Editorials from around Pennsylvania

Editorials from around Pennsylvania

___

LESSON IN PAST PSU PRIORITIES, March 16

Had two former Penn State University officials done the right thing, some children might have been spared the ongoing pain of having been sexually abused.

Apparently, the university’s football program was more important to the two.

Former Penn State Vice President Gary Schultz, 67, and former Athletic Director Tim Curley, 62, pleaded guilty to misdemeanor child endangerment in court.

Each faces as much as five years in prison or, depending what a judge decides, they could get as little as probation.

Their cases are linked to that of former football coaching staff member Jerry Sandusky, who is serving a long prison term for molesting 10 boys. The full list of his victims is much longer.

Curley and Schultz’s cases are being resolved more than five years after the Sandusky scandal broke. One wonders why it took Pennsylvania authorities so long to resolve the matter.

While in their Penn State positions, the two men were among those who in 2001 received a complaint by a university graduate assistant. He said he witnessed Sandusky molesting a boy in a shower used by the team.

But the two - and, allegedly, former Penn State President Graham Spanier - swept the complaint under the carpet. That allowed Sandusky to spend the next 10 years victimizing more children.

The legendary Joe Paterno, Penn State’s football coach for many years, lost his job over the scandal. He died a few months after Sandusky was arrested.

Curley and Schultz failed to protect children under the requirements of the law, and that is why they face prison terms.

Educators work under similar mandates regarding abuse or neglect of children that comes to their attention. Frequently, predators who go to prison in our states have educators who blew the whistle on them to thank.

It is a matter of priorities, we suppose. Either the welfare of children is your top priority - or it isn’t.

Those who think something else is more important belong behind bars.

- Altoona Mirror

___

FIGHTING POVERTY WITH EDUCATION, March 21

Kids don’t choose to be poor. They’re born poor, which too often becomes a life sentence.

Helping kids climb out of poverty is a responsibility we all share, because we all reap the economic and social benefits. In short, less poverty means spending less on social services for the poor, not to mention the cost crime imposes on taxpayers.

But spending less at the back end means spending more at the front end - on schools heavily populated with children from low-income families. And by spending more, we mean spending education money more equitably.

As we reported in our story, “Haves & have nots,” Pennsylvania has the widest funding gap between wealthy and poor school districts in the country. That’s because school districts in this state rely on local property taxes to a greater degree than any other state, thanks largely to the state’s stingy 30 percent contribution to education.

Here’s a dramatic example: Bristol Borough is among the poorest school districts in Bucks County, with the average resident earning about $22,000 per year. As a result, nearly 67 percent of Bristol students come from families living below the federal poverty level, and some 40 percent of them test below the state’s proficiency standards.

By comparison, only 8 percent of students in the New Hope-Solebury School District come from poor families, and fewer than 20 percent score below standards. Average annual income for a resident in Solebury is about $66,000.

Yet Bristol, with a high percentage of students lacking resources at home, spends nearly $10,000 less per student annually than New Hope-Solebury: $16,666 versus $26,275. That’s not the school board’s fault. It taxes residents at a higher percentage than NH-S. It’s just that low property values produce less revenue than high property values, even if property owners in Bristol pay a higher percentage of income to fund their schools, which they do: 7 percent compared with New Hope-Solebury’s 4 percent.

The additional revenue in wealthy districts pays for greater opportunities for students: better materials and resources, more advanced classes, an array of extracurricular activities. This enables more students to obtain college acceptance and, ultimately, a rewarding career. No poverty for them.

State lawmakers addressed this disparity by agreeing to a new funding formula that takes into consideration student population and poverty level. But they blunted the impact of their good work by leaving the state’s so-called “hold harmless” clause on the books. The clause was a political agreement that bought support for funding reform by guaranteeing that a district cannot receive less funding from one year to the next. Only funds above that baseline are subject to the new formula, which means it could take decades for the formula to bring about equity.

Clearly, the clause should be repealed. And legislation to eliminate property taxes in exchange for higher state income and sales taxes could be a significant equalizer. It also would help if poorer districts merged with their more well-off neighbors, a transition requiring some state incentives. All three issues demand lawmakers’ attention.

- (Levittown) Bucks County Courier Times

___

CONGRESS MUST MOVE PRUDENTLY ON BUDGET, March 19

The implications of the most recent transfer of presidential power have been even more murky than usual. Candidate Donald Trump made a lot of sweeping promises, many of them vague and some of them contradictory.

On March 16, Americans got a closer look at President Trump’s priorities for spending and budget cutting. There’s quite a bit in that picture that’s worrisome for Erie and the region.

In its broadest outlines, Trump’s proposal would sharply increase spending on the military, homeland security and veterans by making major cuts to most other areas of discretionary spending. Among the biggest losers would be programs for the poor, cities and the environment.

As Erie Times-News reporter Madeleine O’Neill detailed, for example, Trump proposes eliminating the Community Development Block Grants that the city of Erie and other municipalities have relied on for decades to supplement strained local budgets. His budget would also kill the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, which among other things pays for water quality testing at Presque Isle State Park.

The city of Erie is receiving $2.8 million in CDBG funding this year. Trump’s proposal would eliminate that funding completely, and likely with it youth programs, housing rehabilitation, street paving and various other uses the city puts it to. The effects would be felt proportionately in other municipalities in the region.

It should come as no surprise to anyone who’s been paying attention that the new president would seek to upend the status quo in Washington. His vow to do just that resonated with a lot of voters.

But it’s becoming clear that Trump’s vision for a leaner federal government targets spending and programs many of those same voters rely on. That will complicate the political dynamic for the president, and give pause to members of Congress who must stand for re-election in the 2018 mid-terms.

Congress holds the power of the purse, and even Republicans are saying the final budget will likely look a lot different than what Trump proposes. Some of what his plan targets will find defenders on both sides of the aisle.

But the GOP majorities in Congress can be expected to seek to downsize the federal bureaucracy and devolve power to the states. It’s what many of them believe in and ran on.

But it matters greatly how they go about it and what their priorities are. Simply pulling the financial rug out from under Erie and other struggling cities, for instance, would be foolish and damaging.

If the balance of power among Washington, the states and local communities is to fundamentally change, it should be done methodically to give states and communities the time and latitude to adapt. That requires Congress to act as a check on some of the president’s impulses.

- Erie Times-News

___

FIGHT GERRYMANDERING IN COURT IF NECESSARY, March 19

Are Pennsylvania voters starting to wake up?

Carol Kuniholm thinks so - and we hope she’s right.

The chairwoman of Fair Districts PA said she has been “stunned” by the turnout at meetings she has organized across Pennsylvania during the past few months.

The gatherings are intended to educate people about gerrymandering - when the party in power redraws legislative maps to ensure victory in a disproportionate number of districts - and enlist their help in changing the system.

In a nutshell, gerrymandering lets majority party leaders put a foot on the scale - drawing maps around friendly voters and corralling opposition voters into fewer, nonthreatening districts.

It leads to noncompetitive districts, where elections are decided in primaries and where voters’ choices are limited to varying extremes of one particular political philosophy. Representatives are less beholden to their constituents in these safe districts than to their party leaders.

Redistricting is done every 10 years, based on the results of the latest U.S. Census.

The state constitution says each legislative district “shall be composed of compact and contiguous territory as nearly equal in population as practicable. … Unless absolutely necessary no county, city, incorporated town, borough, township or ward shall be divided in forming either a senatorial or representative district.”

After the 2010 Census, Pennsylvania’s redistricting process took two years and was marked by blatant gerrymandering. For the first time in 40 years, the state Supreme Court struck down a proposed legislative map, saying it was “contrary to law.”

Since then, The York Dispatch has been calling for an independent redistricting commission that would remove politics from the process and return power to the people.

We think that’s even more important after the November election.

“The narrative of ’The elections are rigged’ made people say, ’Are they rigged?’’’Kuniholm said. “In the middle of that narrative, (Fair Districts PA said) ’They are rigged, but not in the way you think.’”

Pennsylvanians can reclaim their power by supporting a bill, introduced in the Senate at the end of February, to establish an independent redistricting commission.

To transfer redistricting authority to a new citizens’ commission, state lawmakers must pass an identical bill in two consecutive legislative sessions - 2017-18 and 2018-19. The potential amendment must then pass in a public referendum in 2020 to take effect in time for the next district redraw.

In other words, that process has to start now if citizens are to have a greater say in the redistricting after the next Census.

Unfortunately - but not surprisingly - there doesn’t seem to be any sense of urgency among local lawmakers to change the status quo. That would mean our representatives might have to vote against their own interests for the good of our democracy.

Pennsylvania residents do have another option.

A panel of federal judges ruled 2-1 in favor of a constitutional challenge to Wisconsin’s district maps. The challenge was based on a new mathematical standard to measure the extent of gerrymandering, dubbed the “efficiency gap model.”

It’s a model proponents say could be used to fight unfair redistricting in Pennsylvania.

We suggest our readers contact their representatives and urge them to support an independent redistricting commission - and be ready to go to court if legislators ignore them.

-The York Dispatch

___

PENNSYLVANIA UNIVERSAL INTERNET LAW NEEDS UPDATE, March 16

It’s hard to imagine anyone lacking access to broadband internet service nowadays.

The internet, for good or ill, has become a nearly essential utility, touching just about every aspect of our lives, from communications to commerce.

And education.

The web hasn’t really changed how teachers approach their jobs, but it has changed some of the means they use to instruct students, replacing backboards with Chromebooks and tablets with, well, tablets.

Yet in some areas of York County - and Pennsylvania, and the country, for that matter - access to broadband service is lacking. Now, that may seem like a first-world problem, and to some extent it is, but for many parents and students, it can stifle their educations, making, at the very least, keeping up with their classmates inconvenient.

The vast majority of York County has access to broadband services, whether it’s DSL or cable or satellite, but some of York County’s more rural areas are shut out, forcing parents and students to take sometimes extreme measures to get connected.

That’s despite a 2004 state mandate for telecommunications companies to ensure that broadband service is universally available. Obviously, it isn’t. And since 2004, the notion of what constitutes high-speed internet has changed. The law should be updated, something that state Rep. Kristen Phillips Hill, R-York Township, has taken up.

According to the state Department of Economic and Community Development, pockets of rural southern York County are shut out when it comes to high-speed internet access. U.S. Census data from 2015 shows that 4 percent of the county’s population has access to broadband only through phones or a mobile hot spot. That’s better than the national average of 6 percent, but it is still significant.

This affects a variety of aspects of rural life, from farmers being unable to quickly access current market information or to shop around for the best prices on equipment or commodities, to students being unable to do their homework at home. It’s about much more than being able to watch a viral video of a cat playing the piano.

In parts of southern York County, parents only have access to high-speed internet service through their smart phones, the most expensive access to the web. Once they burn through their monthly data allowance, the fees add up quickly. Other parents have taken to driving to the school after hours and sitting in the parking lot while their children access the school’s Wi-Fi network. Others have taken to having their kids do their homework at businesses or restaurants that offer Wi-Fi service. (Delta Pizza is among them, and owner Sal Ferranti deserves credit for being more than accommodating, allowing kids to do homework at his restaurant without having to make a purchase.)

But speaking broadly, this situation is unacceptable.

Access to broadband internet service is quickly becoming essential, covering so many aspects of our daily existence, from work, to leisure, to commerce and to education.

The state Legislature knew that in 2004, when it passed Act 183, which set a deadline for the state’s telecommunications companies to provide universal access to high-speed internet service. Apparently, in some parts of the state, that deadline has passed and some still remain without access to the service.

For students at rural districts to be on a level playing field with their classmates, and students from suburban or urban districts, access to broadband is vital.

As Rona Kauffman, superintendent of the South Eastern School District, said, “It’s an issue of equity.”

- York Daily Record

___