Political activist Gene Stilp lost his legal attempt to force the state Auditor General to conduct audits of the General Assembly’s financial affairs. The Supreme Court’s decision that Mr. Stilp “lacked standing” ended another effort to achieve full and fair disclosure of the financial affairs of the peoples’ elected representatives. Legislators also maintain that the constitutional principle of “separation of powers” precludes the Auditor General from conducting audits of the General Assembly’s financial affairs.
Voters should know that annual “audits” of the General Assembly’s financial affairs are conducted by independent auditors under the direction and for the benefit of what is called The Legislative Audit Advisory Commission (the “Commission”), a body consisting of legislators and others appointed by the leadership of the House and Senate. A recent editorial in a reputable newspaper states that legislative leaders believe audits directed by the Commission satisfy the constitution’s auditing requirement.
To date, these audit reports have been confusing at best and misleading at worst. For all practical purposes, the audits are worthless from the standpoint of safeguarding the taxpayers’ money, or informing anyone as to the nature and purpose of amounts expended. As a former Certified Public Accountant, I am surprised that any reputable CPA firm would let their name be associated with such a confusing and misleading audit report.
Voters should know that the independent accountants’ report states in part that the “Report is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than the Audit Advisory Commission.” This means that the leadership of the General Assembly does not want anyone else to see the report.
Also, it is my understanding that many, if not most, legislators were either not aware of or have not seen these reports. Unfortunately, it is equally clear that most legislators were not aware of the nature and amount of expenditures made by the Senate and House leadership.
A review of the audit report issued for the year ended June 30, 2006,
indicates that during that fiscal year, tens of millions of dollars were
reported as “disbursed” under the responsibility, direction or control of
various Senate and House leaders and the Chief Clerks of the respective
legislative bodies and/or their employees, agents and committees. The report
provides no description whatsoever of the nature, purpose or appropriateness of
most of these expenditures.
In light of numerous unresolved questions in connection with the
–
·
Attorney
General’s “Bonusgate” investigation,
·
indictment of Senator Fumo for numerous counts, including personal
use of taxpayers’
monies,
·
indictment of former Representative LaGrotta for payment to relatives for work
alleged not to have been performed,
·
widely-publicized leadership spending for what many believe is campaign-related
polling,
·
widely-publicized extravagant spending for meals and entertainment by various
leaders, especially Senator Mellow,
·
question
of whether taxpayers’ monies were used for the Las Vegas, Super Bowl, or other
travel expenses of Speaker Emeritus Perzel and his staff in addition to the
reported use of campaign funds (a questionable use which should also be
investigated) for these junkets,
·
whether
or not taxpayers’ monies were used for extensive domestic and foreign travel
over the years reported for House Majority Leader DeWeese,
and
·
other
possible incidences of misuse and possibly illegal uses of taxpayers’ monies,
The press and many reform-minded organizations have been recommending
that all responsible leaders authorize forensic audits of all General Assembly
leadership accounts for the period January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2007.
To date, these recommendations, made both privately and by public
testimony before ”The Speaker’s Legislative Reform Commission”, have been
ignored. So long as leaders of the General Assembly continue to ignore the
public’s right to know about these matters, we can only wonder what they are
hiding.
Expanding on the aforementioned recent editorial, The General Assembly
has a fiduciary obligation to clean house by providing its members, the press
and the public with the results of the recommended forensic audits and, on an
on-going basis, providing meaningful independent audits of the financial affairs
of the General Assembly. Such audit reports should be presented in an easily
understandable format, with sufficient descriptions to enable all concerned to
fully understand the nature and purpose of all spending and to have reasonable
assurances that such spending served legitimate public purposes.
Ken Schaefer
Chairman
Vote For Integrity
January 10, 2008