Editorial Roundup: Pennsylvania
LNP/LancasterOnline. October 20, 2023.
Editorial: Gov. Shapiro’s handling of sexual harassment claim against senior aide is a disappointing misjudgment
We have been deeply dismayed by Gov. Shapiro’s handling of a sexual harassment claim against a senior aide.
As Angela Couloumbis of Spotlight PA reported, Shapiro’s office “quietly entered into a settlement agreement to resolve allegations of sexual harassment against one of his most trusted senior aides weeks before the staffer resigned. … The settlement contains a clause that bars both sides from discussing the allegations, according to two sources familiar with the agreement.”
When he was Pennsylvania’s attorney general, Shapiro rightly decried the “enforced silence and institutional cover-up” of the horrific child sexual abuse committed by Roman Catholic priests and others. And he drew national attention and praise for his persistence in holding the church hierarchy accountable for enabling and concealing the abuse.
But you can’t be a champion of survivors, while staying mum when someone in your own office has been accused of sexual harassment.
Shapiro has been uncharacteristically reticent regarding the allegation leveled against Vereb. This reticence is a misjudgment. As is the settlement agreement.
You can’t denounce the silencing of victims and then resort to a nondisclosure agreement when it’s politically convenient. Such agreements have been barred in states such as New Jersey for excellent reasons, among them that public money may be involved.
According to Spotlight PA, “Neither the governor’s office nor the accuser’s lawyer, Chuck Pascal, has confirmed or denied the existence of a settlement. The governor’s spokesperson, Manuel Bonder, reiterated that the administration takes harassment and discrimination allegations seriously, and has ‘robust procedures’ in place to promptly and thoroughly investigate them.”
So, it seems, the governor’s office is doing the least that’s expected of it in these circumstances. That’s not enough.
As Spotlight PA reported, “Republicans — led by state Senate President Pro Tempore Kim Ward of Westmoreland County, the first woman to hold that leadership role — have questioned the timing of Vereb’s resignation, noting that it occurred months after the woman first leveled the harassment accusations.”
Asked in a news conference about Ward’s legitimate questions, Shapiro replied, “Consider the source.”
That’s appalling.
This is not mere partisan politics. This is a matter of character and transparency.
We understand that when a complaint is made against any employee, there are confidential processes and procedures that must be followed. We don’t expect Shapiro to detail how that all played out with Vereb.
We do expect more than vague and dismissive statements from the governor and those who speak for him.
Shapiro could speak clearly about the values of his office and the standards he expects those who work for him to meet. He could discuss the pernicious nature of workplace sexual harassment and how it works to keep its victims — who are mostly, but not exclusively, women — from succeeding and sometimes even surviving. He could talk about the toll it exacts on victims and workplace culture. He could make it crystal-clear that he won’t tolerate it in his administration.
On Monday, Shapiro’s Department of Education announced that
Ultimately, the only way to restore a politics of civility and pragmatism and compromise is through voters valuing those qualities — and then actually voting in both the primary and general elections. But opening primaries to independents is an important structural reform that will make it easier to get there.
Scranton Times-Tribune. October 22, 2023.
Editorial: Reconsider automatically closing schools for prank threats
Students, parents and educators know the drill by now.
The emergency text alert of a bomb threat goes out, forcing caregivers to scramble, cutting the school day short and spreading fear among students, parents and educators alike. Multiple schools across Northeast Pennsylvania have been evacuated and/or closed due to threats on five different weekdays since classes resumed in September. On one occasion, those local threats were part of a nationwide scam that targeted 150 U.S. schools.
The incidents interfere with students’ progress, inconvenience parents and sow anxiety across the community. And they put school administrators in the unenviable and difficult position of weighing student safety against maintaining normalcy, knowing that these threats are almost certainly bogus, but also knowing that making the wrong call could lead to tragedy.
The reaction of local educators during this latest rash of threats has not been uniform. The Scranton School District, for example, chose to keep students in school with heightened security when threats led other regional schools to send students home earlier this month.
Perhaps it’s time for other school districts to consider Scranton’s approach.
The state Department of Education requires all schools and school districts to develop emergency plans, coordinate with local law enforcement, conduct regular safety drills and regularly assess the security of their buildings. But the decision on whether to close schools in reaction to threats is left up to individual districts.
In Washington state, the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, which oversees all K-12 schools, has adopted a series of best practices that recommends against an automatic evacuation in the case of a bomb threat “unless a bomb is obvious.”
“Staying in the school may be the best option,” the agency advises on its website.
That didn’t stop three school districts in eastern Washington from closing all their buildings and sending their students home after they received an email suggesting a bomb threat in April.
But a fourth district chose an alternative called “Secure and Teach” in which all students remain indoors, outside doors are locked and classes continue.
Some parents and teachers might be uncomfortable with that approach. But if repeated fake bomb threats continue to interrupt classes, schools should at least consider other options, such as finding facilities nearby where students can be evacuated while law enforcement assures the safety of their buildings in anticipation of returning kids to class.
Automatically closing schools when threats are received probably encourages future occurrences and even with the expanded remote study options available since the COVID pandemic, students will undoubtedly fall behind when in-school instruction is continually disrupted.
These are difficult decisions best made on a case-by-case basis by the professionals who run our schools. But it is at least worth discussing whether, under certain circumstances, we can keep students safe, secure and still in their classrooms when pranksters strike.
Uniontown Herald-Standard. October 21, 2023.
Editorial: Term limits would deprive us of skilled lawmakers
When Massachusetts U.S. Sen. Ted Kennedy died in 2009, he was fondly recalled for his finely honed skills as a legislator. Commentators and members of Congress on both sides of the aisle noted the abundance of laws that had landed on the books in his 47 years in the Senate that he had initiated, influenced or helped shape.
If Kennedy had been term-limited — say, to two terms in the Senate — he would have been out of office at the end of 1976.
It’s election season, with municipal elections coming up in Pennsylvania and other states in two weeks and, of course, the presidential election coming up next year. In the weeks and months ahead, we’re bound to hear the magic words “term limits” tumble out of many a mouth and be pounded out on many a laptop, in the belief that term limits will fix what ails our politics.
And it is an undeniably seductive idea — Mr. Smith goes to Washington, or Harrisburg, or Columbus, or Albany, or some other capitol, humbly and thoughtfully deliberates the issues of the day, votes on what is “right” based on fundamental common sense and then returns to his workaday life in his hometown.
The likely result of term limits, however, would likely be something somewhat less sunny and idealistic than this scenario. Not possessing the skills coming from a long stretch in public service, Mr. Smith would probably be easily rolled by lobbyists, members of the executive branch and bureaucrats. There’s every likelihood, too, that rather than returning to his hometown when his time is up, Mr. Smith would try to use some of the knowledge he gleaned as a lawmaker to join the lobbying ranks or find employment in some other lucrative line of work.
Jamelle Bouie, a columnist for The New York Times, recently pointed out that “legislating is real work that demands actual expertise. Any elected official who hopes to do anything serious must build relationships with other members, as well as learn the ins and outs of writing laws. This takes time, the same way that expertise in any profession takes time.”
Bouie also said, “Term limits would, by design, force competent, conscientious and talented legislators out of office, depriving the legislature of their skills for no reason other than a knee-jerk distaste for long-serving lawmakers.”
Above all, at a moment when democracy itself has been bruised and battered, term limits would limit the choices that voters have. It’s been said time and time again, and it’s true — the best way to limit the terms of lawmakers is through the ballot box. If you think a veteran lawmaker is too old, has run out of gas, or is just a bum, then vote for an opposing candidate. On the other hand, if you believe a veteran lawmaker has done a stellar job, has a comprehensive understanding of the legislative process and has shown a keen understanding of the issues you care about, then keep them.
In a democracy, every elected official is subject to term limits by his or her own constituents.
END