Feb 14, 2007 3 min read

Those who think we criticize state Rep. H. William DeWeese after anything less than thoughtful analysis, please take notice: DeWeese has done a praiseworthy thing by canceling taxpayer-funded meals for the 102-member Democratic caucus, himself, his staff and his meetings with constituents. It’s the strongest public evidence yet that DeWeese possesses the ability to change with the times, and that he’s indeed heard the clarion call for reform. It makes absolutely no sense for DeWeese – or the leaders of any of the other three caucuses in Harrisburg – to use their $13-million-a-year special leadership accounts in this way. A two-month review of DeWeese’s spending in late 2005 showed $45,178 spent on meals in the above four categories. Over the course of a year, at that rate the meal tab would be $271,068.

Legislators already get a $148 per diem – the equivalent of a daily allowance – to pay for lodging and meals while in Harrisburg. That’s on top of their annual salaries and vehicle expense allowances. So they really don’t need to be treated to sandwich and fruit platters at $1,900 per pop, or to fancier meals at up to $6,300 per setting.

Although the public is no doubt tired of paying for the legislature’s runaway gravy train – and in this case, it’s gravy – DeWeese’s elimination of a perquisite probably caused more than a few upset stomachs within his own caucus. His attempt to restore fiscal accountability, however small, should be emulated by House Republicans, and Senate Democrats and Republicans.

Last May, we ran a story that offered a glimpse into DeWeese’s leadership account spending. It included meal disbursements of $234, $174 and $150 to his chief of staff, Mike Manzo, who earned $124,000 last year plus got a $20,250 bonus from DeWeese, pushing his salary to $144,250. It also included four meals for DeWeese and his staff at Rohanna’s Golf Course in Waynesburg, at costs reaching $121; and one $3,420 meal for 150 people at a downtown Harrisburg pub restaurant.

Part of the problem with that setup – and one reason we have had no choice but to criticize such spending – is that receipts had little or no itemized details, the biggest of which would be the purpose for socking taxpayers with those bills.

DeWeese still has a way to go to fully convince us that he’s using his powerful position for the noble purpose of changing the “me first” culture of the legislature. We eagerly await concrete details on his stance on updating the state’s pitiful open records law, for example.

But on this matter, DeWeese has done a good and necessary thing. He’s shown that as a leader, he is capable of orchestrating change instead of maintaining a sad status quo.

We urge DeWeese to keep moving in this direction.