Our view: Another reason to reform the WAM system

The list of problems associated with the money pit that enables Pennsylvania lawmakers' pet projects continues to grow, as detailed by a weekend Associated Press story.

[Kermit]

On this matter the editiorial board should get total agreement from all citizens regardless of political party. Citizens who pay taxes should have 100% transparency into how the public's wealth is managed and spent by the so-called public servants. WAM should be abolished forthwith. The biggest reform needed by Pennsylvanians is reducing the size of government starting with The General Assembly.

[Chuck Kopack]

I agree with Kermit. In this state, WAM (block grants) is nothing more than another form of graft, and it should be abolished.

I also agree with the concept of reducing the size of the General Assembly, as well as curtailing some of their "perks".

This Commonwealth can no longer afford the "spend-thrift" patterns of its government.

[Dave]

How else do party leaders keep their members in line.

DeWeasel once took away office & staff funding for a fellow party representative that did not vote as told.

Unfortunately this dirtbag stays in office because the people in his district like the money he throws their way.

I don't have an issue with transparent WAMS but the noney should be set based either on a fixed amount per Rep or a figure based on the population they represent. Ths way, the WAMS are not utilized to force votes and we can see who gets this money.

[Tom]

Dave wrote:

How else do party leaders keep their members in line.
DeWeasel once took away office & staff funding for a fellow party representative that did not vote as told.
Unfortunately this dirtbag stays in office because the people in his district like the money he throws their way.
I don't have an issue with transparent WAMS but the noney should be set based either on a fixed amount per Rep or a figure based on the population they represent. Ths way, the WAMS are not utilized to force votes and we can see who gets this money.

Wow! This was about walking around money and in three sentences Dave has turned it into a republican problem!

YOU ARE AWESOME!

[Alberto]

Dave wrote:

How else do party leaders keep their members in line.
DeWeasel once took away office & staff funding for a fellow party representative that did not vote as told.
Unfortunately this dirtbag stays in office because the people in his district like the money he throws their way.
I don't have an issue with transparent WAMS but the noney should be set based either on a fixed amount per Rep or a figure based on the population they represent. Ths way, the WAMS are not utilized to force votes and we can see who gets this money.

Your take on DeWeasel is spot on. He holds infamy alongside "Payraise" Punt, the Greedy Runt" doesn't he? Walking Around Money must be stopped totally because it will be abused if it remains. There are simply too many thugs like DeWeasel and Fumo, etc., who will find a way to misbehave if the opportunity exists. WAM should be denied totally, forever.

[Jess]

Tom wrote:

<quoted text>
Wow! This was about walking around money and in three sentences Dave has turned it into a republican problem!
YOU ARE AWESOME!

It isn't, Tom. Crooks abound in both political parties. Most citizens know that's factual. Lack of transparency in govt. benefits men and women of both parties doesn't it?
The Public Opinion editorial board's view on WAM is like the blind pig who now and then finds an acorn.

[Dave]

Tom wrote:

<quoted text>
Wow! This was about walking around money and in three sentences Dave has turned it into a republican problem!
YOU ARE AWESOME!

1) Deweese = DEMOCRAT

2) Rep = Representative

3) Tom =?

[Tom]

Jess wrote:

<quoted text>It isn't, Tom. Crooks abound in both political parties. Most citizens know that's factual. Lack of transparency in govt. benefits men and women of both parties doesn't it?
The Public Opinion editorial board's view on WAM is like the blind pig who now and then finds an acorn.

I agree!

[tom]

I agree but it's not going to happen.

[Paula]

tom wrote:

I agree but it's not going to happen.

Explain. What are the two main reasons, in your view, why state government cannot be reformed?

[IN QUE nee FYI]

Well this was certainly an original story, especially since the actual article appeared in the Hagerstown Herald-Mail yesterday. Matthew barely changed the wording of the story to make it his opinion. If you're going to quote an AP article then print the article and not a skewed version of it.

[IN QUE nee FYI]

FYI: Just so you know, the PO gave you the Readers Digest condensed version of this article. I suggest you look it up and read the full account. It was quite informative.

[Tom]

IN QUE nee FYI wrote:

Well this was certainly an original story, especially since the actual article appeared in the Hagerstown Herald-Mail yesterday. Matthew barely changed the wording of the story to make it his opinion. If you're going to quote an AP article then print the article and not a skewed version of it.

be careful, I spoke critically of Matthew and it was quickly removed!

freedom of speech does not exist anymore.

[tom]

Paula wrote:

<quoted text>Explain. What are the two main reasons, in your view, why state government cannot be reformed?

Politicians are not going to give up their opportunity to shine with their local voters. Same at the federal level with earmarks. Bringing home the bacon is what these guys do to get reelected. Term limits would help but the politicians are not going to vote for that either. I guess I'm a skeptic.

[Demosthenes]

IN QUE nee FYI wrote:

Well this was certainly an original story, especially since the actual article appeared in the Hagerstown Herald-Mail yesterday. Matthew barely changed the wording of the story to make it his opinion. If you're going to quote an AP article then print the article and not a skewed version of it.

It was also in the Partriot. Thought I was having a flash of Deja Vu.

[wph351]

I agree that opportunity for corruption abounds with "wam".

I am going to make an assupmtion that as a general rule the lion's share of the money goes to counties with wealthiest per capita population.

Is that so wrong?? Should not those paying the most tax dollars also be the ones recieving the most for their contributions?

If i chip in on a pizza with two friends, and i kick in $10 while they throw in $2.50 each, doesn't that entitle me to the last piece?

[Termite]

The more papers shine lights down the Harrisburg rat hole the better informed taxpayers will be. I urge the P.O. to keep going in this direction.

[Edstem]

On PCN's call in show - Rep Josh Shapiro revealed that there is $200 million in a legislature "slush" fund.(slush in my word, not his) He advocated for returning that money to the people.

I agree!