Philadelphia Bulletin

August 27, 2010

Despite what feminists might argue, real men don’t wear skinny jeans. Real men also don’t wear V-neck tees, or accessorized scarves, and they avoid purple and pink like the plague. The mere idea of a pedicure or waxing makes a real man nauseous. If a woman hangs out with this kind of girly-man routinely, it’s only because she wants to share his wardrobe and his non-fat caramel macchiato. A woman can’t imagine a man reloading his double barrel shotgun or chopping wood when he’s donned in Donna Karan and drinking an Appletini. Men were meant to wear rugged Wranglers, leather jackets and boots, like they belong in a James Dean movie and not an episode of “Will & Grace.”

When did men in America go from being masculine steak-eating, plaid shirt wearing, Old Spice smelling, cigar smoking cowboys who like football, hunting, and Clint Eastwood movies to skinny jean wearing, satchel carrying, pierced ear metrosexuals who like chick flicks, “The View,” and Bath & Bodyworks? The American man is an endangered species due in large part to the over-feminization of society.

Not surprisingly, the arrow of blame points towards the feminists who have transformed our schools into gender neutral zones of indoctrination. Early on, boys’ innate masculinity is suppressed by banning competitive, rough games like dodge ball and tag on the playground, having co-ed teams, not keeping score in soccer games, and rewarding passive, demure behavior.

Boys learn to subdue their more spirited, intrepid behavior in elementary and middle school, their male instincts of competition and individualism quashed in the interest of what’s best for girls as they walk like lemmings over the edge of the radical feminist cliff by the time they reach high school. Because of the feminist movement, boys aren’t allowed to be boys – society has fenced them in, corralled their adventurous enthusiasm in the name of sexual equality. The end product is pantywaist pushovers who will cry during “Steel Magnolias” and urinate sitting down. This is bad news for America, who will eventually have to reap what the feminists have sown, which will be a paucity of male leaders, entrepreneurs, scientists and heroes.

Phyllis Schlafly, President of Eagle Forum, reports in “Where Are the Men?” that the ratio of males to females on college campuses has swung from 60-40 to 40-60, with 58 percent of women earning degrees from four-year colleges. In the coming years, this will severely impact the American family who have traditionally relied upon the father as the primary breadwinner.

It is simply foolish to think that America can prosper without men, but New York Times columnist and radical feminist Maureen Dowd suggests the opposite. Mr. Dowd is the author of Are Men Necessary? When Sexes Collide in which she opines and whines about the current state of feminism and questions the value of a woman pursuing a male mate.

Hollywood is also doing its part to marginalize and diminish the role of men in this society. In the Academy Award-winning movie “Juno,” a teenage girl is faced with an unplanned pregnancy after a night of casual, meaningless sex with her friend Paulie. Juno not only ignores Paulie after they have sex but overtly excludes him from any decisions about whether or not to choose abortion over life. To the viewer, Paulie is a non-factor, a by-stander incapable of taking charge, unable to rescue Juno and stand firm in his fatherhood, albeit unplanned. Feminists just love a movie that glamourizes teenage pregnancy and deprecates the male role in conception.

In Jennifer Aniston’s new movie “The Switch,” she plays an unmarried 40 year old who decides that she doesn’t need a man to have a baby, and, instead, turns to artificial insemination of a donor’s sperm – even throwing a “Getting Pregnant” party to celebrate with her friends. The male roles in the movie are those of sperm donors, with Aniston’s character firm in her belief that a woman doesn’t need a man to conceive and rear a child. The implicit message of this movie is that men are not important in the raising and nurturing of children. Their biological contribution to conception is where their role begins and ends.

Unfortunately, this kind of thinking has become the norm rather than the exception in American culture. Feminists’ dogged efforts to have society view men and women as being the same instead of different but equal have paid off. The rotten fruits of their endeavors are manifest in statistics recently released by The Heritage Foundation which reports that, in 2008, a record 40 percent of babies born in the U.S. were born to unwed mothers compared to about 3 percent in 1929.

American men aren’t men anymore because feminists have equated maleness with everything that’s repugnant and have molded men to be more like women. Feminists have slayed the real man by suppressing his desires for adventure, beauty, and competition, his yearning for greatness and excitement. John Wayne once said, “I’m the stuff men are made of.” America needs more John Waynes.

Daily Local News

August 27,2010

Why is anyone a Democrat or Republican these days? Between the partisan atmosphere and seemingly nothing getting done these days in the world of politics, why does anyone consider themselves Democrats or Republicans? Honestly, most of the country agrees that neither party is helping anyone but themselves. Both parties are just as responsible for the economic mess we are in. Neither party is proposing good ways of getting out of it either, so if both parties are causing the trouble and can’t fix it, then why do we keep giving them power? As an Independent with no party affiliation, I see bad in both parties and hardly any good. I want this country to start moving in a positive direction just like everyone else and I see these two parties as the obstacle in the way of moving us in that path. All they do is bicker at one another, call each other names, and run hate-filled campaigns against each other. Neither party truly listens to the people they represent and simply vote by party lines. With all the anger at the way politics is right now, why don’t we aim it at both parties simultaneously? All I hear is the left bashing the right, then the right bashing the left. The way politics is in Washington, Harrisburg, and everywhere else in this country is just horrific. Nobody can get anything accomplished unless they add a few million dollars for their private helicopters, planes, and money for researching the mating of pigs. Apparently, nothing gets done without these money-wasting pet projects that all of them do. So, what can we do with all of the anger we have with the state of politics? We have to actually stop complaining and do something about it. We have to form groups in our communities, then reach out to other communities. We need to all work together, regardless of political views, religious views, race, ethnicity, or anything else. If the people actually become informed, group together, and then go out and vote, I guarantee that things will start to change. The political elites and the people in power want us to remain fragmented so they stay in power, but if we unite and put aside all of our differences, then we can start to change the entire structure of power in this country. 

Scott is a student at West Chester University

Daily Local News

August 27, 2010

Karen Porter writes that the Iraq War is over and somehow she does not feel elated. Well let me offer a possible explanation … we won the war, it was a victory for America and a victory for the Iraqi people. A victory for the women who now have opportunities they have never had …. a victory especially for the young women who were the playthings of Saddam Hussein’s maniac sons.

The far left may not feel elated with victory because they all said victory in Iraq was all but impossible. Harry Reid said the war was lost. Vice President Biden said on “Hardball” that no one seriously believes that Sunni, Shia and Kurds would sit down at a table together … Biden wanted to divide the country into three parts. But George Bush showed the resolve and the courage to support the troops and bring this war to a victorious end … proving all the Democrat naysayers and the elite media types wrong. A fact which prompted Biden to claim that a Democratic Iraq may very well be the most significant accomplishment of the Obama administration … an unbelievable comment from the king of unbelievable comments.

And Ms. Porter keeps throwing out the “lie” thing as if it were true … there were no lies. We all know that every intelligence agency in the world was saying that Iraq had WMDs. It’s not a lie when you act on bad intelligence … Bush lied to no one and John Kerry and Hillary Clinton all supported giving Bush the authority to go to war … they too made statements about the threat posed by Iraq’s WMDs, WMDs if you remember were used on their own people.

And for Bush to have ignored the intelligence reports from around the globe in a post-9/11 world would have been a gross dereliction of duty.

So yes, I understand why Ms. Porter and her group may not feel elated at the victory in Iraq … they were all wrong, and it’s hard to feel elated when you have been proven wrong.

But you have to look no further than the other side of the corner in West Chester every Saturday to see a group of patriots who supported the troops every inch of the way. Those proud Americans are elated with the victory in Iraq, both for America, for our brave troops and for our new Democratic allies in the Mideast … compliments of a steadfast commander in chief who never gave up.

Daily Local News

8/16/10

We have just witnessed the beginning of the end for Obamacare. Living up to its nickname, the “Rocket Docket,” the U.S. District Court in Virginia recently gave the attorney general a green light to launch a constitutional attack upon the health care law. That lawsuit has now cleared the tower and has begun its inevitable journey to the U.S. Supreme Court. Judge Henry Hudson rejected the federal government’s attempt to shoot down the challenge before it took flight, noting that “no specifically articulated constitutional authority exists to mandate the purchase of health insurance or the assessment of a penalty for failing to do so.”

The constitutionally offensive part of the statute is found in the “Minimum Essential Coverage Provision,” which Judge Hudson states “literally forges new ground and extends the Commerce Clause [i.e. federal power] beyond its current high water mark.” Reading between the lines, this means that no previous administration or Congress has ever made such a bold attempt to consolidate absolute regulatory power over commerce.

With the denial of the government’s motion to dismiss Virginia’s lawsuit, Americans may finally get a glimpse behind the government’s curtain and see, for the first time, its alleged justification for such a power grab.

Arguing that a citizen’s decision not to purchase health insurance equals “economic activity” that may be regulated by Congress, the government claims “without full market participation, the financial foundation supporting the health care system will fail, in effect causing the health care regime to ‘implode.’”

The government further contends that, without a “minimum coverage type provision … the market will be driven into extinction.”

My fellow Americans, we need to drive this law into extinction … or our rights and liberty will implode!

This debate should not focus on politics or whether the law is well-intentioned. As Virginia’s attorney general argued before the court, “even if a congressional enactment is noble and legitimate, the means adapted to enforce it … must be within the letter and spirit of the Constitution.” While the law’s intended effect of providing health care to everyone is laudable, the Court notes that it “cannot be employed as a vehicle to enforce an unconstitutional exercise of Commerce Clause power, no matter how well-intentioned.” Finally, we have heard from a learned jurist on the issue, not just political pundits who may be easily dismissed by supporters of the law.

A legal revolution is under way. Under the leadership of our attorney general, Tom Corbett, the voices of Pennsylvanians will be heard in the District Court of Florida, where 20 states attorneys general have joined together in a similar challenge. Moreover, 70 percent of people who voted in a recent referendum in Missouri registered opposition to the health care law, by passing Proposition C, which denies the government the authority to penalize citizens for refusing to buy private health insurance.

I can envision President Obama in the Oval Office when Judge Hudson’s opinion was issued: pacing nervously amongst his advisers, quoting Shakespeare’s Henry VI: “The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.” Well, Mr. Obama, you should recall that lawyers drafted the Constitution in the first place and made certain that the federal government may not exercise power that was never given by the People.

We should be thankful that the founders had the foresight to create checks and balances — for it is quite clear that this Congress and Executive Branch are out of balance. The rule of law and free enterprise form the foundation of our greatness. Hopefully, our judiciary will reaffirm these most sacred American principles.

Daily Local News

July 20, 2010

In response to Gordon Bennett’s letter to the editor where he writes about a sign he recently noticed being held by someone in a group of (in his words) “pro-war demonstrators” that reads, “Our Soldiers are Heroes,” I take exception to his opinion expressed in his letter. Quoting Mr. Bennett further, he states “I assume the sign holder believes that all our soldiers are heroes and I think that’s patently untrue.” Mr. Bennett, in my opinion, misses the whole point, and does so deliberately.

It’s obvious just who the aforementioned “group” is that Mr. Bennett is referencing in his letter, a group he characterizes as “pro-war.” I could be wrong, but I’m fairly certain that he is referring to the members of the Chester County Victory Movement (CCVM) who rally every Saturday morning in West Chester at the corners of High and Market streets. His characterization of this group as “pro-war” is totally wrong and is a self-serving expression on his part. The “pro-war” moniker is just an old 1960s tactic that Mr. Bennett and his ilk think still holds water. I don’t think so.

Regarding Mr. Bennett taking exception to the aforementioned sign, maybe if he inquired as to just who may have been holding that sign … “Our Soldiers are Heroes” … he would find that it may be what we call a “Military Mom” or “Military Dad,” a parent of a son or daughter currently serving in the military in harm’s way in Iraq or Afghanistan. Tell that parent that their son or daughter is not a hero in his or her eyes and in their hearts.

Or maybe the sign holder is a respectful veteran of one of the nation’s past conflicts who served heroically while in harm’s way. Or, then again, maybe the sign holder is just a grateful citizen who appreciates the sacrifice of our troops and wishes to do their part to pay them a tribute by referring to them as heroes.

Those that I describe above are basically what constitutes the Chester County Victory Movement, that is, patriotic citizens who would hope that wars would never have to be waged, but realize that defending our freedoms is paramount; citizens who honor our troops who voluntarily join the military, not knowing where their enlistments may take them, but who heroically accept the chance and challenge in service to their country. And some troops will, quite sadly, pay the ultimate sacrifice in defense of our freedoms and on behalf of all of us that they leave behind to serve, heroically.

Yes, our troops are heroes, even if some don’t choose to accept that particular word in describing our troops. They’re free to do so, thanks to our troops, past and present. Our true American heroes are not athletes making millions playing sport games; or Hollywood “stars” with talent to “play act.” Our troops are not playing, but are serving all of us away from home, many encountering intolerable conditions, even putting their life on the line for us, motivated by the desire to do their part in defense of the greatest nation in the world.

Our Troops! Our Heroes! God bless them all!

Philadelphia Bulletin

June 29, 2010

One of my favorite authors and personalities of the 19th century, Mark Twain, was once quoted as saying “To a man with a hammer, everything looks like a nail.” As this relates to President Obama, one might paraphrase here by saying “To a man with a far left ideology, every problem looks like an opportunity to advance the liberal agenda.” Thus, while many have been frustrated in looking long and hard for the promised transparency of the Obama administration, from the non-existent C-Span broadcasts of the hearings on healthcare legislation to the obfuscatory language that emanates from the mouth of Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, the truth is the transparency has been there all along. Especially with regard to some recent national issues, the motivation behind his responses has actually been very transparent.

Is there a more clear example than the ongoing Gulf oil spill? As an equity analyst covering the energy sector for twenty-five years, I believe I can at least speak with some knowledge to this situation. The first thing that becomes readily apparent is the President’s attempt to exploit the disaster to try to resurrect an unpopular Cap & Trade bill, the words of which have been reshuffled and given the different moniker of Kerry-Lieberman. The disastrous impact such legislation would have on the economy of our country has been well documented. Furthermore, as many in Europe will attest, the carbon trading scheme in that area of the world has been an utter failure with vast opportunities for fraud. And should the EPA attempt its end run to regulate carbon emissions through the Supreme Court’s endangerment finding, the impact would likely be even more damaging to the economy. Finally, as I have written in the past on the charade that is the IPCC’s and the climate change alarmists’ baseless view supporting man-made global warming, the foundation for pushing the anti-carbon agenda is grounded in a bastardized and agenda-driven science.

The second troubling aspect of the President’s handling of the oil spill has to do with his arbitrary and capricious declaration of a six-month moratorium for ongoing and future deep water Gulf of Mexico drilling (that by the way was falsely reported by the administration to have been recommended by a panel of engineers). For starters, the President has sadly exposed his lack of understanding of the oil industry through some of his remarks in the wake of the accident. Compounding matters in the Gulf, with the number of energy industry-related jobs here totaling 170,000, the second-order effects of the moratorium could be devastating. The tragedy in the Gulf is having a pernicious effect on the environment, but the president should not exacerbate the hardship for the people of the region by adding to its unemployment rolls. Third, the deepwater region in the Gulf of Mexico is the home of 50% of the country’s remaining oil reserves and represents a vast opportunity for addressing the future energy needs of our country.

The answer to addressing the spill first lies in a thorough but timely investigation, not by a group of academics and environmentalists as it now appears, but by a group of accredited professionals, at least some of which should have an understanding of the issues of energy security and petroleum engineering. Greater safety standards for deepwater wells and better plans for accident remediation on the part of the federal government and the industry are also needed. But the industry must move forward. The President’s pontificating irrationally about the need to develop alternative energy resources that represent only 2% of the world’s energy needs is nothing but fodder to appease the left. The president should stop playing politics with a situation that warrants a pragmatic, realistic and expeditious solution.

Other examples of this agenda-driven policy transparency include the president’s goals for comprehensive immigration reform (his code words for blanket amnesty, which now appears to be a quid pro quo for securing our nations borders), demonization of the health insurance and financial services industries to place them under greater government control and the exploitation of a weak U.S. economy to justify a tax and spend fiscal policy.

Ah yes, transparency. Now I get it.

Daily Local News

July 2 , 2010

With Independence Day quickly approaching it seemed appropriate to remind liberty-loving Americans of the sentiments expressed by John Adams when the Continental Congress voted to sever relations with Great Britain.

In a letter to Abigail Adams dated July 3, 1776, he said: “The second day of July 1776, will be the most memorable epoch, in the history of America. I am apt to believe that it will be celebrated, by succeeding generations, as the great anniversary festival. It ought to be commemorated as the Day of Deliverance by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires and Illuminations from one end of this continent to the other from this time forward forever more. You will think me transported with enthusiasm but I am not. I am well aware of the toil and blood and treasure that it will cost us to maintain this Declaration, and support and defend these States. Yet through all the gloom I can see the rays of ravishing light and glory. I can see that the end is more than worth all the means. And that posterity with triumph in that day’s transaction, even although we should rue it, which I trust in God we shall not.”

How often have contemporary Americans forgotten to celebrate Independence Day with both the joyful enthusiasm and sober mediation advocated by John Adams? Picnics, beer and barbecues… though they have a place in the celebration… should not overshadow some of the more reflective aspects of the Fourth of July.

Adams included “solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty” in the celebration process, but how often have we stopped to reflect on the gift of our God-given liberties? Adams thought independence should be celebrated with boisterous expressions of patriotism including “pomp and parade,” but how often have some us shied away from such actions for fear of offending someone who might look with disdain on our pride in America?

This Fourth of July, would it not be a good idea to revive some of those means of celebration suggested by one of America’s greatest Founding Fathers? Would not a public reading of the Declaration of Independence be in order so that children can be taught what some of those ideals were that drove 13 colonies to turn their back on the Old World and begin building a new one? Would not a time of prayer, a time of reflection be in order so that we will remember that it is from God, and not government, that our fundamental rights emanate from? And would it not be good to celebrate Independence Day with the same enthusiasm that it was embraced by Adams and Washington and Franklin more than 230 years ago?

May we all have a joyous Fourth of July, and may God save these United States.

Daily Local News

July 1, 2010

Saturday June 26 was blazing hot in West Chester. A small reminder of what our troops in Afghanistan endure constantly – for the troops even more so with their 80 pound load of equipment, body armor, and weapons strapped to their backs everyday.

 For the past several years, every Saturday at noon, a group of American patriots comprised of veterans – WWII to current, ordinary citizens, and family members of military, stand as ONE, at the Historic West Chester Courthouse, in tribute to all of our military brothers and sisters – The American Sheep Dogs.

 This Saturday there was an especially heroic display of extraordinary patriotism and camaraderie, in that there were five different motorcycle organizations, comprising about 250 motorcycles joining together as ONE to salute, support, and applaud our military and their families. Additionally, trailing the bevy of motorcycles riding in formation, was a parade of vintage and custom cars led by a commemorative fire engine, flying a blue star flag – which represents all of the mother’s whom have sons or daughters currently serving in the U.S. Military throughout the world. A reception was held at the Knights of Columbus on Gay Street.

 The point of this note is that without our military troops, past and present, America would not continue to be the finest free republic in the world. When trouble calls, our military members, from the lowest rank to the highest, spring into harms way to offer protection, helping hands, medical, and material supplies to the oppressed and overwhelmed citizens of the world. Our military does not discriminate between our own or others around the globe. Our unified goal is “liberty and freedom for all”.

 We should all stop every day to give thanks to those whom are sacrificing their lives everyday (and those whom have made the ultimate sacrifice) to keep our nation the grandest, least oppressive, and most opportunistic nation in the world.

 The Philadelphia Bulletin

Friday, June 18, 2010

Radio and TV talk show host Glenn Beck correctly contends that “Progressivism is the cancer in America and it is eating our Constitution, and it was designed to eat the Constitution, to progress past the Constitution.” This progressivism of which Mr. Beck speaks is alive and well at Wilder Publications, where they recently published the U.S. Constitution with a disclaimer that reads: “This book is a product of its time and does not reflect the same values as it would if it were written today. Parents might wish to discuss with their children how views on race, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, and interpersonal relationships have changed since this book was written before allowing them to read this classic work.”

Apparently some truths are not so self-evident to the folks at Wilder Publications. Who puts a warning label on the supreme law of the land, our founding document, the bedrock upon which our republic stands? Warning labels are reserved for objectionable or questionable content, like pornographic song lyrics, adult themed TV shows, or the Communist Manifesto, but not the Constitution. Who would imagine the day when someone would put a warning label on a document crafted expressly to protect the freedoms endowed us by our Creator?

What’s objectionable about our Constitution as it pertains to race, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, or interpersonal relationships anyway? Someone at Wilder Publications must have been drunk on the progressive Kool-Aid, ripped this outrageous disclaimer label from a copy of Saul Alinsky’s Rules For Radicals and smacked it on the Constitution.

The U.S. Constitution is our country’s single greatest inheritance, our governmental infrastructure, purchased for us with the blood, sweat, and tears of our forebears who understood its infinite worth to future generations of Americans—we the people. As such, it is necessary for good citizens to defend the law of our land when it is oppugned by liberal revisionist historians such as Wilder Publications.

President Lincoln cautioned Americans about just this sort of sinister incursion by advising, “Don’t interfere with anything in the Constitution. That must be maintained, for it is the only safeguard of our liberties.” Prefacing our most cherished document with an unwarranted admonition certainly constitutes interfering with its purpose for America; such a disclaimer only serves to confuse and befuddle a generation of Americans which has carelessly discarded ideas like limited government, individual liberty, and traditional values for the “living” Constitution that is subject to societal trends and moral recidivism.

Lincoln further urged Americans “to overthrow men who pervert the Constitution,” likely referring to organizations like Wilder Publications who indeed distorted and misrepresented our Constitution by attaching such a ridiculous disclaimer to it.

And what’s this business about the Constitution being a “classic work?” Hemingway’s The Old Man and the Sea is a classic work, but the Constitution is the most significant achievement of our American political heritage. It’s not a work of literature, but the brass tacks of our political system. It is freedom’s bulwark, individual liberty’s guardian, hardly needing a warning label.

“The Constitution of the United States was made not merely for the generation that then existed, but for posterity- unlimited, undefined, endless, perpetual posterity” asserts the highly esteemed American Statesman Henry Clay who, in a Senate committee chaired by John F. Kennedy, was named one of the five greatest Senators in U.S. history. Surely statesman like Clay never considered the Constitution a “classic work” as if it were penned as a piece of American fiction subject to broad interpretation. But that’s what the obtuse publishers at Wilder Publications would have readers believe when they attach such a stipulation to what the Founders wrote; such an action is a rhetorical backdoor to subversion and deception.

The caveat to readers who purchase Wilder’s version of the Constitution suggests, however subtly, that perhaps more liberal views on “race, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, and interpersonal relationships” ought to somehow usurp more traditional views on such issues. When, in fact, the Founders’ intent was to ensure that the Constitution protect people’s individual freedoms, especially on those issues. Constitutional attorney Noel Francisco explained to FoxNews.com that “[b]y putting on the warning , you’re making controversial something that’s not controversial: our Constitution, our Declaration of Independence.” George Washington firmly declared, “The Constitution is the guide which I never will abandon.” I’m sure he’d never put a warning label on it either.

Daily Local News

June 14, 2010

It was satisfying to learn that the statewide grand jury assembled two years ago to investigate the Capitol corruption scandal known as Bonusgate had decided to issue a report on its findings. Contrary to reports, not everyone in the General Assembly has scoffed at or derided the recommendations. It was even more satisfying to learn that many of the grand jury’s recommendations for reforming the Legislature and curbing public corruption are already contained in bills I have introduced.

It is rare that a grand jury opts to issue a report, and even rarer that it would delve so deeply into the muck as to make sweeping recommendations for change. I can only surmise that the average taxpaying citizens who comprise that body where so appalled at what they learned about their State legislature and pervasive corruption that they were moved to initiate a desperate cry for change. It is apparent in the words of the grand jury, that the state legislature is” irretrievably broken” and in desperate need of systematic change. Its recommendations include reducing legislative salaries to force Pennsylvania into becoming a part-time legislature; cutting legislative staff; streamlining services; and limiting special accounts controlled by the House and Senate leaders.

My legislation includes those points and goes even further to eliminate discretionary grants known as WAMS, and move members of the Legislature to a defined contribution system to replace their defined benefit pension plan. In fact, last summer during the protracted state budget stalemate, I proposed forming a true citizens’ constitutional convention, which captured wide spread support among major reform organizations throughout the Commonwealth.

A constitutional convention would allow all of the issues raised by the grand jury to be addressed. The grand jury asserted that a constitutional convention would likely be necessary to achieve some of the reforms it was recommending as jurors expressed doubt the legislature was capable of reforming itself.

I am encouraged by the findings of the grand jury. While some recommendations are open to debate and discussion, I believe the grand jury has done a great service on behalf of Pennsylvanians. It is an independent body that has carefully studied the practices and procedures that enabled corruption to occur and take hold at the highest levels of previous House leadership. While many changes have been made by current House leaders, this report still serves as a major wake up call. I am calling on the leadership of the House and Senate to take these recommendations seriously and to act immediately to fix our broken system.