PA COURTS ARE ON TRIAL

          Of our three branches of government, the judiciary is considered the most refined, dignified and less controversial.  Not so in Pennsylvania. Our Commonwealth’s Supreme Court has garnered more unwanted headlines than the do nothing legislature and is keeping pace with our lame duck Governor.  On the local scene the Washington County Court System is receiving more ink and editorial attention than the Commissioners. This is not a good thing.

          The judiciary is designed to effectuate the rule of law for all citizens by remaining non political and running a low key operation in the background of government.  It is expected to be heard when opinions are issued or legal decisions made.  Members of the appellate and local courts are held to the highest of ethical and moral standards because they are elected to “judge” the rest of us.  Any appearance of impropriety makes it difficult for citizens to believe they are receiving equal justice under the law.

          The last year has been brutal to the reputation of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.  First, a Justice was criminally charged and convicted of violating the most basic of campaign practices by involving her staff in campaign activities.  Part of her sentence was a public apology to members of the court system, the wording of which has devolved into a comedy of errors.  Most recently, a second Justice was caught in an investigation of porn, distributed via email among high ranking state officials.  The Chief Justice called him a psychopath. He has resigned to preserve his sizeable pension.

          These stains on our highest court have resurrected the age old debate over whether appellate judges should be elected or appointed.  In the short run, the good news is that our new Governor has the ability to appoint two candidates to serve on the Supreme Court for the next year, prior to the November 2015 elections.  Presumably these two individuals will be vetted and recommended by the Pennsylvania Bar Association and be well qualified.  The bad news is that any scoundrel with a thick wallet or wealthy friends who want to buy a seat on the Supreme Court can run in November, an off year election in which the voting tally and public scrutiny will be miniscule.

          In Washington County the President Judge has also limped through a brutal year.  One would have predicted that matters would have improved in 2014 after the election of two new judges to bring the bench back to full strength.  Instead, she has become the subject of several inquiries and a whistle blower lawsuit.  The Supreme Court has taken the unusual step of removing her administrative responsibilities and bringing in a retired Allegheny County Judge to perform these duties.

          As a former court administrator, I have two observations about Judges and administration. First, they generally do not enjoy it.  Second, they often have the wrong temperament and training to be good at it.  The practice of law and judging cases does nothing to prepare an administrative judge for human resource matters, case management, computers and the like.  There is a tendency to either micro manages or to leave all the details to a court administrator, with little oversight until something goes wrong.

           By leaving each President Judge in our 67 counties to his or her own administrative devises, there is no uniformity across the Commonwealth. Worse, bad things can happen. Witness rouge judges in Luzerne County making millions on the backs of juvenile defendants in the “kids for cash” scandal.  Or the former President Judge in Allegheny County packing the court employment roster with her family and relatives.

          The present court of common pleas system in Pennsylvania is a great example of how not to manage an organization.  In most counties the President Judge is chosen based strictly on seniority regardless of credentials.  The exception is Allegheny and Philadelphia counties where all judges vote for the President Judge and the Supreme Court chooses administrative judges for each division of the court.  All county court administrators in Pennsylvania are state employees.  All other court staff continues to be county employees, although they are supervised by the President Judge and not the Commissioners.  Through each county’s salary board the commissioners have final say over new positions and raises.

          In Pennsylvania, child support collection and enforcement is already a state run operation with one computer system for case management and distribution of child support payments.  It would not be much of a stretch to make all court personnel state employees, reporting to the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts (AOPC).  President Judges could continue to give assignments and set schedules for the judges of each county.

          The Supreme Court has already ruled that the court system is the responsibility of the Commonwealth and not the Counties.  Once it sees fit to enforce its own edict, a unified court system, with non judicial court staff administered by the AOPC and not county judges, will prevail.  Judges will then be free to perform what they were elected to do, hear cases and render decisions.

FAILURE TO LEAD

          According to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll, two-thirds of Americans are worried about an Ebola epidemic in the United States, and more than 4 in 10 are “very” or “somewhat worried” that they or a close family member might catch the virus.    The media frenzy and conspiracy theories on the internet have run riot. Ebola is foreign and exotic and commands our full attention with isolation wards and full body suits.

          Senator Pat Roberts, in the fight of his life for reelection in Kansas, has latched onto this fear of Ebola to attack President Obama and bolster his campaign.  Part of his press release reads:

 “The President has failed to secure our borders, and he is now failing to lead during this crisis.  From the crisis in the Middle East with ISIS, to the standoff in Ukraine with Russia, and now to the spread of Ebola from West Africa to our own shores, this Administration has consistently been two steps behind and asleep at the wheel. We cannot afford the risk of President Obama’s inaction and failure to lead. American’s are frightened, and they deserve better.”

          It is the Senator’s reference to “failure to lead” that grabbed my attention. His party along with a coalition of conservatives and libertarians have filed suit against the President for taking action on a number of issues with which they do not agree.  The lawsuit involves a series of executive orders that Obama issued on climate change, immigration rules, the health-care law and raising the minimum wage for federal contractors.  He has also unilaterally filled important governmental positions that were left unaddressed by Congress for many months if not years.

          Republicans claim that these Presidential actions were power grabs that did not have the requisite backing from Congress.  Tea party members have actually called for impeaching the President for issuing the executive orders.  These are the very same republicans who control the 113th House of Representatives, a legislative body all but assured of being the least productive in recorded history in terms of passing legislation signed into law.

          So when is the President leading too much and when is he failing to lead?  Is it simply a matter of partisan politics or is there something more basic in our unique system of government?  Any student of constitutional history knows that while Alexander Hamilton sought a strong executive for the “protection of the community” and the “steady administration of laws”, James Madison sought a system of checks and balances that greatly limited the executive.  Madison won this debate and our constitutional republic is based on the limitation of authority and the division of power.

           Unfortunately, this division of power is not clearly defined or divided and often replicated among the three branches of government and among federal, state and local authorities.  The result is that any new crisis that has not been put to the test, like infectious disease, or is politically charged, like immigration or is constitutionally unclear, like the war powers, becomes muddled and messy until a consensus can be built.

          The President is neither a benevolent dictator nor a pawn of the Congress and Judiciary.  He is an executive constantly seeking a path to power through the maze that is our constitutional system.  This is why he can be criticized for acting and not acting in the same conversation.  When it comes to the exercise of power, the leader of the free world is anything but free.  When it comes to Ebola, my guess is that the country will learn a great deal from the present scare, similar to the consensus that was built after 9/11,  and be much better prepared in the future for “the big one”, most likely an influenza pandemic.

THE AMERICAN CAMPAIGN TRADITION

          We recently sponsored a gathering of neighbors, friends and family to meet our State Senate and House Representatives who are running for reelection in November.  Attendance was spare.  Not even the incentive of my Wife’s deep dish apple pie and other treats could induce prospective voters to break away from their regular routine, including the new prime time shows, the Pirates and Thursday Night football.  This was a shame, because by the end of the two hour session, those in attendance learned a great deal about the campaign, the issues facing Pennsylvania and what our representatives plan to accomplish if reelected.

          There was a time in America when state and local political campaigns were a major event and a welcome form of socialization.  After all, the only competition was the local houses of worship, the local taverns and the occasional town hall meeting.  In those days, political pamphlets, local speeches, rallies and small gatherings insured that voters got entertained, were heard by the candidates and were well informed before Election Day.  Compare this with today’s world, where we find it easier to complain about lack of results or the wrong result, rather than to become vested in the election process before the votes are tallied.

           I discovered several points from our experiment in sponsoring the candidates for reelection.  First, a newspaper account, sanitized stump speech, or political commercial will not reveal as much about a candidate as a one on one exchange on the issues.  Second, a discussion with a candidate makes it easier to separate the problem solvers from the pretenders.  Third, local candidates for State office want to meet with individual voters, listen to their issues and to have the opportunity to explain how they will govern. 

          Lastly, the candidates emphasize one point over all others: the importance of voting on November 4^th. Voter turn outs are ridiculously low in off year elections and the margin of victory often dangerously slim.  The cliché “every vote counts” could not be truer.

           Showing up at a campaign event to meet the candidates should be on your “to do” list. You will be participating in a grand American tradition and be well rewarded for making the effort.  Moreover, if your candidate does not win, or fails to follow his pronouncements, you will have earned the right to complain.

MY DISENCHANTMENT WITH FOOTBALL

I am losing interest in football.  This is more difficult for an aging boomer to admit than losing interest in sex.  After all, there are pharmaceuticals like Viagra or low T products available to address the latter problem and nothing for the former.  Maybe if I come out of the closet, other men will admit they prefer a good book to Sunday, Monday or Thursday night football.  Or that a walk in the park on a Saturday afternoon beats 12 hours of college games.  Or even that a concert at Heinz Hall on a Sunday afternoon is preferable to attending the Steeler game.

          I think my growing disenchantment with the game has many sources other than my age.  The recent firestorms over domestic violence, concussions and treating college players as chattel are a part of it.  On a more basic level, football has become more predictable if not outright boring to watch.  Teams use the same schemes, in the same situations, achieving the same results, with great regularity.  I could get my fill of the NFL for the week, watching the final quarter of scoring plays from all the 1 PM games on NFL Red Zone, from 3:30 to 4:15 PM each Sunday.  During this brief window, the action is fast, more unorthodox and actually exciting, as all the games come to a close.

          With the exception of the diehard football addict who will watch analysis of the sport all year round, I believe there are four factors that the football gods have encouraged to maintain interest in the game.  First, are the emotional rewards of supporting the home team.  Alcohol, social gatherings at home and at the stadium and hometown pride help drive this phenomenon.  Why else would communities spend billions of dollars to build football palaces that are used 10-12 times a year?  Why else would emotions run so high that the number of domestic violence cases in Allegheny County sky rocket after a Steeler loss?

          Second, for the millennial fans, who love games with their games, the fantasy football craze has added a new dimension much more intriguing than the office football pool.  Third, is the business of sports betting.  With the possible exception of bingo, no endeavor has ever been more embraced by the gambling crowd than football.

           Lastly, both college and professional football are able to display their product over ever increasing swaths of prime time commercial television.  Advertisers will pay top dollar for live football where consumers will actually watch the commercials rather than tape the game for viewing the next day.

          If it is not bad enough that football today is built on fan emotion, fantasy games, gambling and commercial television, there is still the dark under belly of the game that is difficult for me to ignore. Modern, big time football is dangerous to one’s health. It is not a career I would favor for my own child, or grandchildren.  It has become the province of the underprivileged athlete, seeking to claw his way out of poverty as a new age warrior, no matter what the cost.

           No one disputes that the nation’s top athletes are recruited by our largest institutions of higher learning to participate in a de facto NFL minor league.  Within this system players are exploited by their host university for financial gain under draconian NCAA rules for players.  The football coaches receive higher salaries than the university presidents. The players receive a de minimis education and are turned into gladiators for the NFL. 

          At the professional level, football demands that each player be physically and mentally stronger than his opponent, play through pain and injury and win at any cost, all within an ever changing set of rules the NFL happens to favor at the moment.  On the field, the mindset is violent and aggressive.  Off the field, young men with little social preparedness are expected to act with the decorum of English gentlemen at the nonstop public relations events sponsored by the league and in their private lives.  Talk about not bringing your work home with you.

           With advanced training techniques the players keep getting bigger, stronger and faster. As a result, career ending injuries are more common.  Some would argue that the players forced out of the game at an early age are the lucky ones.  Those who survive over the long run are crippled for life in their 40s and 50s.  Others lose mental capacity soon after retirement because of repeated concussions. 

          Unlike the Roman coliseum bosses, NFL owners pay the gladiators a portion of the gate and do not encourage their immediate demise.  In other respects, our need for controlled violence does not seem to have abated or changed all that much.  Our country will no doubt be more successful exporting professional football to the world than we were at exporting democratic values.

          I am not sure whether Cicero favored the spectacle of the Roman games to writing a good oratory or reading Plato and Aristotle.  I do know that the names of those gladiators have not survived the ages while the philosophy and writings of the ancients are as strong as ever.  There is so much to learn, so much to do and so little time.  In my life, football will occupy less of my schedule.

           Unless, that is, the Steelers make the playoffs, emotion overcomes reason, and all the negatives are forgotten.  Perhaps a winning team is the most potent medicine for reverse a waning interest in football.

ENTERTAINMENT TRUMPS GIVING

          Now that the calendar turns to September and the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge winds down, is it ok to ask, what was that all about?  Melting ice became more popular in old mop buckets than its usual function of chilling down a six pack.  Looking like a drowned rat on social media was a summer fashion statement.  The somewhat obscure disease, ALS, became as well known as Kate Perry’s newest song. Most unbelievably, a charity that took in 2.5 million in all of 2013, hit the jackpot with over a 100 million in August donations. 

          Some commentators believe the success of the challenge was due to the simplicity in the dunking and the empathy for the afflicted.  I believe it was due to fear and greed.  Like a good old fashion chain letter or Ponzi scheme, no politician, public figure or manager at the local Wal-Mart wanted to be caught saying no to a little ice water. Taking a dunk after being challenged might not help the cause but not taking one had nothing but downside written all over it. As an added bonus you got to challenge your impeccably dressed brother in law and watch him get wet.

          Better to make a contribution along with the dunking to show what a good sport you were.  Wet and generous. The risk analysis was always in favor of getting a little free publicity, even if it meant tracking down an old school chum or long lost cousin who actually had the disease.  This transformed the dunking event into a sort of reality show, with the one under the bucket as the star.

          What will be next for charitable organizations?  The public relations wheels must be churning to build on the ALS experience.  After all, the cancer, heart and diabetes fund raisers could hold some must see events that would make the ALS campaign appear minor league.  Can you imagine retired navy seals walking across Iraq to plant a U.S. flag, on a 24 hour news feed. That would get the dollars flowing in, like Jerry Lewis never could.  A final Led Zeppelin concert or Beatles reunion, with Lennon and Harrison’s sons playing with the old guys would open some wallets.

          Sometimes withholding entertainment is also a good bet.  For example, interrupting The Good Wife or Big Bang Theory with end stage lung cancer patients should meet pledge goals in minutes flat. The sure fire winner would be to buy up the rights to the Super Bowl half time show, which is now for sale, and make it into the largest pledge event in history.  What could be better than an audience of billions of intoxicated sports fans, watching a parade of wheel chairs and dying declarations, pledging the mortgage before the second half could start,.  Public Television, watch how the big boys do it.

          If charitable giving must be driven by entertainment, let’s do it right.  It cannot possibly be any worse than the endless stream of reality shows and we would not feel as guilty watching them and throwing in a buck or two.  Like it or not, giving for the sake of giving and even for the tax deduction are not enough.