Reform-opinion-Bumsted

===Source===
:October 22, 2006, Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, by Brad Bumsted STATE CAPITOL REPORTER
==Politicians, reform thyself==
HARRISBURG
The most overused word at the state Capitol this fall is reform. Everyone is a reformer. There's lobbyist reform and gambling reform. There's legislative reform. Long-standing, of course, there's tax reform. Despite passage of a bill recently, it's not complete.
It depends, of course, what one means by "reform."
Lynn Swann is the reform candidate for governor. Unless, of course, you believe Democrat Gov. Ed Rendell, who didn't embrace a reform proposal of much significance for 3 1/2 years and now all of a sudden is a reformer.
Rendell audaciously says in his TV commercials that he -- not Swann -- will reform state government.
There's a reform caucus in the House. Plenty of lawmakers are casting themselves as reformers.
Reform means, according to Webster's, "removing faults and defects, to correct" and "to make better by putting a stop to abuses or malpractice or by introducing better procedures."
Or -- here we go -- "a correction of faults or evils, as in government or society; social or political improvement."
Pennsylvania has a long history of political corruption. It is an anti-reform state.
All of this new attention to reform is a result of the reckless path that legislative leaders led the rank and file down in July 2005. That's when they cowed lawmakers into voting for pay-jacking for legislators and state officials.
They orchestrated a middle-of-the-night vote where not a single legislator spoke out. They allowed legislators to take the raise early as "unvouchered expenses" in clear and direct violation of the state constitutional ban against midterm raises.
It had been laid out in late 2004 by Supreme Court Chief Justice Ralph Cappy. Rendell, the "reformer," encouraged the Legislature to approve the raise so he could get his budget priorities.
Rendell would later suggest he was bullied into it by Senate Republican leaders.
After a huge political backlash, the pay grab was repealed last November.
Seventeen incumbents lost their jobs in the May primary; a Supreme Court justice was defeated last year in the anti-pay furor.
Different "reformers" have been pushing for changes -- Tim Potts, Gene Stilp, Eric Epstein.
Stilp sued over the pay raise and the high court recently decided enough was enough. They reinstated the raise for themselves and for other judges.
There's reform for you.
In some cases, reform doesn't mean reform at all.
In almost all versions of the bill to reform lobbyists, they revert to the status quo prior to the lobbyist law being overturned by -- you guessed it -- the Supreme Court.
The reform in large part is going back to the way it used to be.
Tax reform also has always been a misnomer. To most people it means tax cuts.
To politicians it means tax shifting -- at least for anything substantial.
The problem is there's always a fear that the taxes cut will be raised again.
Then we'd need, what? Why, more reform, of course.
Reform will be with us a long time yet -- clearly through the 2007-2008 legislative session. So far it's been mostly talk and little action.
Watch out for the next big one. They'll probably start calling it transportation funding reform.
It definitely will require paying more.
==Links==
* Reform