RSS FEEDSRecent Research
January 11, 2012 | Commentary by MATTHEW BROUILLETTE
A Decade Left Behind
My first career started a few decades ago in the classroom as a high school history teacher. While much has changed since then – including the use of technology and smaller class sizes – the one constant is the need for "reform" to improve our education system.
December 5, 2011 | Commentary by MATTHEW BROUILLETTE
What Will You See in 17 Minutes?
Seventeen minutes is a small sliver of time for most people. In those few moments, most people could take a shower, prepare a meal, or watch half a sitcom. But for 82,000 kids in Pennsylvania, 17 minutes is no ordinary or laughing matter, it is pain that can last a lifetime.
November 7, 2011 | Commentary by MATTHEW BROUILLETTE
WIFM: What's In It for Me?
"What's in it for me?" Legislators will ask that question from time to time when they don't see the direct political benefit in voting for something controversial. Recently, as Gov. Corbett and the General Assembly consider a package of education reform bills, legislators - particularly those in suburban and rural districts - are asking "What's in it for me?" more often.
Recent Blog Posts
DECEMBER 20, 2011
Union Party vs. Taxpayer Party: PA's Political Paradigm
If you don't receive our Weekly Update every Monday via email, here's what you missed yesterday. If you want to get these updates directly, sign up here.
Dear CF Friend,
I imagine you feel disappointed right now, as I do. A year ago, we had high hopes that by now we would have staved off a tax hike, cut the size of state government, put its spending online, greatly expanded school choice, removed government from the booze business, and protected the Marcellus Shale "golden goose."
To their credit, Gov. Corbett and the General Assembly delivered on the first three items on that list back in June. That was a dramatic shift in the Harrisburg paradigm, and the kind of success we still haven't seen down in D.C. But since then, our legislators seem to have spent most of their time crafting state legislative and federal congressional districts that protect incumbents – failing to pass a comprehensive education reform package, to privatize the state stores, or to resolve a Marcellus Shale bill. And with historic Republican majorities in both houses and the most conservative governor in modern Pennsylvania history, it is more than reasonable to expect better.
Many people are rightly asking me why more hasn't been accomplished. Here's why: The reality is that on virtually every issue, the majority party isn't the Democrats or the Republicans. The more accurate division in the legislature is the Union Party versus the Taxpayer Party. And today it is the former that is dictating to the latter. Just look at the political giving of the PSEA, SEIU, AFSCME, AFL-CIO and the many other labor unions who gave over $23 million in the 2010 election cycle to both Democrats and Republicans and you'll understand why reforming public schools and improving our tax and business climate is so difficult.
The next question you might rightly be asking is: Should we give up, with odds these long and opponents this powerful? Again, I both understand and share your disappointment. But my answer is one word: NO!
Despite hundreds of millions of dollars in compulsory union dues, fees and political action money, we have been able to take on – and beat – the Union Party on some very big issues (like raising your taxes). Do we need to beat them again? Sure. And I'm convinced we can – that we will ultimately win the war for our future and our children's future. I've been in this fight for 15 years, and I've never seen the unholy alliance of union-sympathizing Republicans and Democrats as exposed, and the Taxpayer Party as awakened to the threat from within, as I see today. There are more of us (taxpayers) than there are of them (tax eaters), and we are waking up.
Indeed, when the history of our time is eventually written, I believe waking up the Taxpayer Party will prove to be President Obama's main achievement. You know the old saw about boiling a frog: If you throw him into a pot of boiling water, he'll jump out. But if you heat it slowly, eventually you'll cook him. Before President Obama came along, the Union Party – Democrats and Republicans – was boiling us slowly. He turned the heat up too high, and we jumped out. We're still a little disoriented, and he and his allies are still in the policy "kitchen" – including right here in Harrisburg. But we're finally awake, and we will not rest until we've done what's right for our kids and their kids – that is, until we ensure they get to live in an America that is still the greatest nation on the face of the earth.
It's easy to forget, but that's ultimately what our day-to-day battles here in your State Capitol are all about. And that's why I – and the awesome team you've given me here at CF – will never, ever give up...
Fighting for Your Freedom,
Matthew J. Brouillette
President & CEO
posted by MATTHEW BROUILLETTE | 06:39 AM | 3 comments
NOVEMBER 29, 2011
Owned or Rented by the PSEA?
A prominent politician (someone you'd recognize if I named him) reminded me yesterday that the primary obstacle in letting parents choose the safest and best school for their children is that too many Republicans are "rented" by the school labor unions for their purposes and most Democrats are simply "owned" by the special interest group. Hence the difficulty in even getting a modest expansion of school choice through a Republican-dominated legislature.
Some House Republicans continue to think the PSEA and PFT labor unions will be their friends if they stand with them in preventing children from escaping violent and failing public schools. Well, as one senator recently wrote back to me after thanking him for his vote to expand school choice, the unions demand nothing short of complete allegiance to their agenda. He wrote:
Matt,
Thanks for the letter in regards to my continuing support of SB1.
Since I'm getting beat up back in my District pretty harshly, my only regret is that we "watered down" the Bill to only the worst performing [schools].
Was hoping for a statewide implementation to give the PSEA really something to complain about.
Still - Thanks for the kind words.
[Signed]
Is your Representatve owned or rented by the PSEA? Ask them here, and then see how they vote.
posted by MATTHEW BROUILLETTE | 08:11 AM | 0 comment
NOVEMBER 17, 2011
House to Vote Marcellus Impact Fee
The Pennsylvania House of Representatives is expected to vote on HB 1950 today, which would enact an impact fee on "nonconventional gas wells," largely aimed at Marcellus Shale gas drilling.
The impact fee language in HB 1950 closely follows the Governor's proposal. You can read our assessment of that here.
Under the bill, counties decide whether to impose a fee or not, and how much the fee should be, up to a set maximum. This allows counties to determine if local governments are bearing costs not being paid for with current taxes and fees, and to set the rate accordingly. It also ensures competition between local governments, discourages excessive fee rates, and reduces the threat of cross-subsidization and redistribution of fee revenues to unrelated purposes, and is in keeping with our principles that should guide an impact fee discussion.
This represents a less onerous fee than that imposed under the Senate plan, which passed this week. That bill cannot become law in its current form, as revenue bills must originate in the House under the state constitution. But the Senate bill imposes a set fee statewide, would increase the "fee" with gas prices, and would first distribute $13 million to state projects and then keep almost half the remaining revenue at the state level. In other words, it is a tax.
HB 1950 needs to be improved to be a true fee, and not be a tax by another name. The "impacts" the bill ties to a fee are currently too broad, and include things that are not direct costs of drilling or should be funded through general taxes and fees, as they are "impacts" not of gas drilling only, but of trucking or population growth. And given the amount of money the industry is already putting towards infrastructure, there should also be a credit for companies that are already paying for those impacts. Otherwise, the fee could encourage companies to stop voluntarily rebuilding roads, a concern raised by many local residents and officials.
HB 1950 will not likely be the final version of what reaches the Governor's desk, but it moves the discussion forward to allow Governor Corbett to keep his promise to voters not to raise taxes, and work toward a final piece of legislation that embraces the principles we laid out when this debate began.
posted by NATHAN BENEFIELD, MATTHEW BROUILLETTE | 02:13 PM | 0 comment
