By Dick Miller
WE.CONNECT.DOTS: A couple of ivory tower academics have produced a study claiming Pennsylvania is riddled with more government corruption than most other states.
Mainstream media pounced on the news and editorialized. Phony do-gooders who talk-the-talk, but don’t necessarily walk-the-walk bellowed their horror.
These eggheads claim government corruption causes excessive state spending. Reducing corruption to an “average level” in the Commonwealth and nine other especially dirty states would lower annual state spending by $1,308 per person – or 5.2 percent.
Study authors are John Mikesell who teaches at the University of Indiana and Cheol Liu, assistant professor at University of Hong Kong. Liu earned his doctorate at Indiana under Mikesell. The current issue of Public Administration Review published the results of their research.
Thesis of the study is “the Impact of Public Officials’ Corruption on the Size and Allocation of U.S. State Spending.”
Democrats seldom comment publicly on such news, preferring to duck “hot potatoes.” Two prominent Republican operatives, however, had decidedly different views.
Former US Attorney for Central Pennsylvania James West, who handled several high-profile corruption cases, said, “I’d say, based on my experience, it is true.” The Pittsburgh Tribune Review carried his comments.
West was a minion helping fellow Republican Richard Thornburg become governor and continue to punish his political enemies. When the late Budd Dwyer, another Republican who as state treasurer dared question Thornburg’s spending to travel abroad, West prosecuted him for public corruption. Convicted in late 1986, Dwyer killed himself at a televised news conference on the eve of his sentencing.
Former Gov. Tom Ridge, also a Republican, said Pennsylvania should not be categorized as a corrupt state, also published in the Tribune Review. Ridge said he would shout his conclusion “from the highest mountain or building in the state.”
Each state is different, making it nearly impossible to create enough measuring devices to form a proper comparison.
Thornburgh was only the first politician to use the criminal justice system to get elected governor.
This was the post-Watergate era and Republicans needed to show Democrats were just as crooked. Thornburg prosecuted a series of local and state Democrat pols. His conquests are figured in the study period that ranged from 1976 to 2008.
Current PA Governor, Tom Corbett became the second Republican to prosecute his way to the state’s highest office, just two decades after Thornburg. Not all of his prosecutions are counted in the study.
Neither Thornburg nor Corbett paid attention to government corruption after becoming governor. Corbett could have finally brought about reform in Harrisburg. The fact that he did not, just proved his run-up to the executive mansion was only to advance his political career.
A docile media let him off the hook.
One theory is that corruption is more likely in states where the capitol is not in a large city. Harrisburg Patriot-News has recently cutback to printing three days per week. Pittsburgh and Philadelphia media exist with smaller staff and resources covering state government news.
How well does the media watch state government? Reporters like John Baer, Philadelphia Daily News and Brad Bumsted, Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, are typical.
Both have exposed little corruption on their watch, preferring self-advancement through publication of books about what went on while they were there.
Pennsylvanians get the kind of government they deserve because of their resistance or disinterest to consolidation. We live in one of over 2,500 municipalities and can educate our kids in any of 500 school districts. Big deals are transacted in over 1,500 active authorities. Each buy of materials and services or hiring consultants and other professionals represent opportunities for bribes or kickbacks.
Bottom Line: This type of academic research deserves a non-academic admonishment. Garbage-In, Garbage-Out.
One of the reasons for corruption is that the state injects so much cash into municipalities. If municipalities were required to raise taxes to cover their expenses citizens would look more carefully at the government they buy. Once the terms “state or federal” money is invoked people think it’s free. And so it goes.
EDITOR: In many cases if not most, locals would not be able to conceive or execute policies that are important for the nation.