Variations on this theme are repeated throughout Pennsylvania on a daily basis. State representatives and state senators giving checks to little league teams for uniforms, to civic groups for parades, to senior citizen centers for televisions and so on. All these checks are compliments of the legislative initiative program - WAMs (walking around money) for short.
And what could possibly be wrong with these "warm and fuzzy" pictures of legislators helping children, senior citizens and even volunteer firemen?
Pennsylvanians should realize that the real beneficiaries of WAMSs are the legislators who use them as a tool to get re-elected year after year and the legislative leaders in Harrisburg who dispense WAMs as a tool to wield power. Pennsylvanians are the losers not only because the WAM program wastes our tax dollars but more importantly because the WAM program breeds mediocrity in the General Assembly.
WAMs are hidden in Pennsylvania's budget each year in the course of budget negotiations. A deal is struck between the Governor's Offce and the leaders of the 4 caucuses of Pennsylvania's General Assembly (House Democrats and Republicans and Senate Democrats and Republicans). Monies are secretly inserted in unrelated line items of the budget for WAMs. Each of the 4 caucus leaders has a share of these monies at his disposal to give to rank-and-file legislators as he sees fit.
The WAM program has been in existence since the early 1980's although until recently it has operated in secrecy. Over 8,000 WAM grants totalling over $90 million dollars were processed in the 2 year period ending in June of 1992 according to information released by the Governor's Office. WAMs were again hidden in the 1993 budget but the amount has not been revealed. It has been estimated to be between $40-70 million dollars.
Typically legislators give WAMs to high profile community groups with sizable memberships such as sports teams and volunteer fire companies. Checks are frequently presented so as to maximize publicity for the legislator (enlarged check, presentation ceremony, photo-op for the local press, etc.)
Legislators know that WAM grants translate into votes,on election day from both the grateful membership of the recipient group and the community at large who see that their legislator is "bringing home the bacon". That's why legislators love them.
Although WAMs create the impression of an effective legislator, the reality may be different. The legislator who has carefully "seeded" his district with WAM grants may actually be contributing nothing to the legislative process. Unfortunately this false impression of effectiveness makes it very difficult for a challenger with new ideas to defeat this legislator and make a contribution. The result is stagnancy in the General Assembly.
The General Assembly has the responsibility for crafting a $15 billion dollar budget and passing laws which govern our lives. The price Pennsylvanians pay for a mediocre legislature is incalculably high.
The WAM program does not put our limited tax dollars to their best use. WAMs are awarded not based on the needs of a district, but on the political needs of the legislator. A legislator from a wealthy district with a "tough " election coming up can expect more in WAMs than a legislator from a poorer district with a "safe seat".
The power to decide who gets WAMs gives the 4 caucus leaders a powerful control tool over rank-and-file legislators. WAMs have been used in the past to coerce legislators into voting for tax hikes and pay increases. The fear loss loss of WAMs serves as a deterrent to reform minded legislators. The control afforded by WAMs also gives party leadership the opportunity to consolidate their own political power base by allowing them to give more WAMs to loyalists. This can be done in relative secrecy as only leadership knows how much in WAMs each legislator is getting. The opportunity also exists for an unscrupulous legislator to sponsor grants to an organization whose hidden purpose is to assist in his re-election.
The WAM program is simply not needed. Communities managed before WAMs and they will manage if WAMs are eliminated. In the areas where WAMs are most commonly used (such as fire safety, recreation and assistance to local government), there are already state programs in place. The Fire Safety Loan Program, the Local Government Capitol Project Loan Fund, The Recreation
Improvement and Rehabilitation Act Program, the Library Grant Program, the State Planning Assistance Grant Program are just a few. These programs are currently underfunded. Their funding should be increased with the money saved by eliminating WAMs.
The WAM program has corrupted the integrity of the state legislature and wasted our limited tax dollars. Unfortunately it is a program which many legislators will continue to support unless their constituents voice their opposition. Urge your state representative and state senator to support legislation reforming or eliminating WAMs.