends packed the banquet hall to hear a terrific keynote address from Ms. Geller–the best speech ever delivered to our organization–with the exception, perhaps, of 2012 Republican nominee Mitt Romney’s Tax Day talk at the Franklin Institute.

Pamela Geller Defending A Friend July 4 2012
Pamela Geller flanked by Don and Terri Adams at the Independence Hall Foundation’s July 4, 2012 event.

The event went off without interruption–thanks, mostly, to the National Park Service security officers and the assistance of Internal Affairs Division of the Philadelphia Police.

ISIS Operatives Attempt to Carry Out a Texas Massacre
In Texas, earlier this, the situation was quite different–as Ms. Geller’s Muhammad Cartoon Contest ended with the killing of two
ISIS terrorists and the wounding of a security guard.

As quickly as the violence erupted in Texas, a national debate unfolded around the merits of the the contest and the supposed limits of free speech.

At the center of the storm–Ms. Geller–who was quickly labeled “hater” by the left–the same left that applauded “Christ in Urine” and a tasteless depiction of the Blessed Virgin that was praised as “art” by Catholic-bashers everywhere.

In all of our interactions with Ms. Geller, we have found her to be
principled, honest, hard working, dedicated, thoughtful, sincere, and caring. Of all the numerous conservative politicians, pundits, and operatives that we have hosted, she is one that we greatly admire.

While we wholeheartedly support Ms. Geller–and vouch for her tremendous character, we also firmly believe that with our rights, including free speech, come responsibilities.

Holding a single contest to prove several points–that free speech is preferable to the alternative, that a fatwa can be issued against American citizens, that ISIS is alive and well on the US mainland, and that Jihaddists will stop at nothing to destroy the West and all that it represents–may have been worth the price of the Texas shootings.

But conducting such contests over and over again, here and there, will prove nothing new–and will increasingly bring into question the motives of those holding the contests rather than the would be terrorist-murderers who seek to carry out fatwas and the extinction of western culture.

The following are two fascinating, yet contrary, opinion pieces written by conservative pundits – –Rich Lowry, for Politico, and Kathleen Parker, for the Washington Post.
For the record, we completely disagree with Ms. Parker’s view of Ms. Geller.  Media hound Parker knows far too well of which she speaks–as most of what she says about Geller applies to herself, instead.

Update: Don has asked to add that another good thing concerning Ms. Geller’s contest was the way it exposed the hypocrisy of the left.

Mr. Adams is among the founders of the Independence Hall Foundation.

Pamela Geller Defending A Friend

 

Senate OKs Transparency Bills

Commonwealth Foundation is praising the Pennsylvania Senate for passing two bills, May 6,  that bring  greater financial openness and transparency in government and that sunshine contract negotiations between public sector unions and elected officials. Senate OKs Transparency Bills  -- SB 645 sponsored by Sen. Patrick Stefano,
SB 644, sponsored by Sen. Mike Folmer, empowers the Independent Fiscal Office to provide the public with cost estimates on state public sector union contracts prior to ratification.

SB 645, sponsored by Sen. Patrick Stefano, requires public sector collective bargaining agreements to be posted on state, school district, or local government websites two weeks prior to signing.

Senate OKs Transparency Bills

Pennsylvania Legislature Size Not The Problem

By H. John StahlPennsylvania Legislature Size Not The Problem

As a former House member, it was the 1968 revisions to the PA Constitution that causes most of the problem. Governor Scranton forced the legislature to adopt a new constitution changing, among many things, the legislature from part time to full time with full time salaries. He said that they could get the best and brightest by offering full time work with full time executive pay.

That didn’t work out so well. The Late James Gallen, one of the longest serving members of the House, discussed this with me. He was there before the new Constitution took effect.

He and I, in the minority, agreed that the problem was three fold:

First, the legislators had to make it appear that they were busy simply to justify their salary.  The current job pays over $100,000 with the expenses along with a generous pension. (I do not collect one). So, they have to introduce legislation vote on legislation and do enormous amounts of constituent work to justify that much money. While most fail, the upshot was lousy legislation and shoddy work. Even in 1972, I ran thinking that I was going to do good things for my constituents. I soon found out that my real job was to stop other legislators from doing things TO their constituents!

Second, instead of attracting the best and brightest, because the job paid so well, it attracts those who want to better themselves financially. It also attracts lowlifes in some areas of the state. When the legislature was part time, it attracted  those who wanted to better themselves by “serving” their communities. Thus the term that is used today( without much meaning, I might add). (I served in the legislature from 1973 to 1976, two terms.) In other words, having done well in the private sector, they wanted to give back something to their communities by serving them. (This is Christ’s example: He that is last shall be first. And That Christian doctrinal belief is also missing from the public marketplace.)

At the turn of the 19th century, there were just as many legislators as today. But the population is double today that which it was in 1900. Thus the representation per person is 1/2 of what it was. Limiting the size of the legislature is the wrong solution to the wrong  problem.

The  third reason is MONEY. The amount of money spent on elections in Pennsylvania and the nation is obscene. It is estimated that nationwide in all state and national elections, 10 to 11 BILLION Dollars will be spent. Only special interests have that kind of cash. When I ran, while there were a few fat-cats that contributed to my campaign, most of the money I raised was from ordinary folks, friends and family. It takes at least $100,000 average per state house race.

FollowTheMoney.org says that the amount of money spent in Pa in 2014 alone was over $152 MILLION! Now when you understand that because of gerrymandering only a small percentage of House and Senate seats ever change hands (usually under 10%), you can see that someone is paying a huge chunk of cash for relatively small gain.

These guys don’t give money because they’re nice guys.

There is an additional problem: US

“The best laws cannot make a constitution work in spite of morals; morals can turn the worst laws to advantage.”  said Alexis De Tocqueville. He also remarked that people get the government they deserve. That is, unless the people take part in their government on a continuing basis, they will continue to get the kinds of results we get now. When, three or four generations ago, they stopped teaching real “Civics”, people began to lose their connection to their government.

When asked what kind of government do we have, Ben Franklin was said to have replied, “A Republic, if you can keep it.” The price of liberty being eternal vigilance,who can say that they actually keep a watchful eye on their various governments? Few. Very few,indeed.
When I was a legislator, for instance, if I received more than 8 personal letters on a subject, I was worried. Even 40 years ago people stopped participating in their government.

There are solutions.
It is easy to demonize the size of the legislature. But,hopefully, I have dissuaded you from that angle. What we should do is to return the legislature to part time status. By nature, it will become more conservative. Next, reduce the pay by three-quarters, eliminate pensions, perhaps discuss healthcare, eliminate bloated staffs, control the cost of elections by limiting to x dollars per person served, adjusted annually for inflation or deflation.
And then we must mandate the teaching of Civics to our students. And that teaching must include the notions expressed in our original founding documents: the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution.

H. John Stahl represented the 128th District in the Pennsylvania State House from 1973 to 1976.

Pennsylvania Legislature Size Not The Problem

$477,591 Public Pension In Pa

By Sen. Scott WagnerSen. Wagner decries $477,591 Public Pension In Pa

Contained in this column are two articles from the Patriot-News.

The first  was published May 6 by reporter Jan Murphy.

It is titled “Set for Life –Browse the database to see who is getting a six-figure annual pension”  Click here to view it.

The second article was published May 7 by reporter Charles Thompson. It is titled – “How PA state workers and teachers calculate their pensions” and can be read here.

The first article exposes the six-figure annual pensions of many retired Pennsylvania state government and school district employees.

Number one on the list is a retired Pennsylvania State University employee who is receiving $39,799.23 per month for a total yearly annuity of $477,591.

Number two on the list is another retired Pennsylvania State University employee who is receiving $36,989.98 per month for a total yearly annuity of $443,880.

These numbers do not reflect the health benefits that retired state employees are also receiving.

Please take note that of the top 25 people on the list, 13 are Penn State University retirees.

I have reported in the past that I serve on the Senate Appropriations committee and our committee is in the process of reviewing the governor’s budget.

I am scratching my head wondering why last year the State of Pennsylvania contributed approximately $230 million dollars from the general fund to Penn State University and this year Governor Wolf’s budget is proposing a $50 million dollar increase this year to Penn State for a total of approximately $280 million from the general fund to Penn State.

During Appropriations hearings last month I specifically asked the President of Penn State University for their financial statements to allow our committee to understand how much cash Penn State currently has in its various bank accounts and endowments.

Here is the head scratching thought – why is the state giving Penn State any money when it appears the money is going to subsidize breathtaking lifetime pensions when in fact the money should be going towards the education of their students?

I am not trying to single out Penn State University –  I am just stating the facts.

I have mentioned in previous email blasts that retirement and health benefits state employees receive are completely out of line with the private sector and they are virtually unsustainable.

For anyone wondering why Pennsylvania taxes are so high, these articles are crystal clear examples.

The second article explains how pension benefits are calculated stating that, “So as the plan exists now, a PennDOT foreman with 35 years of service could retire with pension income equal to 87.5 percent of their average pay for the last three years on the job.”

Excuse me – did I read that right?

In the last 3 years of a PennDOT foreman’s employment it is not unreasonable that this person could spike their gross income to $100,000 annually or more for the last 3 years of their employment so that an average of the 3 years could very well be $100,000 or more.

At $100,000 per year average for the last 3 years this person would retire with $87,500 per year to start for the rest of their life, plus lifetime healthcare benefits.

So a foreman could tell his wife – “Hey honey, I’m going to spend the next 3 years working as much overtime as I can so I can drive  my annual compensation up as high as possible so I’ll get a gold-plated pension when I retire – I’ll be back in 3 years!”

Reading articles like this combined with what I have learned since taking office makes me sick to my stomach.

This is the exact reason why I have introduced legislation such as my Taxpayer Fairness in Compensation Act.

These articles are more examples of how working class families are the ones who continue to get exploited in Pennsylvania.

Below is a graph from PennLive of the Top 40 highest pensions, but to view and search the full database of the thousands of retired state government and school district employees receiving over $100,000 per year in pension benefits, click on this link or look below.

 

Last Name First Name Yearly Annuity Monthly Annuity Total Years Of Service Last Employer
Erickson Rodney $477,591 $39,799.23 37 Pennsylvania State University
Benkovic Stephen $443,880 $36,989.98 43 Pennsylvania State University
Mitchel Irene $332,017 $27,668.12 48 State System-Higher Education
Schultz Gary $330,699 $27,558.25 38 Pennsylvania State University
Willey Richard $314,658 $26,221.49 25 Pa Higher Educ. Assist Agcy
Oliver Frank $286,118 $23,843.13 54 House Of Representatives
Kuo Kenneth $277,440 $23,120.01 39 Pennsylvania State University
Pierce William $254,362 $21,196.85 27 Pennsylvania State University
Racculia Phillip $249,902 $20,825.13 35 Pa Higher Educ. Assist Agcy
Kiely Daniel $242,169 $20,180.75 47 Pennsylvania State University
Costello Anthony V $222,685 $18,557.10 39 Garnet Valley Sd
Pell Eva $222,549 $18,545.76 36 Pennsylvania State University
Hershock Michael $222,174 $18,514.49 34 Pa Higher Educ. Assist Agcy
Marciniak Robert $219,221 $18,268.39 56 Pennsylvania State University
Parizek Richard $217,550 $18,129.13 52 Pennsylvania State University
Vesell Elliot $212,284 $17,690.34 39 Pennsylvania State University
Ohmoto Hiroshi $208,576 $17,381.36 44 Pennsylvania State University
Porter Jack $204,818 $17,068.20 39 State System-Higher Education
Anderson James $199,070 $16,589.15 40 Pennsylvania State University
Reddy Channa $196,173 $1,6347.74 28 Pennsylvania State University
Mcnairy Francine $194,408 $16,200.69 40 State System-Higher Education
Meyers Ronald $193,592 $16,132.67 47 State System-Higher Education
Summers Edward $189,844 $15,820.30 27 Administrative Off.-Pa Courts
Mazur Lee $189,690 $15,807.52 39 Administrative Off.-Pa Courts
Klein Richard $188,181 $15,681.74 42 Administrative Off.-Pa Courts
 $477,591 Public Pension In Pa

 

Rand Paul Subpoena Vote

The details are in concerning Sen. Rand Paul’s (R-Ky) visit to Philly.  It’s 11 a.m. May 18, at Independence Seaport Museum. It’s part of the WPHT Speaker Series and it will be hosted by Dom Giordano. The cost is $45. Rand Paul Subpoena Vote

Paul is seeking the Republican presidential nomination for 2016 and the topic is his book  Taking a Stand: Moving Beyond Partisan Politics to Unite America.

Hopefully, however, he will be queried on the allegations made by National Review that he stifled a subpoena for the application Congress made to the District of Columbia’s health exchange to beat the Obamacare penalties.

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) insisted during the debate over Obamacare that lawmakers and staff join one of the health-care exchanges set up under the bill. This meant giving up government subsidies of between $5,000 and $10,000 per person.

Did it happen? LOL. After a secret meeting with House Speaker John Boehner, President Obama agreed to allow Congress to file as a small business. The law defines a small business as having no more than 50 employees. Congress employes tens of thousands.

An application was made declaring Congress to be a small business employing just 45 people and our public servants got to keep their Cadillac health-care plans.

Sen. David Vitter (R-La.), who chairs the Senate Small Business Committee,  wanted to find out who in Congress pushed this claim and sought to file a subpoena against the D.C. health exchange for the full application.

All nine Dems on the Small Business Committee were against it, hence Vitter needed the support of all 10 Republicans.

Only five did and none of them was Paul. The other guilty parties were Mike Enzi (R-Wy), James Risch, (R-ID),  Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.), and Deb Fischer (R-Nebraska).

Just one of those things that should make one go hmmm. Paul has said that his vote was because he wants a Constitutional amendment to prohibit Congress from passing laws that exempts themselves, according to N.R.

So what’s that got to do with opposing the subpoena? And that’s another thing that makes one go hmmm. Hopefully, that lame answer does not let Paul off the hook.

Rand Paul Subpoena Vote

Lawmakers Seek To Cut Representation

Lisa Esler has informed us that the Pennsylvania House has, this week, passed House Bill 153 that would reduce the size of the House from 203 to 151 and House Bill 384 would reduce the size of the Senate from 50 members to 37. Lawmakers Seek To Cut Representation

If you think easy access to your state legislator is a bad idea then obviously you should support these bills.

On the other hand, if you think easy access to your state legislature is a good idea you would support bills increasing the size of the legislature to 424 as it is in New Hampshire, a state with a population about a 12th of Pennsylvania’s and area of about a fourth.

The claim is to save money. Rather than cutting the size of the legislature by about a quarter, why not cut the salaries of the legislatures by that much? It’s not as though they can’t afford it.
Lawmakers Seek To Cut Representation