In April 2006, Massachusetts enacted a dramatic health care reform package. Dubbed "Romneycare" after Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, this plan calls for reforms in the health insurance market, a mandate for individuals to purchase health insurance combined with taxpayer subsidies, and mandates on employers.

HARRISBURG - In the hours leading up to votes in the General Assembly on an approximate $26 billion budget the message from the Pennsylvania Club for Growth and taxpayers across Pennsylvania is "Just say, NO!"

"Who's in charge in Harrisburg?" asked PA Club for Growth Executive Director Kathryn English. "Last time I checked, Republicans held wide majorities in both the House and Senate. Why are they behaving like tax-and-spend Democrats?"

Most troubling to the PA Club for Growth and its members is the lip-service being given by Republican leadership to exercise fiscal restraint. Just last month many legislators' campaign literature touted their "yes" vote for the "Taxpayer Fairness Act", or HB 2082 which would limit a spending increase to only 3.47%, yet the proposed budget is more than double this rate.

To add insult to injury for the taxpayers of Pennsylvania, rumors continue to run through the halls of the Capitol about Gov. Rendell's "creative budgeting" of rolling over roughly $300 million in welfare costs into the 07-08 budget making the spending seem less than it really is before his upcoming bid for re-election. The General Assembly is also considering using $363 million of the current year surplus, yet under the Taxpayers Fairness Act 65% of this surplus would be returned to the taxpayer.

"The Republican leadership has the power to bring Gov. Rendell's profligate spending under control," said English. "The question is whether or not they have the will and courage. Votes on the budget will be a real measure of the commitment of all who voted YES on HB2082 to rein in state spending."

"While we had hoped hope the GOP's 'Playbook for Progress'-introduced earlier this session-represented the kind of leadership Pennsylvania needs today, we are apparently back to the same spending ways of 2005 and 2006," English added

The Pennsylvania Club for Growth, which supports strong fiscal conservatives who run for the state legislature, will continue to work with lawmakers to move forward a pro-growth agenda that includes tax cuts and other smaller government issues.

The Pennsylvania Club for Growth is a group of citizens dedicated to expanding the prosperity of working families through the Reagan Doctrine of lower taxes, smaller government and strong free enterprise. As the Pennsylvania chapter for a rapidly growing national organization, we are committed to seeing that Pennsylvanians regain their voice in Pennsylvania politics. For far too long, elected officials who claim to be fiscal conservatives have cast aside their beliefs to partake in a bloated government that insists on taking more and more from families trying to achieve the American Dream. To that end, the Pennsylvania Club for Growth is committed to supporting and electing men and women who are advocates of the Reagan Doctrine.

PHILADELPHIA -- Senate Majority Leader David J. Brightbill, who helped craft the unpopular legislative pay raise that spurred an anti-incumbency movement, conceded an upset loss in today's primary.

With 38 percent of precincts reporting, Mike Folmer had 6,258 votes, or 64 percent, compared with 3,520, or 36 percent, for Brightbill.

Brightbill, a Lebanon County native, was first elected to the Senate in 1982 and became Senate majority leader in 2000.

Sixty-one incumbents, including five legislative leaders, had challengers in Tuesday's primary -- the highest number since 1980. Full Story - 2006-05-16

Just in time for the May Primary when so many incumbents are in heated primary races, the PA General Assembly and Governor Rendell have finally agreed on a proposed property tax conference committee bill.

Once again activity from the legislature is geared toward what will get the greatest number of incumbents re-elected, rather than what is actually fiscally responsible or best for the people.

According to the Commonwealth Foundation - "the House-Senate conference committee bill for property tax reform fails Pennsylvanians.”

"Although Gov. Rendell and legislative leaders will be using words such as 'historic' and 'unprecedented' to describe the conference committee report on property tax relief, Pennsylvanians will not be fooled.

"This new tax relief plan is just Act 72 warmed over with an extra helping to seniors. "In addition, the loophole-laden back-end referendum provides school board spending control without taxpayer control. Under these provisions, taxpayers will be prohibited from restraining spending on construction costs, pensions, and healthcare benefits, to name just a few. This is 'referendum in name only.'"

"Shifting taxes from one Pennsylvanian to another Pennsylvanian is not reform, and handing out checks to politically selected taxpayers will do nothing to relieve the property tax burden," said Brouillette. "Until policymakers get serious about controlling spending in public education, Pennsylvanians will continue to get property tax 'relief' that isn't relief."

The Commonwealth Foundation introduced a proposal in April that could provide as much as five times the property tax relief promised under Act 72 without shifting or raising taxes on any Pennsylvanian. For the complete release or more information on this innovative proposal, see the "Property Tax Relief Scholarship Act" at www.CommonwealthFoundation.org.

Call your Legislator – Tell your legislators Pennsylvania needs "REAL" Property Tax Relief. - 2006-05-02

Rasmussen Report Poll Shows Folmer with a Staggering Lead Over Senate Majority Leader Chip Brightbill   

Michael Folmer leads Chip Brightbill, by 45 percent to 27 percent 

Harrisburg – A  Rasmussen Report poll commissioned by Pennsylvania Club for Growth reports Michael Folmer leads Brightbill, by 45 percent to 27 percent, among likely Republican voters. Kathryn English, executive director of the PACFG issued the following statement regarding the poll. 

“This poll confirms what PACFG has been saying.  The taxpayers are ready for a change, incumbent Chip Brightbill’s support is lagging well below 50 percent despite the fact that he is the Senate Majority leader and well known by Republican primary voters. The poll shows more than half of the Republican primary electorate is looking for a different candidate this year.”  

“In the coming weeks we will be expanding our efforts to inform Republican primary voters about Mike’s plans for reducing taxes, cutting state spending and protecting traditional family values.  As voters become more familiar with this message, and as they learn more about how Chip Brightbill actually votes on the issues, we are confident Folmer will win the primary.” 

“Polls have indicated that those voters who know of Mike Folmer are supportive of his campaign. Mike Folmer is the only candidate who has offered real plans for reducing our tax burden, cutting spending and protecting traditional family values.  As the voters learn more about Mike Folmer in the coming weeks, we are confident he will surge well over 50% in the polls.” 

“It is significant that Brightbill is trailing Folmer by 18 points in this poll. Many voters are still learning about Mike, so his level of support has tremendous potential for growth. Conversely, most voters are already familiar with Brightbill and he is trailing Folmer by a sizeable margin.” 

Rasmussen Reports is best known for being the most accurate polls in the 2004 Presidential Race.   

When Ronald Reagan, a former Democrat, challenged the incumbent president of his own party, Republican Gerald Ford, in 1976, he posed the following rhetorical question to the grassroots conservative base of the party: If not us, who? If not now, when?

Today, another former Democrat by the name of Mike Folmer, is courageously challenging one of the most powerful leaders of the State Senate Chip Brightbill.

Like Ronald Reagan, Mike Folmer knows why he became a Republican: because a firm belief in small government, low taxes, personal responsibility, and traditional values is at the core of his being.

Mike Folmer, along with the entire base of the Republican Party, has watched Chip Brightbill raise taxes, increase the size of government, and completely disintegrate the peoples faith in politics.

And in the spirit of Ronald Reagan, Mike Folmer is bound and determined to go to Harrisburg to reclaim our party for the principles upon which it was founded.

A decade ago, Republicans took complete control of both houses of the General Assembly. Grassroots Republicans, working families, single moms, senior citizens, small businessmen, were all optimistic that property taxes would be eliminated -- or at least seriously reduced, that gone would be the days of having the most crushing business tax burden in America, that we would finally implement legal reform, that we would have school choice, that we would seriously curb state spending, and that people would again trust government.

But sadly, none of this has come to pass. In fact, on Chip Brightbills watch, the size and cost of government has exploded. Perhaps the most poignant commentary on the Brightbill reign was the appropriations process of 2004, when Brightbill ushered through a state budget that increased liberal Ed Rendells massive spending request by $160 million, ballooning the size of government by more than double the rate of inflation.

And of course, more spending means higher taxes. Chip Brightbill has been Ed Rendells best friend. In 2003, he rubber stamped the third largest tax increase in history, a $1 billion slap in the face to working families, that increased the personal income tax a whopping 10 percent.

But not content with the spending binge that tax increase made possible, Brightbill also rubber-stamped the approval for Rendell to borrow another $1 billion in bonds, which is money our children and grandchildren are going to have to pay back someday.

The truth, in fact, is that Chip Brightbill has voted for each of the four biggest tax increases in history, for a total of $7 billion in higher taxes.

Our state, every citizen, urgently needs new leadership in Harrisburg, men and women who not only talk the talk on commonsense values such as lower taxes and more efficient government, but who will walk the walk.

Mike Folmer is exactly the type of principled leader we need in Harrisburg. When he says its time to clean up government, he means it. When he says its time to eliminate property taxes once and for all, he means it. When he says it is time to stand up to the trial lawyers and other special interest groups, he means it. When he says it is time to rein in wasteful spending, he means it. When he says it is time to make Pennsylvania a friendly place to do business, he means it. When he says it is time to end closed-door deals with lobbyists and late night pay raises, he means it.

As Ronald Reagan asked, if not us, who? If not now, when?

Ladies and gentleman, the man who will change Harrisburg and give state government back to the people, Mike Folmer.

State College, PA - Pennsylvania Club for Growth (PACFG) today endorsed Matt Shaner who is running to be the next Republican State Representative for the 77th District in the Pennsylvania State Legislature. The 77th house seat will be an open seat due to the retirement of current house representative Lynn Herman.

"I believe Matt Shaner will prove to be great pro-economic growth legislator," said Kathryn English, Executive Director of the Pennsylvania Club for Growth. "Shaner will do what is right for the taxpayers and will fight to reduce spending in Harrisburg."

Mr. Shaner also believes Harrisburg must heed the taxpayers' demand for more accountability in the way the State Legislature conducts its business. Rather than late night, closed-door deals, the General Assembly should have a process open to the public and the media.

"For far too long, Pennsylvania, has had Representatives who have voted regularly more to benefit themselves and liberal special interest groups," added English. "The 77th district has an opportunity to elect an honest reformer with conservative values who will fight for the people" PACFG believes Matt Shaner is the best candidate to not only represent the 77th district, but all taxpayers from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

Pottsville, PA - The Pennsylvania Club for Growth (PACFG), the Commonwealth's leading political action committee devoted to the Reagan Doctrine of fiscal and economic policies, today endorsed conservative Gary Hornberger for the PA House Representatives in the 125th District. Hornberger will face incumbent Bob Allen for the Republican nomination.

PACFG's Board of Directors and Executive Director unanimously voted to endorse Hornberger because they believe he will be the strongest defender of the lower taxes, efficient government, and job creation. "This was an easy decision to make," stated Executive Director Kathryn English. "PACFG looked at Bob Allen's long record of increasing taxes, exploding the size of government, and lining his own pockets with taxpayer money, and decided to take a principled stand to endorse an honest reformer with conservative values. Gary Hornberger will fight to assure that our children and grandchildren are not picking up the tab for the tax-and-spend habits of today's legislature."

As a member of the County Salary Board, Hornberger led the effort to keep salary and wage increases in line with the rate of inflation. He opposed the creation of unneeded positions and thwarted an attempt by a majority of the commissioners to grant wage increases without the mandated approval of the Salary Board.

Representative Bob Allen, meanwhile, is out of touch with his constituents. The Commonwealth Foundation Liberty Index scored Allen a dismal D- for his 2003-2004 Legislative report card and an F+ for his mid-term 2005-2006 report. (See below) Allen twice voted to give himself an unconstitutional pay raise, most recently to $89,155 from $69,647. Allen joined with Democrats in voting for the massive $1 billion tax increase sought by liberal governor Ed Rendell. He joined Democrats in voting for the crushing $400 million tax increase on gasoline. Allen and his fellow politicians were shamed into repealing the pay raise and giving back the money after the news media alerted taxpayers to what happened.

"For far too long, Bob Allen has been wheeling and dealing to benefit himself and liberal special interest groups from Philadelphia," added English. "Hornberger will fight to put more money in the pockets of Schuylkill County workers, businesses, families and senior citizens.

"When voters have an opportunity to compare Gary Hornberger's record of fighting for the people, versus Bob Allen's record of gearing legislation toward maintaining his incumbency and blindly following the Philadelphia leadership, the choice will be clear, Hornberger will be the taxpayer's choice."

About the Commonwealth Foundation Liberty Index The Liberty Index is designed to educate the people of Pennsylvania about how members of the General Assembly and the Governor are voting on laws to expand or contract Liberty in Pennsylvania. This report card is the fairest and most comprehensive analysis available on the overall performance of legislators and the governor. Unlike most organizations that only look at selective votes in their ratings, the Commonwealth Foundation analyzed every single bill that became an Act or was vetoed by the governor during given legislative session.

(Harrisburg) – The Pennsylvania Club For Growth will hold a press conference to announce their endorsement of Gary Hornberger for the 125th PA House Representative Republican Primary

WHO:	Pennsylvania Club For Growth
WHAT:	News Conference
WHEN:	February 7, 2006 10:00 AM.
WHERE:	The River Inn 1476 Route 61 S Pottsville, PA 17901

All members are encouraged to attend!

Pay Raise

The Pennsylvania General Assembly experienced a rather eventful year in 2005. Perhaps the most controversial issue to face the legislators this year was the pay raise legislation. House Bill 1521, which became Act 44 of 2005, increased the salaries of all members of the General Assembly, as well as those for the executive and judicial branches, by at least 16% in a year where the budget provided neither increased PACE or PACENET funding nor tax relief for Pennsylvania's citizens.

What made this pay raise more offensive than prior pay raises was the method in which it was enacted. The General Assembly used a legal, yet highly controversial, parliamentary procedure insert the pay raise provisions into another bill in the in the early morning hours of July 7, 2005 without any input from the public at large. Perhaps what was most egregious about the pay raise was that the legislation allowed the legislators and other officials to collect the pay increase as "unvouchered expenses." This practice clearly violates the Pennsylvania Constitution, which under Article II, Section 8, requires an intervening election before a salary increase may be effective.

The fallout from the pay raise was swift and furious. A concerted effort on the part of good government groups, including Pennsylvania Club for Growth, and the media shed light on the pay raise and was instrumental in forcing the General Assembly to rescind the pay raise legislation in November of 2005; however, this is presently being challenged in court by certain judges who believe that rescinding the pay raise legislation itself violates the Pennsylvania Constitution since judges' salaries may not be lowered.

Special Session

In order to shift focus away from the pay raise debacle, the Governor and General Assembly met in Special Session to address the long-standing and elusive goal of providing property tax relief and reform for Pennsylvania. Beginning in September, 2005, the Special Session allowed a number of proposals to be considered to eliminate or restrict the property tax in Pennsylvania, including the Commonwealth Caucus Plan, which in general would have substituted a lower yet broader-bases sales tax to compensate for eliminated property taxes, and to establish a more permanent and structured plan to fund education.

After considering this issue, the House and Senate have apparently provided their own versions of how property tax relief should look. The Senate's version, Special Session SB 30, and the House's version, SB 854 (as amended), are quite different from each other and require a bi-cameral conference with representatives from the Governor's office to address the differences in the plans and come up with a comprehensive and consensus-building plan.

Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR)

The other major issue facing the Pennsylvania General Assembly is the Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR). Basically, the bills of the package (HB 2067, HB 2082, SB 4, and SB 884) provide amendments to the Pennsylvania Constitution and enacting legislation that would restrict new General Fund spending to certain indicators of inflation for the prior 3 years to ensure that the state government does not spend greater than its means and adheres to responsible budgetary practices that Pennsylvania's working families demand. The bills are currently going through the legislative process. Stay tuned for updates.

Pennsylvania Club for Growth

One of the more positive effects of the legislative turmoil has been the increased awareness of and membership in the Pennsylvania chapter of the Club for Growth. As of December, 2005, there are now 2000 new members from all walks of life in Pennsylvania with the common goal of demanding responsible government and lower taxation for Pennsylvania's citizens.

2006 Preview

As a result of our combined efforts with fiscally responsible groups, we are now poised to take back the State Legislature.

Over the last year we have asked for your help to get the Pro- Growth message out to Pennsylvania citizens everywhere, to fight against the constant whittling of our rights, and to form the strong and agile grassroots network that will put the tax and spend legislatures out of power in Pennsylvania.

And it has all been in preparation for this, the most pivotal election in recent memory. We need your help to identify and equip the strongest field of Pro-Growth candidates we have ever assembled!

This year we have a chance to elect leaders with real vision and leadership instead of more of the same tax-and-spend policies we have labored under for so long.

Every race will count and candidates will need our full support to prepare them for the usual barrage of liberal rhetoric and the type of favor that can only be secured by incumbent power. The fight to end mismanagement in Harrisburg will be won on the ground, in every town and every district.

We need your help to build the Candidates' Fund and to field the very best team we can to secure Pro-Growth victories in May.

THE CAMPAIGN STARTS TODAY!

Your support over this exciting year has brought us so close to our shared goal. Our success in '06 depends on your continued involvement. We look forward to your reply.

Sincerely,

Kathryn R. English
Executive Director

Once again the Pittsburgh Penguins are threatening to move if they don’t get a new arena soon. The team wants taxpayers to cough up the money (now an estimated $278 million) to build the arena, but local governments are financially embarrassed at the moment. There really is no money unless the County decides to divert spending from currently funded items or raise taxes. The City is in distressed status and the County eliminated 500 positions in 2004. Even the Governor’s office is quick to point out that even though money is earmarked, it is not currently available. With the team’s lease for the Mellon Arena up in 2007, the team is pressuring elected officials to find the money. Will lawmakers cave, or will the Penguins march away?

Chief Executive Onorato has pledged to find a way to build an arena. He also says, “It will take a lot of different funding sources to get this built, just like other cities have done.” Taxpayers should view such pledges warily. Past experience with stadiums shows the vulnerability of taxpayers when officials vow to build sports facilities.

As we have argued for years, any arena needs to be built privately. There are private funding alternatives that have been used in other cities, and could be used here. If an arena would see the level of year-round use that local and team officials claim, then it should be a great investment opportunity for investors, perhaps a large local corporation. Indeed, the ability of the facility to generate large amounts of non-hockey revenue should make it a strong candidate for private funding.

One of the newest arenas was built in Columbus, Ohio for the NHL Blue Jackets. The arena, which opened in 2000, was constructed almost exclusively with private funds as Nationwide Insurance and the Dispatch Printing Company paid the entire sum while receiving only infrastructure aid from the city and county. The Wachovia Center in Philadelphia was privately built with loans and contributions from Spectator (now ComcastSpectacor).

One arena that fits the profile offered by the Chief Executive is the Pepsi Center in Denver, home of the Avalanche. The owner of the Pepsi Center, Ascent Arena Company, LLC, used a variety of funding sources: private sponsorships, indirect public subsidies (property tax breaks and tax rebates), and bonds floated against revenues from luxury suite sales and food concessions. Local companies such as Coors sponsored the Pepsi Center’s amenities such as an amphitheater and conference center while Conoco sponsored service stations on the property. Any arena for the Penguins will almost certainly include amenities such as restaurants, retail space, and even meeting space that could provide rental income to meet bond payments.

Revenue bonds have been an increasingly popular tool for financing sports facilities. Not only have they been used at Denver’s Pepsi Center, but they have also been used to finance arenas for the NHL’s Atlanta Thrashers and NBA Miami Heat and a stadium in New England. We previously promoted this concept in a 2002 report, Private Financing for a New Penguins Arena. The team dismissed the idea out of hand. However, the idea of using a portion of revenue streams from operations to retire arena related debt was incorporated into a Sports and Exhibition Authority plan—a plan that the Penguins also denounced.

But let’s cut to the chase. Hockey is a sport with a very limited, albeit dedicated, following as evidenced by the very small television revenue compared to other sports. By right, taxpayers should never be forced to subsidize professional sports. To ask them to subsidize a sport of such limited appeal is even more egregious. The claims that the Penguins are needed to promote economic development and that the loss of the team would cause a loss of jobs in Pittsburgh are fatuous at best. The team has been here for almost 40 years. Have they prevented the City from experiencing population losses in the hundreds of thousands? Obviously not.

Those who continue to trot out the economic development argument as a reason to subsidize the Penguins need to offer some evidence that it has worked here or other cities. There simply is no credible evidence from around the country that a region benefits economically from subsidized professional sports facilities.

So, for those who want to build a new arena to keep the Penguins, we suggest another financing method. Sell nonvoting shares in the team or in the new arena. There is precedent. The Green Bay Packers and Boston Celtics are publicly held corporations. Selling shares would allow serious fans and others who believe that having a team is important to the City to show their support and loyalty. The team could sell shares to the public, regionally and across the nation.

At a minimum, the team should offer one million shares at a $100 per share. If the team cannot raise $50 million through this process, it would reveal a clear lack of broad based support. Elites in the political and civic communities should not be permitted to impose costs on taxpayers when private investors are not willing to ante up to pay for a multi-use arena.

Those close to the team say that they are not bluffing. They say it’s a fact that when the lease at the Mellon Arena expires, the team will be free to move and will do so if plans for a new arena have not been finalized. Well it’s also a fact that taxpayers are tapped out. If a new facility is to be built, the bulk of the costs will have to fall on private sector shoulders. Taxpayers have been forced to subsidize everything from stadiums to defunct department stores to multi-million dollar companies. It is time to stop this expensive, ineffective kowtowing to special interests.

For a formatted version of this brief, please visit out website: http://www.alleghenyinstitute.org/briefs/vol5no49.pdf

Frank Gamrat, Ph.D., Sr. Research Assoc.        Jake Haulk, Ph.D., President

Spending Lobby Misleads Public About Spending Limits Legislation

HARRISBURG, PA — “It is hardly news that the beneficiaries of additional state spending support additional state spending,” said Matthew J. Brouillette, in response to negative radio ads attempting to help defeat legislation that would limit the growth of state government spending to the growth of the economy in general.

The so-called Coalition for Common Sense Priorities, a coalition consisting primarily of government employee unions and other organizations heavily subsidized by taxpayers, has released attack ads of misleading and inaccurate information.

“We’re not surprised that these groups want more taxes on Pennsylvanians and higher government spending, but they should at least make their case with facts rather than falsehoods,” said Brouillette, president of the Commonwealth Foundation, a public policy think tank located in Harrisburg.

The Coalition’s ads center around criticism of Colorado’s Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR) using figures drawn primarily from the union-backed Center for Budget and Policy Priorities report, which has since been discredited by the Tax Foundation and the Cato Institute in Washington, D.C.

The distortions, fabrications and rhetoric being spread by opponents of fiscal responsibility, such as the Coalition for Common Sense Priorities, include the following.

DISTORTION: Colorado’s tax and spending limitation “failed miserably” and has been repealed by the voters. (House Democratic Caucus, news release, Nov. 1, 2005)

FACTS: Colorado’s TABOR has had many positive benefits for the citizens of that state. 

• Colorado Gov. Bill Owens notes in a recent commentary that “Colorado voters fixed a glitch in the spending cap law; they didn’t overturn it, as some reports might have you believe. There was no ‘up or down’ vote. I believe … other states will see how well spending caps can work and more will adopt them.”
• Colorado’s TABOR generated over $3.2 Billion in tax rebates from 1997 to 2001. 
• Colorado’s budget deficit would have been six times larger in FY 2002 without TABOR, according to the Tax Foundation. 
• In the 8 years before TABOR, Colorado ranked 43rd among states in median family income growth, and it now ranks 7th. Colorado was 33rd in job growth before TABOR, but 6th since TABOR’s passage.  Colorado was 43rd in economic growth per capita before TABOR, but now ranks 7th.
• TABOR is not the cause of Colorado’s budgetary problems. The budget difficulties in Colorado have been caused by other factors, namely Amendment 23. This constitutional amendment, passed in 2000, mandates increases in K-12 education expenditures of inflation plus 1%, irrespective of the economy. This measure means education funding is exempted from TABOR and would, by law, be guaranteed a larger share of the Colorado budget each year. This law was clearly designed to undermine TABOR. 

FABRICATION: “Spending increases have averaged less than 3 percent per year since 1975.” (House Democratic Caucus, news release, Nov. 1, 2005)

FACTS: Pennsylvania’s General Fund expenditures have increased an average of 5.8% annually from $4.8 Billion in FY 1975-76 to $24.3 Billion in FY 2005-2006.  General fund expenditures have grown 41% above inflation over that time.

DISTORTION: Spending is already limited because “our Constitution requires a balanced budget.” (Repeated statements by Gov. Rendell, and House Democratic Leadership letter, Nov. 10, 2005)

FACTS: A balanced budget only means that the state must take in as much in taxes, fees and other revenue as it spends.  Functionally, the balanced budget requirement allows virtually unlimited spending. Theoretically, it only limits spending to 100% of all income earned by Pennsylvania workers and businesses, plus federal aid. 

RHETORIC: A Spending Limitation Act would require cuts in education, homeland security, transportation and criminal justice. (House Democratic Leadership letter, Nov. 10, 2005)

FACTS: A spending limit merely slows the growth in state spending, it does not mandate any cuts.  Under the proposed spending limit legislation, General Fund spending alone could increase by $638 million to $702 million next year, and by higher amounts in subsequent years.  Of the total cost of Pennsylvania state and local governments of over $100 billion, less than a quarter would be covered under the spending limits as currently proposed.

                                                                                              # # #

The Commonwealth Foundation (www.CommonwealthFoundation.org) is an independent, non-profit public policy research and educational institute based in Harrisburg, PA.

                                                                                              - 30 - 
 

The House of Representatives announced their fall 05-06 legislative agenda which included legislation that will put a cap on spending.

The Taxpayer Fairness Act seeks to put long overdue spending controls on state government, ensuring it lives within its means. PA Club for Growth is aggressively working to secure passage of the Act.

Among the changes it would make, the Taxpayer Fairness Act proposes a constitutional amendment that would restrict spending by capping spending increases to the combined rates of inflation and/or population growth and would return 75 percent of any surplus tax revenue to taxpayers that contribute through the state personal income tax. The remaining 25 percent would go to the state’s Rainy Day Fund to prevent future tax increases.

PACFG is cautiously optimistic at this point that our state leaders will continue to move forward on legislation that is critical to the future of Pennsylvania’s working families.

PA Club for Growth will continue to aggressively work toward securing passage of the Act and will continue to monitor the progress of this legislation in both the House & the Senate and will keep our members informed of the bill’s progress.

Legislation Progress

10/26/05 - Senate Bill 4 (a statutory limit that could be implemented immediately) and Senate Bill 884 (a constitutional amendment that could be implemented as soon as 2007) permitting government spending to increase, but limiting the growth to taxpayers' ability to pay passed 42-8 on SB 4; 50-0 on SB 884

11/02/05 - House Bill 2082 was passed, 110 yeas, 87 nays

The "Rock the Capital" rally scheduled for Monday, September 26, 2005, from 1:30 to 3:00 pm is being sponsored by ten broad-based organizations, including the Pennsylvania Club for Growth. Several guest speakers, music and a visual feast of political props will be featured before citizens enter the Capitol to meet and greet their representatives.

Bob Durgin from WHP Radio in Harrisburg will broadcast live from the Capitol Steps from 3:00 to 6:00 pm. Durgin will display and deliver petitions with more than 100,000 signatures opposing the pay raise during his live broadcast.

The Pennsylvania Club for Growth, which has been an outspoken critic of the pay-raise and wild spending habits of state legislators, will be on hand to fuel the fire. All taxpayers from across the Commonwealth are encouraged to attend the rally and let their legislators know how they feel about the pay-raise and higher taxes.

Later in the evening, the Pennsylvania Club for Growth, will be hosting a $150-per-person fundraiser featuring National Club for Growth chairman Pat Toomey. The event, which begins at 5:30 p.m., will be held a block away at the Harrisburg Hilton and Towers. Money raised from the event will be spent in the effort to replace wastrel, self-serving legislators with ones who will fight for low taxes and smaller government.

For more information about either event, contact Kathryn English at (717) 541-5000, Kathryn@paclubforgrowth.com or Click here for Online Ordering Information. - 2005-09-15

HARRISBURG- Almost two months after the Pennsylvania General Assembly increased spending 6.1 percent and raised legislators salaries 16-34 percent, politicians are scratching their heads and wondering why the taxpayers are still in an uproar?

As reported by columnist Brad Bumstead, politicians are blaming the media. House Speaker John Perzel (R-Philadelphia) was quoted as saying, "It's been a slow news month"

Kathryn English, executive director of the PA Club for Growth (PACFG), asks, "could it actually be that the people are just plain fed up- fed up with being the fifth worst state in the nation in economic freedom, a position the commonwealth has held for six years running? Maybe they're distressed over the fact that working Pennsylvanians received wage and salary increases averaging just slightly more than 6 percent over the last tow years – yet state government spending during the first half of the Rendell administration grew at the alarming rate of 12.1 percent?"

"Or could it be because 'unvouchered expenses' have become synonymous with 'middle of the night pay increase'?"

Whatever the reason, the taxpayers are taking a stand. They are asking for a repeal of the pay raise, which is only a symptom of a much larger problem of a tax-and-spend legislature. PACFG is asking the people to go one step further and ask the General Assembly to stop spending their hard-earned money and pass Senator Brightbill's "Taxpayer Fairness Act," introduced in the spring, which would have held the spending increase to 0.29 percent. "With co-sponsorship by 28 of Pennsylvania's 50 senators, this legislation should be law," English said.

The Pennsylvania Club for Growth is a group of citizens dedicated to expanding the prosperity of working families through the Reagan Doctrine of lower taxes, smaller government and strong free enterprise. As the Pennsylvania chapter for a rapidly growing national organization, they are committed to seeing that Pennsylvanians regain their voice in Pennsylvania politics. The Pennsylvania Club for Growth is steadfast to supporting and electing men and women who are advocates of the Reagan Doctrine.

HARRISBURG – On July 7, 2005, the members of the Pennsylvania General Assembly passed generous pay increases for themselves, as well as for judges and top executive branch officials. Legislators' base pay rose anywhere from 16-34 percent, depending on seniority. Since the pay increase, several legislators have publicly defended their vote by mentioning "how hard they work."

State Rep. Bob Allen (R-125), for instance, is quoted in the Pottsville Republican & Herald as saying, "This is a seven-day-a-week job, and I have to be on call seven days a week. Whether going to regular meetings Monday through Friday or special events on the weekend." As a committee chairman, Allen's pay soared to $89,155, up from $69,647. The annual median household income in his county is a paltry $34,718.

It must be noted that legislators are scheduled to be in Harrisburg only 73 days in 2005, scantly more than two months out of the year. And they receive an extra $129 stipend for meals and lodging for each of those days they show up, which is awarded in addition to their base salary. And, whatever portion of their workday stipend they don't report for use on meals and lodging, they get to put directly in their pocket as extra income. Let it also be considered that many big states such as Texas and Illinois have legislators that receive significantly lower salaries than what members of the PA General Assembly earn. These legislators from other states are able to meet the demands of their job in significantly less time while collecting much less pay, accordingly.

The real questions, then, become: what have our legislators done to merit a sharp bump in pay? What have they accomplished for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania? What does the Commonwealth have to show for those "24/7" jobs? Is our economy that much stronger than those of states with part-time legislators who earn part-time pay?

According to the Pacific Research Institute, PA is ranked 45 of the 50 states in the 2004 Economic Freedom Index. "Being the fifth worst state in the nation in economic freedom, a position we have held for six years running, is simply unacceptable," stated Kathryn English, executive director of the Pennsylvania Club for Growth.

In 2003, 5.7 percent of the civilian labor force in PA was unemployed, which is significantly higher than the national average. Pennsylvania also has the 19th highest unemployment rate in America. As of March 2001, there were 540,725 full-time government-employed workers in Pennsylvania. That year, Pennsylvania public employees earned approximately $1.79 billion in salaries and wages. There is approximately one public employee for every 23 Pennsylvania residents.

In a 2004 study completed by the CATO institute, Pennsylvania's primary business tax rates, the Corporate Net Income Tax and the Capital Stock and Franchise Tax, remain 3rd and 2nd highest in the nation, respectively. Pennsylvania's real per-capita government spending was 5th highest in the nation from 1991-2002. The study also showed Pennsylvania as one of the "worst" states in controlling spending and Pennsylvania received an "F" grade for controlling spending.

So it is not a surprise that at the same time the lawmakers voted themselves a raise, they voted for a fiscal year 2005-06 state budget of $24.27 billion, representing a 6.1 percent increase in spending over the previous state budget of $22.87 billion. Since Gov. Rendell took office in 2003, despite a legislature controlled by the party of limited government, low taxes, and fiscal responsibility, spending has increased 18 percent.

English said, "The taxpayers of the Commonwealth should be outraged by this increase in spending. What happened to House Bill 1663, sponsored by House Appropriations Committee Chairman Brett Feese and co-sponsored by 81 of his colleagues, which would constitutionally limit annual increases in spending to the annual increase in the Consumer Price Index?" English also questions why 49 representatives, more than half of the co- sponsors of HB 1663, voted yes to the 6.1 percent increase in spending, and 60 Representatives, including Feese, voted in support of the pay raise. "They talked the talk, but when it came time to walk the walk, they folded," she added.

The House is not the only problem. Senate Majority Leader David "Chip" Brightbill of Lebanon County sponsored the Taxpayer Fairness Act, introduced this spring with the co-sponsorship of 28 of his colleagues. Yet the 6.1 percent spending increase passed with an overwhelming majority in the Senate. English added, "If 28 of the 50 Senators sponsored legislation that would have limited spending to only a 0.29 percent increase, why did this Senate, including Brightbill, pass a 6.1 percent bigger budget? It's like endorsing healthy eating habits while gorging yourself with chocolate éclairs."

But, to be fair, Pennsylvania is #1 in one category. The Pennsylvania Economy League tallied the number of Pennsylvania legislators along with their salaries, health care benefits, per diems, pensions, and staff to find Pennsylvania ahead of not only Texas and Illinois, but above all 50 states in size and cost.

The Pennsylvania Club for Growth asks not only Rep. Allen, but all members of the Pennsylvania General Assembly who voted for the pay raise, the budget, or both, why do studies show Pennsylvania to be near the bottom of the pile economically, with a failing grade in controlling spending, and yet legislation was passed increasing legislators' income from 16-34 percent, and increasing spending by 6.1 percent?

The Pennsylvania Club for Growth urges the voters of Pennsylvania to hold legislators accountable for voting to increase their own pay while taking more money from the people who really needed a bigger paycheck—the taxpayers—by voting for a 6.1 percent increase in spending.

The Honorable Pat Toomey, President and CEO of the Club for Growth, America's preeminent free-market political advocacy group, spoke to a group of sixty Pennsylvania Club for Growth donors, Monday June 27, 2005 at The Duquesne Club in Pittsburgh.

With a room full of conservative activists Toomey said, "It is up to us to support and elect the right legislators, those who will oppose tax hikes and spending increases, it is not enough to just have a Republican controlled legislature."

Toomey also stated that the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania would benefit from a similar plan Colorado follows, limiting spending of all government entities with taxing authority to the prior year's budget plus the rate of inflation and the rate of growth in population or new development. "Unfortunately there is very little talk in the legislature about this plan" said Toomey.

Toomey then went on talk about the importance of organizations like Pennsylvania Club for Growth who support candidates truly committed to pro-growth policies such low-taxes and limited government.

The fundraiser was co-hosted by Glen Meakem, Ron Muhlenkamp and John Pierce.

The Pennsylvania Club for Growth is a group of citizens dedicated to expanding the prosperity of working families through the Reagan Doctrine of lower taxes, smaller government and strong free enterprise.

As the Pennsylvania chapter for a rapidly growing national organization, we are committed to seeing that Pennsylvanians regain their voice in Pennsylvania politics. For far too long, elected officials who claim to be fiscal conservatives have cast aside their beliefs to partake in a bloated government that insists on taking more and more from families trying to achieve the American Dream. To that end, the Pennsylvania Club for Growth is committed to supporting and electing men and women who are advocates of the Reagan Doctrine. For more information, log on to www.paclubforgrowth.com.

Press Release (Word) - 2005-06-29

Pat Toomey, 43, is President and CEO of the Club for Growth, America's preeminent free-market political advocacy group.

Before joining the Club for Growth, Mr. Toomey served as a member of the United States House of Representatives from Pennsylvania's 15th district for three terms, from January 1999 through January 2005. He served on the Budget Committee, the Financial Services Committee, and the Small Business Committee.

Prior to his service in Congress, Mr. Toomey co-founded, owned and operated four very successful original-concept restaurants in Allentown and Lancaster, Pennsylvania.

His first career was in investment banking from 1984 through 1991. He developed and managed a $21 billion derivatives trading operation for Morgan Grenfell Finance, Inc. in New York, supervising sales and trading operations in New York, London, and Tokyo.

Mr. Toomey attended LaSalle Academy in Providence, RI and graduated from Harvard University, cum laude, with a degree in government.

To register for the June 27th fundraiser click here - 2005-06-06