Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

MuckRaker83 t1_j09s8n8 wrote

Cutler keeps trying to reframe it as money "raised" by Republicans for Republican use since it was collected while Republicans were in office.

It's PA taxpayer money that existed in those accounts to do the business of the legislature. It's theft. Imagine if an outgoing president transferred all the taxpayer money to fund the operations of the white house and executive offices to their own accounts and those of their political party!

220

Excelius t1_j0bk4xc wrote

I'm having trouble making sense of a lot of this recent drama the Pa House, since most of the public has little knowledge of the normal internal processes and procedures of the legislature. I have no idea what is normal business in the state house, and what isn't.

This is all further complicated by the fact that the GOP will technically continue to hold the majority until special election are held to fill Democratic vacancies.

> It's PA taxpayer money that existed in those accounts to do the business of the legislature. It's theft. Imagine if an outgoing president transferred all the taxpayer money to fund the operations of the white house and executive offices to their own accounts and those of their political party!

It's worth noting that none of these transfers are leaving accounts internal to the structure of the state legislature.

Fight for control of Pa. House rages on as Republicans move $51 million in state funds >In the Pennsylvania House, the caucuses of both parties are allocated separate funds to be used for things like payroll, office costs and more.  > >In 2022, “Caucus Operations” for both parties were allocated a total of $140,044,000. According to Cutler, this total is usually divided into 52% for the majority party and 48% for the minority party, which would mean Republicans got about $72,822,880 and Democrats got about $67,221,120. > >Cutler said Republicans have allocated some of their funds into various accounts that benefit both parties, such as an account used to pay for technology upgrades in the Capitol. For example, it was used to pay to upgrade the House chamber voting board last summer. Republican leadership said they planned future projects like upgrading the Capitol media office, which still has an entrance sign reading “Newspaper correspondents” and only has a men’s bathroom. > >Funds from the information technology accounts made up most of the $51 million transfer to the Republican House Special Leadership account. Republicans said because the money was allocated to and saved by the Republican Caucus, they should get to keep control of it. > >“It’s essentially 12 years’ worth of surpluses that have accumulated because we’ve managed our finances very responsibly,” Cutler said.

15

hostile_rep t1_j0bok1b wrote

>“It’s essentially 12 years’ worth of surpluses that have accumulated because we’ve managed our finances very responsibly,” Cutler said.

Grand theft auto is essentially aggressive valet parking.

21

IamChantus t1_j0a66wy wrote

Pretty sure that's a lot of what got Iran pissed at the US in the first place.

Edit - right, we helped install the Shah.

12

IamSauerKraut t1_j0a77hd wrote

Iran was pissed at the Shah, and then at the US because it gave them the Shah.

10

IamChantus t1_j0a7fap wrote

I thought we took in the Shah along with their national Treasury. Or at least a sizable portion of it.

Edit - nevermind, forgot we put the Shaw in place.

1

IamSauerKraut t1_j0ceidn wrote

The US held onto certain Iranian assets as the result of the Hostage situation. We did not take in their national treasury.

5

IamChantus t1_j0dgpif wrote

That's what it was. Thank you for the correction.

2

NewAlexandria t1_j0aco9e wrote

Does this mean we're getting to a point where parties will refuse to settle cashflows into state coffers, but act like fiduciaries for the money until the acting reps & administrators want to allocate / purpose it?

i'm not even sure that could work. I'm trying to liken it to how other countries have many parties in the governing body, and each has to barter to get things funded/etc. Same in this model — each of 'the two parties' is really a network of PACs and NGOs, with their own access to donations/financials.

Today those groups are already deciding where to allocate based on trust / alliances. Are we headed toward a model where they more like fiduciaries, trusting a lesser amount of political hierarchy?

(all of this is aside from what Cutler did, should do, or consequences)

please, analysis only. No partisan trope responses.

4

oppiewan t1_j09mezn wrote

There is no bottom to the Republicans depravity. Vote accordingly.

103

Dredly t1_j09up3k wrote

Clearly they did not...

10

cashonlyplz t1_j0ba2l1 wrote

I mean ... PA Dems will have a House majority for the first time in over a decade, so they kinda did??

14

themollusk OP t1_j0bs6jv wrote

But due to the Democrats not having official control for a few weeks/months into the new season, Cutler is almost certain to be elected speaker on the 3rd and the GOP will use their short term majority to ram through the amendment package onto the May primary ballot.

  • Abortion ban.
  • End of no excuse mail voting.
  • End statewide elections for the supreme court, and have them elected via politically drawn districts. Read: gerrymandered.
6

cashonlyplz t1_j0cbpfw wrote

Prediction: The Senate won't pass that because they can't override the inevitable veto from Wolf. It has pass the legislature, which means not merely the House. there is still time for the GOP controlled legislature to do this, apparently. It does not ever see the governor's desk.

Small good news is Cutler will not be speaker in '23. He will be a minority whip.

2

themollusk OP t1_j0cl1v3 wrote

Governor has no say whatsoever in the amendment process. That's the entire reason why the state GOP has been machine gunning amendments the last few years is because they can't override a veto. So instead, they package unpopular legislation as amendments specifically because it cuts out the governor's office.

They abused this process to strip the governor's emergency powers, and now they're working on abortion, mail in voting, and gerrymandering the state supreme court. Dave Argall, chairman of the Senate government committee, had also made it clear that the GOP intends to use constitutional amendments to skirt around the governor and ban property taxes.

If the GOP holds a majority in both houses for even a slight bit of time during the upcoming session, they will push the amendment package through. All they need to do is have it pass both the house and senate one more time and then they can put it on a statewide vote. They want this on the May primary ballot because it's the most advantageous for them.

2

cashonlyplz t1_j0cxquq wrote

Dang, I didn't realize the Amendment process was that convoluted. Welp, we better not let up, then. Time to harangue, now more than ever.

3

themollusk OP t1_j0d8xnz wrote

And the extra pisser about the process?

It only requires 50%+1 vote during each step. Compare that to amending the US Constitution: 66% of both the House and Senate, and then 75% of the states. It's amazingly simple to amend Pennsylvania's constitution, especially so when you have an artificially created majority that isn't representative of the actual people who live in this state.

2

cashonlyplz t1_j0gkfkn wrote

Some good news, I guess, care of Stephen Caruso.

2

themollusk OP t1_j0gpj2y wrote

Holy shit, that's one spicy meatball!

1

cashonlyplz t1_j0gxlh9 wrote

Gotta love when election denialism causes the system to deny the certification of people who ran on or friendly to the idea of denying the results elections.

F*cking golden.

2

Illustrious_Air_1438 t1_j0gwq7f wrote

This was partly due to poor strategy on the Democrats' part. Austin Davis and Summer Lee simultaneously ran for higher office and the state house, won both, and now have to vacate their seat in the state house. If they had chosen just one office to run for, the House would have been 101-101 at this point.

However, I still question the ability of Republicans to pass their amendments. They cannot afford any defections, assuming that all 99 Democrats stay united, and I think there may be a few Republicans in the Philly suburbs who are unwilling to support these amendments.

0

FuneralBeef t1_j09s3l2 wrote

Taxpayer money doesn't have a party affiliation.

90

Drinky_McNoshoot t1_j0b9w0w wrote

Every republican accusation is an admission.

19

Yachtrocker717 t1_j0a30vf wrote

As a family values oriented fiscal conservative, I sure hope this Cutler fellow returns these slush funds to the taxpayers. But, he and his cronies will probably spend it on hookers and blow.

14

worstatit t1_j0bgomi wrote

These clowns have 50 million slush funds of our money? Fuck them.

11

wagsman t1_j0bv83x wrote

So if this was money budgeted for them, and they had a bunch of extra money, then the party of spending less and cutting taxes shouldve budgeted less for themselves and passed a tax cuts. That is, unless they are a bunch of hypocrites.

9

kdeltar t1_j0ctyaz wrote

“Unless” is doing quite a lot of heavy lifting there

3

markwusinich_ t1_j0be30s wrote

Stupid man does crime.

Stupid people look the other way.

Hopefully he gets prosicuted.

6

drunkmonkey176 t1_j0bvnng wrote

Trash can only be trash. Take it out.

2

VeeTheBee86 t1_j0bz2ym wrote

Is this actually standard procedure? Has this been done before when party control switched? More what I find surprising is that taxpayer money is even subject to partisan control.

2

themollusk OP t1_j0c51cn wrote

That's a legitimately good question.

It may have happened in the past, but unfortunately it's been a while since PAs had a swap of control so it would have been a while ago. No matter, it's wrong.

Because as you and someone else pointed out, taxpayer money doesn't have a party affiliation.

2

axeville t1_j0cc46b wrote

Fifty. Million. Dollars. Is a lotta money.

2

hedgerow_hank t1_j0cssoh wrote

Republicans... the party of criminals.

If they can't lie, cheat or steal - they can't win.

2

Yelloeisok t1_j0dy9rv wrote

I hope the next headline I read regarding this issue is a lawsuit filed against this thief.

1

Archpa84 t1_j0cdizd wrote

Just another sick move. Plant an anonymous tip with the FBI and watch.

0

Bronxboy23 t1_j0cbq8m wrote

Lets not do this holier than thou dance. The only reason Pennsylvania is affordable is due to the republican parties management of funds. Every where else,including Philadelphia, in the northeast has democrat hands in the coughers and no one knows what's going on with the money. High homelessness, sanctuary cities, embezzlement, nothing gets dork because it has to pass too many hands first

−11

steelceasar t1_j0cyn2h wrote

None of what you posted is factual or makes sense in any sort of way.

3