To Address Corruption, Pennsylvania Must Change Laws That Enable It

for BigTrial.net

When most Americans think of corruption, images of the Daley machine in Chicago, Tammany Hall in New York and New Orleans’ timeline from Huey Long to Ray Nagin come to mind. Pennsylvania, however – more specifically Philadelphia, are topping national statistics on corruption. 

In looking at the last decade alone, the City of Brotherly Love has seen both its congressman marred in ethics scandals, one imprisoned and the other “retired” following the revelation of a scandal in where his rival (a Judge) was bribed to bow out of the race against him. 

Currently, two sitting City Council members are still collecting taxpayer salaries while under federal indictment. The former District Attorney is in prison and new scandals arise each week surrounding his radically-progressive successor, Larry Krasner.

Krasner has reportedly hired credentialed unit chiefs and supervisors at the city’s top law enforcement agency who had recent criminal histories, appointed one of his personal debtors and fired a myriad of seasoned professionals to appoint prosecutors with no experience who failed the bar exam. 

One such questionable appointee of DA Larry Krasner was Movita Johnson-Harrell. She defrauded her charity to donate to the Krasner campaign, securing her job there, then, she took more of that money to run for the State Representative seat in West Philly. 

Her conviction and subsequent removal from that seat was embarrassingly the third elected representative in a row that had been removed from that seat due to a criminal conviction. 

Add these recent scandals to the famed “sting case” in where former PA Attorney General Kathleen Kane tried to shut down a corruption case that caught four Philadelphia-area State Representatives and two Judges accepting bribes. 

All the defendants caught on tape are now convicted. Also convicted and imprisoned was Kane, for leaking grand jury information about the former head of the Philadelphia NAACP.

So why the rampant waste, fraud and abuse that impacts the lives of Philadelphians each day so accepted? Look no further than the city’s political infrastructure, and the laws on the books; some of which were enacted in the city’s home rule charter under the guise of “reform."

You see, unlike many American states, Pennsylvania lacks a hierarchy in where state officials can step in and remove locally elected or appointed leaders for gross mismanagement, incompetence or worse – an allegation of corruption short of an actual conviction.

For the many who were left scratching their heads when Allentown Mayor Ed Pawlowski and Congressman Chaka Fattah were allowed to stay in office for upwards of two years while under federal indictment for their respective public corruption and pay-to-play politics cases, it’s because Pennsylvania’s laws come up short when it comes to a state, county or city’s ability to oust elected officials from office.

Even worse, Philadelphia’s home rule charter, which was written in 1952 in a reform measure against the then-Republican machine that ran the city; makes it the only “City of the First Class” in Pennsylvania.

The home rule charter codified less state oversight for the Commonwealth’s largest city, which is why there’s laws against election-day security, elected constables and enforced performance for elected leaders. Furthermore, the charter enacted the city’s campaign finance laws. 

While these laws are great in theory, in Philadelphia they guarantee that candidates outside the political machine here will never have the resources to buy expensive media or get out the vote campaigns; unless they have an angel donor willing to fund their campaign to the tune of $1.45M dollars, like George Soros.

As a former member and student of the Association of Inspectors General, I can attest to the fact that nothing breeds corruption worse than “machine” and “identity” politics. This means that politicians get elected because they are placed on the ballot and/or pushed to voters by a connected group of stakeholders that have run their political party for generations (the machine). Or worse, politicians run and win based on their “identity”, which places characteristics like race, gender, religion or political platform over the candidate’s actual ability to do the job they’re running for. 

If you don’t believe me, consider these questions:

1. If you personally needed a lawyer, doctor or accountant – would you hire the most learned, studious scholar in the field with a track record in that role, or someone you identified with because of their race, gender, religion or political affiliation?

2. Would you select that professional to possibly save your life, freedom and/or finances because they traded favors with your union, clergy or political party?

3. In Philadelphia, do we elect the most educated, experienced and qualified people to lead our city?

Of course we don’t.…and this is how corruption breeds so rampantly.

First, let’s consider the machine. Currently, both John Dougherty, the business manager of Electrician’s Local 98 which is quite possibly the city’s largest political patron, and Bobby Henon, the former political director of Local 98 and a current Philadelphia city councilman. Both Dougherty and Henon are under federal indictment for egregious examples of corruption, which included acts like extorting the Children’s Hospital. 

Despite being under an indictment that literally brings hours of wiretap recordings to the table, Henon was reelected to his Council seat. He joins fellow-federal defendant Kenyatta Johnson, who was also elected to his council seat despite his indictment and record of anti-Semitic behavior. 

While union participation in the political process is in no way, tantamount to corrupt behavior, it is important to understand that almost every incumbent politician reelected in Philadelphia was aided in money, manpower, and endorsement by local 98, of whom former Congressman and City Democratic Chairman Bob Brady is a member. This is despite the fact that Brady has been employed in politics, not electrical work since the 1980s, and despite the heavy cloud of corruption looking over it.

Examining identity politics, consider the current wave of “woke” politicians coming into local elected office as a backlash to the aforementioned machine that has run the city since the 1950s. The most glaring examples are the recent elections of Sheriff Rochelle Bilal and District Attorney Larry Krasner.

Starting with the Sheriff, it should be noted that the office has been scandal ridden since the administration of now-imprisoned Sheriff John Green, who was elected in 1987. That tradition continued on to Bilal’s predecessor, Jewell Williams, who spent a short time as a Temple University police officer before becoming a State Representative for the 197th District from 2001-2012. 

This is the same district that’s had three elected predecessors since have all resigned amid corruption scandals and/or felony convictions. Williams himself ran for reelection in a recent primary against Bilal, despite a slew of sexual harassment and race discrimination lawsuits and lost. That was largely because Bilal won the support of both the #MeToo movement and Black Lives Matter, a group not normally sought after in an election to a law enforcement office.

In examining the issue at hand, look at the Sheriff’s official bio – which in the first paragraph highlights Bilal as “the first elected African American woman sheriff, in the 181-year history of the Philadelphia Sheriff’s Office. In fact, Sheriff Bilal is the department’s first-ever elected woman.”

Her bio also highlights the fact that she served on the Philadelphia Police Department for 27 years as well as being the public safety director for Colwyn Boro, but it doesn’t highlight her absence of graduate education or command experience. 

While this may sound like I’m picking on the sheriff, it should be stated that the Philadelphia sheriff does less than its counterparts in the three bigger and three smaller cities in population. In a city with one of the lowest delinquent tax collection rates; and highest poverty rate of any large city in America, one would think we would elect a sheriff with management acumen, who is a proven policy innovator who can reform the highest elected civil law enforcement agency in the city.

More important than ever, the city needs a sheriff proven to reform the office from generations of corruption. And that's a difficult task for Bilal, who left her positions in both Colwyn and Philadelphia under a cloud of disciplinary scandal. Then, her first acts as the elected sheriff is to host a fundraiser for Sheriff Green upon his departure for federal prison and to fire the official charged with financial accountability there. 

Then there’s the election of DA Larry Krasner, who was elected not on racial, sexual or religious identity - but because of his progressive political agenda. While Krasner was an attorney for 30 years, he had spent his whole career in defense, and had never worked as a prosecutor. 

Upon his election to the District Attorney’s office, he himself characterized himself as a “Public Defender with Power." His election has led to a myriad of declined and/or downgraded prosecutions, so much so that his office has blocked legally-filed public records requests as to the reasons so many cases were declined. 

While crime continues to surge despite the COVID-19 outbreak, Krasner’s own tweets haven’t condemned the criminals who prey on society amid a public health crisis. Instead, he has called for the release of prisoners in a manner that can only be described as “tone deaf” to the law abiding taxpayers who pay his salary.

Just because Krasner was elected on a wave of progressive identity politics that differs from the Philadelphia Democratic Machine, doesn’t mean he's immune to his share of corruption scandals. He immediately fired 31 seasoned prosecutors in his first week, later replacing them with progressive high-minded college graduates who couldn’t pass the bar exam. 

Kranser was being sued over his termination of Victim’s Services Chief Tami Levin to make room for the hiring of campaign donor and now-incarcerated politician Movita Johnson-Harrel. There's also the scandal of his $160K-a-year appointment of a former creditor that he owed money to.

More corruption problems: a lawsuit for the D.A.’s harassment & civil rights violation of veteran Police Detective Derrick "Jake" Jacobs, and Krasner's senior staff appointment of a disbarred lawyer. 

In even more chilling revelations, the Krasner DA’s Office has a record of plea bargaining or even dismissing violent crime charges in politically contentious cases without consulting witnesses, for crimes ranging from domestic assault to homicide. 

The question presented in both the elections of Bilal and Krasner is, do elected offices filled by candidates backed by machine or identity politics breed corruption? In looking at national case studies like Buddy Cianci in Providence, Kwame Kilpatrick in Detroit or even the myriad of cases here in Philadelphia – the answer is an unequivocal YES.

So how are other states curbing their corruption while Pennsylvania’s continues to grow?

States and cities have tackled their corruption problems head on in two ways, by instituting independent inspector general’s offices with law enforcement powers and though robust state oversight of not only state agencies, but the local jurisdictions that benefit from state funding.

Former Mayor John Street, in an effort to appear more transparent following his reelection amid the discovery of an FBI corruption investigation into his administration, created the Philadelphia Office of the Inspector General. Street subsequently appointed future D.A. and federal inmate Seth Williams as his Inspector General. 

The agency has limited authority, only has the power to investigate executive-branch agencies, and has to send criminal referrals to the District Attorney’s Office. This is in sharp contrast to its counterparts in former corruption-havens like New York, New Orleans or Florida, where inspectors general can investigate any agency or contractors receiving public funds as well as having the authority to arrest and charge corrupt officials when probable cause exists to do so.

This means that the Philadelphia OIG can write reports pointing out the serious management issues at the Department of Human Services, work with other law enforcement agencies on cases targeting city employees or go after the likes of corrupt L&I inspectors and streets workers. But the Philly OIG has little to no authority to address any corruption in elected offices like City Council, the Sheriff’s Office, Registrar of Wills, Commissioner’s Office, Parking Authority or School District. 

Was this merely an oversight in design? No. Nutter-appointed Inspector General Amy Kurland regularly asked Council (which included now-Mayor Jim Kenney) to amend the home rule charter to give the office the permanence, authority and independence it needs – and has been turned down every time. 

In looking at recent history, such an entrenched unethical culture is reformed when change is forced upon the city from outside its tainted electorate. In New Orleans, known for its culture of corruption, Hurricane Katrina brought millions in federal aid dollars into locally managed agencies, forcing oversight from numerous federal inspectors general and watchdog agencies. This served to highlight a case in where former Mayor Ray Nagin was federally convicted of corruption, but forced the powerful political machine there to accept the oversight of an independent Inspector General.

In looking at state oversight, consider the fact that Pennsylvania law has no mechanism for the removal of a public official for alleged misconduct or pure mismanagement, which enables people like Fattah, Henon, Johnson or Pawlowski to stay in office for years while their offices remained marred under a cloud of corruption.

In contrast, the Florida Governor upon a vote from the state house can remove a locally elected official for mismanagement of misconduct. Such as:

-- suspending Broward County Elections Supervisor Brenda Snipes, who was in office during two of the nation’s most prominent election scandals;

-- removing Broward Sheriff Scott Israel after his mismanagement of the Fort Lauderdale Airport and Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shootings;

-- the removal of Mayors in Hallandale Beach and Port Richey upon their criminal indictments, instead of leaving them in potentially dangerous positions of power pending convictions. 

To get control over the culture of corruption in its state, the Pennsylvania State House must employ these real legislative reforms.

Despite Philadelphia’s mayorally-appointed “ethics czar”, an Ethics Board, Office of the Inspector General, and City Controller; the silos set up in the Home Rule Charter and lack of state oversight make fighting political corruption a feckless enterprise here. 

For example, the Ethics Board routinely cites campaign finance and conflict of interest violations, but their fines are normally negligible with no criminal referrals. So the elected officials who violate them time and again simply pay fines and get re-elected. Likewise, the City Controller has conducted numerous audits exposing waste, fraud and abuse in city government; but with no personal accountability levied to affect change and create a deterrent against misusing public funds.

In order for meaningful local reform to occur, Pennsylvania should follow national best practices and pass a bill that enables the state house to remove elected state and local officials for egregious acts of mismanagement, or worse, criminal charges. 

In addition, state legislation should give state and municipal inspectors general independent authority and the budget and staff it needs to create an omnipresence and limit the opportunity for corruption. Pennsylvanians from throughout the Commonwealth should be calling on their representatives to start cracking down on the corruption that has given the Keystone State and the birthplace of America a black eye.

A. Benjamin Mannes, MA, CPP, CESP, is a Subject Matter Expert in Security & Criminal Justice Reform based on his own experiences on both sides the criminal justice system. He has served as the former Director, Office of Investigations, for North America’s largest medical board and previously as both a federal and municipal law enforcement officer.