Click here to subscribe today or Login.
Wednesday, January 26, 2000 Page: 10A
Even by the ignoble standards of the Pennsylvania General Assembly, the
circumstances surrounding Frank Serafini’s resignation set a new low for
political cynicism.
By post-dating his departure until Feb. 7, the Lackawanna County Republican
and convicted perjurer has denied voters in his 114th District the chance to
choose a new representative on April 4, when they will be at the polls to
choose state and federal candidates in the party primaries. State law requires
a 60-day gap between a resignation and a special election. Serafini’s long
goodbye spares the GOP, at least temporarily, from risking the seat while two
other members of its 103-100 majority face criminal charges that could
theoretically lead to their expulsion before the November election.
We say theoretically because Republican maneuvers to keep Serafini in
office despite a conviction for lying about attempts to circumvent federal
campaign law have clouded the issue of whether felons may serve in the General
Assembly. We hope the state Supreme Court will clarify the issue despite
Serafini’s resignation and rule that the state Constitution means what it
says, that convicted perjurers cannot serve in the General Assembly, no matter
how compelling they may believe their grounds for appeal.
And we challenge House Speaker Matthew Ryan to schedule a special election
to choose Serafini’s successor as soon as possible. The people of the 114th
District have the right to uninterrupted representation in Harrisburg, no
matter what effect that election may have on the rogues’ gallery that the
Republican majority is becoming.
Serafini’s case, the arrest of Bucks County Republican Thomas Druce on
vehicular homicide charges and the federal conspiracy indictment of Erie
Republican Tracy Seyfert must make Pennsylvania’s voters question the whole
political subculture in the state capital.
What kind of people are we sending to Harrisburg? To what embarrassing
lengths will our political parties go to secure and keep power? What does it
say about the Keystone State when the vital issues of self-government must be
decided with one eye on court dockets, federal indictments and prison
sentences?