“Critics fret over fate of lawmakers WAMs” continues “A notable victim of this year’s recession-driven budget cuts is supposedly the tens of millions of tax dollars that legislative leaders have long controlled through a secretive process to underwrite lawmakers’ favored causes.”
WATCHDOG: “Walking Around Money” can be a good thing since it gives legislators authority to fund local needs, a task too complicated and a process subject to distortions if each is reviewed by the entire body. Local citizens scrutinize how the funds are used and can hold their legislators accountable at the polls.
But the AP and Intell err in waiting until the fourteenth paragraph on the ‘jump page’ to provide critical information, to wit: “An AP analysis of the grant requests in the last half of 2008 – when 228 of 253 legislative seats were filled by voters – found that some counties that are home to top legislators were targeted to receive disproportionately more legislative grant money.” To quote Shakespeare, “Here lies the rub!”
NewsLanc at times has inadvertently buried the most important information deep in a piece, so we are sympathetic. Nevertheless, we award the article a ‘growl.’
How much “Walking Around Money” was spent on the hotel and convention center project?
At the very least, Gib Armstrong’s final $3 million grant would fall under that category.
With a little research, it should be easy to show that there were others.
Editor’s note: That final $3 million for the Convention Center to cover cost over runs likely resulted from Armstrong’s diversion of funds previously promised to the Lancaster Public Library towards its renovation and expansion.