DV Journal

Six billion dollars. That is the difference between revenue projections and Gov. Josh  Shapiro’s latest budget proposal. He’s proposing that we spend $6 billion more than taxes collected by the state. You wouldn’t plan to spend more than you make in your household budget and it should be no different for the state.

Because I am committed to protecting taxpayers and keeping the growth of government in check, I have two fundamental questions as I evaluate the budget and decide whether I can support it. Are we spending more than the revenue we are bringing in? And, is our spending growing faster than the rate of inflation?

As a member of the Appropriations Committee, I had an opportunity to hear directly from, and ask questions of, some of Shapiro’s top cabinet officials over the past three weeks seeking to justify the governor’s $51.5 billion budget proposal. It’s already a hard sell for me because this budget increases spending by more than twice the rate of inflation, and spends billions more than projected revenues.

With this being my first time as a participant in the budget hearings, I thought I’d share some of what I considered the highlights and offer my perspectives on where we go from here.

As an active airline pilot, I had a particular interest in learning more about the state’s aircraft and how they are used. In addition to the more than $600,000 in taxpayer-funded flights that Shapiro and Lt. Gov. Davis took over the past two years on the PennDOT airplane, the governor also had previously undisclosed travel on a State Police plane, for which, after our scrutiny, he has now pledged to begin providing flight logs. I found numerous errors and inconsistencies in the PennDOT reporting system, so this administration has some work to do in ensuring true transparency and accountability. You can get more details about the use of the PennDOT plane at my website.

Disappointingly, neither the revenue nor the budget secretary, or any of the other cabinet officials, offered definitive answers about what seem like vastly inflated revenue projections.

The governor’s proposal to legalize and tax recreational marijuana anticipates $1.4 billion of tax and fee revenue, twice as much as he estimated last year. His idea to tax skills games that are already in many taverns, veterans’ clubs and gas stations to generate an extra $370 million is five times higher than last year. It’s worth noting, governor hasn’t provided legislative language around his priorities.

As acknowledged by the budget secretary, the state has a structural budget deficit of more than $3 billion a year (i.e., our recurring expenses are significantly higher than our revenues), requiring the state to spend down its dwindling reserves and Rainy Day Fund (which, by law, is only to be used for emergencies or economic downturns), and at this rate of spending these balances will be entirely gone in less than two years. Then we’d be forced to enact large tax increases or expense reductions, so we must act now to restrain the growth in spending.

That’s why I want to use our legislative oversight to look for every opportunity to decrease costs by eliminating unnecessary programs. One of the areas I focused on during budget hearings was divisive “diversity, equity and inclusion” (DEI) initiatives.

Besides unconstitutionally and illegally institutionalizing racial and gender discrimination, many DEI programs now risk the state’s federal funding because of executive orders by the Trump administration intended to restore merit-based opportunity in government. Millions of dollars are being spent throughout our State System of Higher Education, our Department of Human Services, and other agencies for DEI-related activities, and I’ve asked for additional details to determine how we can end discrimination and cut costs.

The June 30 deadline for adopting the state’s 2025-26 budget is quickly approaching. While the budget hearings were a starting point, we still have a lot to learn about the governor’s budget proposal. As negotiations proceed, I’ll continue to be a watchdog for taxpayers and press the administration for answers and cost reductions, in hopes that the final budget deal earns my support.

(This article first appeared in Broad + Liberty)

A week’s worth of emails from a former Shapiro administration deputy cabinet secretary no longer exist.

That’s what an attorney conceded in court last month as he represented Gov. Josh Shapiro’s attempt to suppress Broad + Liberty’s legal effort to obtain more documents on the biggest scandal Shapiro has confronted in his first term. The employee in question, a young woman who claimed she was sexually harassed by a top Shapiro aide in 2023, no longer works for the commonwealth.

The revelation made in court on February 12th raises the specter that the emails were purposefully deleted because they could shed new light on the scandal. The government’s lawyer seemed to suggest, instead, that they were merely deleted for matters of good digital hygiene.

But government regulations indicate the emails should have been preserved a minimum of three years, if not longer. In this case, however, the emails were deleted substantially sooner.

In September 2023, Shapiro’s director of legislative affairs, Mike Vereb, resigned because one of his deputies had accused him of workplace sexual harassment in February and March of that year, the very first weeks of the Shapiro administration.

Although the young female deputy felt so pressured she left her position in the first week of March, Vereb stayed on for another six months until September. Female Republican legislators — but few Democrats — asked how Vereb, who had also been a top aide in Shapiro’s attorney general office, had managed to stay in his post for months despite the administration spending $295,000 in taxpayer dollars to settle the sexual harassment complaint.

More than a week after Vereb’s resignation, Shapiro told reporters that the people of Pennsylvania could trust the process, and referenced Vereb’s departure as an obvious good thing.

“I can tell you the individual [Vereb] you cited in your question no longer works in my administration. I’ll also tell you — and I want to just speak generally on this, not with regards to any specifics here, and I appreciate your understanding of why I can’t comment individually — our administration is led by two women, strong women, my chief of staff and general counsel. And we work every day to make sure that we have a healthy, safe, professional work environment for all of our employees.

“And I want everyone to know who works in state government or anyone observing state government, that should anyone feel that we’re not meeting those standards, that we have an independent, robust, professional process to allow people to come forward safely and have their concerns heard. That’s something I’m committed to, that’s something the leaders in our administration are committed to, and that is something we adhere to in every case,” Shapiro concluded (video, minute 37:30).

Seeking to better understand how Vereb stayed on for months after the accusations, and also to test Shapiro’s theory about the “independent, robust, professional process,” Broad + Liberty filed extensive Right to Know (RTK) requests with the governor’s office in December of 2023 and then March of 2024.

When the administration’s document production seemed incomplete, both RTK requests were appealed to the Office of Open Records, with both appeals lasting months. Later, as Shapiro’s administration then began to turn over additional documents due to the OOR rulings, there appeared to be noticeable gaps in the document production.

In the most standout example, this reporter requested all inbound and outbound emails for the deputy for “March 2, 2023, to and including March 8, 2023,” — essentially her last week at work. Such documents might have revealed if the deputy began to reach out to others in the office for help, or communicated her distress in other ways.

The governor’s office, however, did not produce even a single email communication for that time period. For these reasons, Broad + Liberty elevated the matter to Commonwealth Court.

At oral arguments in February, Broad + Liberty’s attorney, Thomas Breth, told Commonwealth Court Judge Michael H. Wojcik, “The response that we have in this affidavit [from Shapiro’s office] is during that time period, the deputy secretary of legislative affairs received no emails and sent no emails.
“Your Honor, on its face – I don’t – I don’t want to insult, but on its face, that’s really, really difficult to – to fathom that scenario.”

Moments later, the governor’s attorney, Thomas Howell, said the idea that there were no emails for that time was wrong.

“I also take some exception to the concept that the affirmation is attempting to establish that no emails were sent for this one- or two-week period. That’s not what the affirmation says,” Howell told Judge Wojcik.

“What the affirmation says is that the Office of [the] Governor no longer possesses the records of this employee who was – who left commonwealth employment I think about a year to a year and a half before this Right to Know Law request came in,” Howell said.

“That, frankly, should not be surprising that an account of a departed employee would be disposed of in accordance with the records retention schedules. Those retention schedules are public, and they establish that, you know, your general emails are deleted as soon as they’re no longer necessary,” Howell added.

The governor’s office did not respond to a detailed request for comment that asked for the records retention schedule.

Broad + Liberty’s first Right to Know request was in December of 2023, only nine months after the deputy departed her position. The second request, which included the line seeking one week’s worth of emails from the deputy, was filed on March 28, 2024, was filed approximately one year and three weeks after she quit.

This outlet on Monday filed a petition seeking sanctions against the governor’s office in the belief that the administration did not, in fact, adhere to the document retention regulations.

Many regard the Vereb scandal as the most important and threatening development thus far to Shapiro’s reputation, and it quickly became a focal point for national political reporters last summer when Shapiro was considered to be one of two finalists to be the vice-presidential running mate to Kamala Harris’ nascent presidential campaign.

For example, as the “Veepstakes” speculation was reaching its peak last July, a political reporter for the New York Times filed a Right to Know with the governor’s office that was a duplicate of the original Right to Know filed by Broad + Liberty in December of 2023, according to the RTK log from the governor’s office.

Just days before Kamala Harris would ultimately select Minnesota Governor Tim Walz as her running mate, Broad + Liberty published an article casting doubt on the thoroughness of any internal investigation into the allegations by Shapiro’s office.

That article used a log obtained in the RTK appeal process which outlined various emails that the governor’s office was arguing should still be withheld. On March 14, roughly one week after the deputy quit, Christina Palmer, Shapiro’s senior legal analyst in the Office of General Counsel sent a message to Vereb described as “email forwarding legal advice.”

Two attachments to that email were described as “conveying legal advice/instruction.”

This suggested the possibility that Shapiro’s office was providing legal advice to Vereb while at the same time supposedly investigating him — which, if true, would present a clear conflict of interest. At the time, Shapiro’s spokesman, Manuel Bonder, tried to refute that idea by saying the office of general counsel “represents the Office of the Governor and executive agencies, and not individual officials in their personal capacities.”

In that article, Senate President Pro Tem Kim Ward (Westmoreland), who also is the first woman to lead the Pennsylvania Senate, denounced Shapiro’s handling of every aspect of the scandal.

“It is becoming apparent that any attention Shapiro or his staff gave this matter was protective to cover their office. Shapiro has had every opportunity to step up and do the right thing and he has failed every time,” she told Broad + Liberty in August of last year.

In the same press conference referenced earlier, Shapiro shrugged off criticisms from Ward by saying, “consider the source when it comes to the president pro tem” of the state Senate.

The notion of a workplace sexual harassment investigation also resurfaced in the courtroom oral arguments.

Upon hearing the idea that the emails had not been preserved, Breth was incredulous.

“[T]here was an active investigation to allegations of sexual harassment,” Breth said. “She leaves the employment of the Office of the Governor March 6th, March 7th, somewhere in that time frame, your Honor. There’s a subsequent settlement agreement that comes — becomes public in October of that year. And less than a year — from the time she left the employment, the Office of the Governor’s position is they — they — I don’t want to say destroyed –  they did not preserve emails[.]”

“I’d also assert that I’m assuming if there were an investigation through the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission that had the jurisdiction of this matter, they would have been provided access and digital copies of all of the emails.This individual was only employed for a relatively short period of time — months. So to accumulate all of her sent and received email, I would assume that that was preserved as part of the investigation,” Breth added.

Using a retention schedule promulgated in 2016 but apparently still in effect, Broad + Liberty believes most of the deputy’s emails would fall under two categories (G001.001, and G001.006) which would have retention requirements of eight years and three years, respectively. That retention schedule was still available on a state website at least as late as March of this year, according to a snapshot from the Internet Archive.

Additionally, a 2015 Commonwealth Court ruling held that government agencies have a duty to search their computer servers for deleted emails.

“When an individual deletes an email from his or her email account, as many people to their chagrin have found out, that does not mean that the email is necessarily deleted,” the ruling said. “Those emails remain on the mail server until they are deleted in accordance with a retention schedule established by the Department. Consequently, to establish that the email records do not exist, the Department must also establish that they no longer exist on the mail server.”

In looking at the retention issue, the only piece of the picture lacking then is the “Agency File Plan,” which, if it existed, would have given employees of an agency guidance on things such as how often an employee should cull documents for preservation. Or, the file plan might give instructions on who is responsible for preserving the documents of an employee who has left the department.

“The record retention schedules are only as good as their implementation within the agencies, and the Agency File Plan is really where the rubber meets the road, so to speak,” said Melissa Melewsky, media-law counsel for the Pennsylvania Newsmedia Association. “If there is no file plan, or there’s little training about it or oversight of employee compliance with it, the record retention schedules could be rendered ineffective,” she said.

That plan would also have been among the documents Broad + Liberty sought to obtain when reaching out to the governor’s office for comment, but the request was ignored.

The Shapiro administration’s response to Broad + Liberty’s first Right to Know included an “agency affirmation” from its open-records officer that said, “In response to the request, I reviewed the records, operations and programs of the Office and conducted a search of the Office’s records for emails…” But the affirmation did not make any mention of a search of the office’s computer servers, an issue that came to dominate much of the oral argument last month.

“If they’re conducting a good faith search to determine whether there are any sent or received emails from this individual during that time period, some — I’m assuming…the agency open records officer doesn’t have the authority to just go in and search the, the server. [Shapiro’s open records lawyer] certainly doesn’t indicate that in his affirmation,” Breth told the judge.

Rep. Abby Major, who has been a confidant to the deputy who resigned, and who herself was also the subject of sexual harassment at the capitol, excoriated the idea of missing emails.

“The idea that there are zero emails on the server for an employee is preposterous. Even after someone’s account is removed, there are still records of emails that were sent and received in other inboxes,” Major said.

“Also, why would they delete her account and any record of her employment while in the middle of a legal case with her? It suggests to me that they were potentially interested in hiding some evidence or proof of the sexual harassment that could have been found in her email.”

The Vereb scandal has witnessed two major developments since it originated, both coming during the 2024 Veepstakes.

In August 2024, ABC News reported that a woman who works for a nonprofit organization told lawmakers that she had been verbally attacked by Vereb years before when Shapiro was still at the attorney general’s office.

“…Vereb, allegedly invoked Shapiro’s name on the call, telling the woman that ‘by the time he and Josh were done with me, I would be worse than nothing,’ said the woman, who requested that her name not be published, in an interview with ABC News,” the report said.

At about the same time, the New York Times reported on the Vereb issue: “Shapiro Faces Scrutiny Over Sexual Harassment Complaint Against Aide[.]”

“In a statement…Manuel Bonder, a spokesman for Mr. Shapiro, said the governor ‘was not aware of the complaint or investigation until months after the complaint was filed.’ Mr. Shapiro should have been notified of the allegations sooner,” Bonder told the Times.

That update drew swift condemnation.

Chuck Pascal, a western Pennsylvania Democrat who also was the attorney for the deputy secretary and victim, ripped the notion that Shapiro didn’t know early on.

“Either 1) he has no idea what goes on in his own inner circle, and office suite; or, 2) his top staff, including his Chief of Staff, keeps him in a “good news only” bubble for whatever reason; or 3) this statement has ZERO credibility,” Pascal posted to X.

At the time, Broad + Liberty asked Bonder to give more detail on when the governor was actually informed. He did not respond to that request for comment.

The National Women’s Defense League, which drew headlines during the VP search, blasted the revelations of the missing emails.

“Today there is still no adequate detailing that has been shared by Gov. Shapiro of the investigation of the complaint resulting in a nearly $300,000 settlement, but what we do know is deeply problematic: First, Gov. Shapiro’s office said they had robust procedures in place and had done a thorough investigation. Ten months later, in August of 2024, they said that Gov. Shapiro actually didn’t know about the complaint against his top aide and direct report until months after. Additionally, an earlier Right to Know request revealed serious conflict of interest and bias, including possibly providing legal counsel to the harasser’s attorney and the hiring of multiple sexual harassers,” said league cofounder Sarah Higginbotham.

“This is unacceptable. All state legislatures, including Governors’ offices, should be operating under a publicly available sexual harassment policy – one that is ideally codified in state statute that outlines prevention efforts, investigation process, and ongoing evaluation. Critically, the policy must also seek to eliminate political bias in the process. What remains unclear in Pennsylvania is what that process has been in the Governor’s office and in the state legislature. What is absolutely clear is that whatever they’re doing — or not doing — isn’t good enough.

“Gov. Shapiro has an opportunity to evaluate the failings of their procedure, be candid with the public, and create a better policy.”

During his budget address, Gov. Josh Shapiro claimed the Affordable Care Act (ACA) “is working for Pennsylvanians.” So, is he right? Judging by his 2025–26 budget plan, even the governor may doubt the ACA truly works for Pennsylvanians.

If it’s working, why do rural hospitals need cash infusions? Shapiro proposes $10 million for rural hospitals and another $20 million for “hospital partners” for patient safety and services. Meanwhile, no evidence exists the ACA has slowed rural hospital closures.

If it’s working, why is there a statewide care provider shortage? A fact Shapiro acknowledged in his address. Notably, his budget adds $10 million above the existing $8 million to repay loans for primary care medical professionals.

If it’s working, why would the state deny competing insurance models? Association Health Plans (AHPs) allow companies to pool funds and reduce employee health insurance costs. Yet, Pennsylvania ostensibly banned AHPs. In 2019, Pennsylvania joined 10 other states and the District of Colombia to sue the U.S. Department of Labor to reverse the agency’s new rule expanding AHPs.

So, no, ACA isn’t working for Pennsylvanians—full stop. Shapiro’s calls for so many added subsidies and mandates to prop up our health care system prove its shortcomings.

Moreover, ACA is costly. Nationally, exchange premiums doubled between 2013 and 2017. The same holds true in Pennsylvania: Premiums increased 6 percent statewide this year.

ACA cheerleaders point to increased enrollment. Pennie—Pennsylvania’s state-level version of ACA—added 500,000 new enrollments this year. However, when extra federal tax credits expire, enrollees can expect a whopping 81 percent premium increase by 2026. Last year, Shapiro attempted to intercept this financial shortfall by introducing a new statewide subsidy to make Pennie plans more affordable. (Again, is this system really working?)

Health care is more than just access. Possessing an insurance card doesn’t guarantee affordable, high-quality care. This is especially true with publicly subsidized programs. Public insurance programs increase the amount of health care used; however, their improvements to overall health are, at best, overstated and, at worst, fabricated.

ACA hasn’t improved the overall health of the nation. Before 2014 (when ACA began enrolling the uninsured), life expectancy grew by about 1.5 years per decade. From 2014 to 2017, life expectancy dropped annually—the first time in 100 years. This decline was even more drastic in states that adopted the ACA Medicaid expansion compared to states that didn’t.

Meanwhile, families continue to struggle with soaring insurance premiums. From 2019 to 2024, KFF, formerly known as the Kaiser Family Foundation, found the average premium for family coverage increased 24 percent. About half of insured adults say it’s difficult to afford coverage. One in four Americans skip or postpone treatment because of cost.

In true broken-clock fashion, Shapiro was “right” about two policies to make health care more affordable.

The first is price transparency. Only 30 percent of Pennsylvania hospitals comply with a federal mandate to publish service prices. Holding providers accountable would empower patients to shop around and avoid the sticker shock of unexpected medical bills.

Shapiro also suggested broadening the scope of practice for caregivers to solve health care labor shortages. Nurse practitioners (NPs) have the skills and training to diagnose and treat patients. However, Pennsylvania law keeps these talented professionals sidelined by requiring expensive collaborative physician agreements. Granting NPs full practice authority would increase the supply of primary care professionals, especially in Pennsylvania’s underserved rural areas. Pennsylvania houses about 16,000 NPs. With full practice authority, one NP could serve an additional 109 patients.

Pennsylvania lawmakers must also embrace competition and adopt alternative models of coverage. AHPs, for example, provide millions of Americans with cost-effective, high-quality coverage for a fraction of the cost. The Foundation for Government Accountability found that AHPs provide up to 29 percent in average savings. Pennsylvania must join the 30 states that allow AHPs. Like Pennie, these plans can cover everything from preventative care to emergency care.

Shapiro’s proposal to codify ACA into state law is another bait-and-switch maneuver. The ACA’s start in 2010 may have fooled some. But after more than two decades, Pennsylvanians want a more personal, affordable, higher-quality level of care—things the ACA has failed to provide. Harrisburg must stop subsidizing failed programs and enact laws that empower Pennsylvanians to personalize their care.

State Senate Republicans are firing flak at Pennsylvania’s high-flying governor, questioning his frequent use of state-owned aircraft and what they say is a lack of transparency in how these flights are reported.

Gov. Josh Shapiro (D) will be up for reelection next year and pundits have speculated whether he might run for president in 2028, especially after he made Kamala Harris’ vice presidential short list for a running mate in 2024.

Sen. Jarrett Coleman (R-Bucks/Lehigh) published Shapiro’s flight logs for the Department of Transportation’s (PennDOT) private plane. Shapiro also uses the State Police aircraft, but logs were not available for those flights, Coleman said.

In 2024, flights for Shapiro and Lt. Gov. Austin Davis cost taxpayers than $300,000. Those flights included trips to throw out the first pitch for the third National League Division Series game, attend a Penn State vs. Michigan football game, flying the Shapiro family to Erie to see the solar eclipse, and a visit to Hilton Head, S.C.

Republicans also noted a taxpayer-funded flight to take Lt. Gov. Austin Davis from Pittsburgh to Harrisburg to preside over the Senate for just half an hour, before flying back.

According to state data, “The base cost for the use is $1,350 per block hour. A block hour is the elapsed time from when the airplane door is closed until it is opened at the destination. Additional charges include pilot charges consisting of the individual pilot salary per block hour, subject to overtime, subsistence and pilot lodging when applicable. Additional costs include incidental fees, including without limitation landing, hangar and de-icing fees.”

Republicans, as the saying goes, pounced.

“It’s a bird! It’s a plane! No… it’s  @GovernorShapiro flying high on YOUR tax dollars. #ShapiroAirlines,” Senate President Pro Tem Kim Ward posted on X.

Coleman noted that the information, which should be available to the public, had to be uncovered by legislators.

“The information I posted on my website is only available because of extensive research my staff and I conducted by referencing Shapiro’s daily calendar, social media updates, and media reports. Taxpayers don’t have the time for all that legwork and shouldn’t have to play detective anyway,” Coleman said.

Coleman and the Senate Appropriations Committee have brought administration and former administration officials to testify about the flights.

While state law requires PennDOT to post the names of people on those flights, the logs frequently list people who were on the plane on a certain date, but not which specific flight.

“The data provided by PennDOT is woefully inadequate. The PennDOT logs are full of inaccuracies and omissions. These errors mask the true use of the airplane and thwart a comprehensive evaluation of their use,” Coleman said.

During questioning at the Appropriations Committee hearing on Thursday, Secretary of the Budget Uri Monson said it is difficult to read and understand the flight logs and promised to make them more transparent.

“It’s not that difficult. It’s a flight log,” Coleman told him.

State Police flights do not require passenger documentation, and Coleman said he would sponsor a law to change that. After being questioned by lawmakers and the media, Shapiro is voluntarily making those flight logs public going forward. However, Coleman said a law is needed since the next governor may not.

A memo by Dana Fritz, Shapiro’s chief of staff, outlined who gets dibs on the PennDOT airplane, with Shapiro and Davis having priority.

“Statewide elected commonwealth officials, members of the governor’s cabinet and senior staff, board and commission chairpersons and legislative leadership will be considered next in priority with the governor’s chief of staff’s approval. All other flight requests will be last in priority and must be approved by the respective agency head or a deputy secretary or equivalent senior agency manager on a first-come, first-serve basis,” the memo stated.

Also, “commonwealth aircraft are to be used when necessary for commonwealth business as determined by the requesting agency upon consideration of cost and need.”

PennDOT requested $10 million for two new airplanes in the governor’s proposed 2025-26 $51.5 billion state budget, up 7.5 percent from last year.

Coleman is also concerned that the state is self-insured. In case of an accident, Coleman worried whether people aboard the plane who are not state employees would be covered.

“Which is important to the people on the airplane and, if there was a crash, to the people on the ground,” Coleman said.

When asked about the insurance, Monson told Coleman he’d look into it.

A spokesperson for Shapiro did not respond to requests for comments about the governor’s airplane use.

(This column first appeared in Broad + Liberty.)

It’s become increasingly common for elected officials to live in permanent campaign mode and use new technologies to promote themselves. Gov. Josh Shapiro has elevated this to new levels.

Ironically, an old-fashioned phone book helps tell the story.

Every year, our state government publishes the Commonwealth Telephone Directory, an actual print (and, yes, online) “phone book” (remember those?) of employees in the executive, legislative, and judicial branches.

Beyond giving names and numbers, the directory provides a peek into priorities of various offices and agencies.

A comparison of Gov. Shapiro’s office directory with that of former Gov. Wolf in 2022 shows a heightened focus on Shapiro’s public image.

For example, last year, Wolf had a “Communications and Press” department, with a staff of 13. This included five staff members dedicated to digital media. Shapiro, meanwhile, has made “Digital Strategy” its own department with a staff of seven. This is in addition to his eight-member Communications and Press department.

The taxpayer-funded digital team is clearly hard at work. We’ve seen Shapiro as Barbie’s Ken Doll on Twitter, Shapiro’s staff applying makeup on Tik Tok, and Shapiro ceremonially signing (and re-signing) bills he’s already signed into law. After all, why get one photo when you can get three?

Of course, not every post is reminiscent of a teenage slumber party. Most simply tout Shapiro’s accomplishments—real or imagined. For example, Shapiro is currently taking a “victory lap” on the state budget, even though that budget remains incomplete. And it seems not a day goes by that Shapiro’s team isn’t patting him on the back for I-95.

Beyond the new Digital Strategy department, Gov. Shapiro also has a three-member Public Affairs and Marketing department—which was absent from Gov. Wolf’s office, according to last year’s directory.

We reached out to Shapiro’s office to ask the mission of this department, the reason for its creation, and how it differs from the press and digital offices.

In response, Shapiro’s press office said the following: “The Office of Public Affairs and Marketing was created under the Shapiro Administration to serve as a conduit for connecting everyday Pennsylvanians, local and federal government, business leaders, advocacy and nonprofit organizations, and others to state government to listen, address needs, and inform and connect people with the government services. The Office oversees several facets of state government to ensure streamlined and coordinated external communication to Pennsylvania’s vast population, including one on one direct-to-constituent services, local and regional engagement with communities across Pennsylvania, and statewide marketing to increase awareness of Commonwealth services and benefits available to Pennsylvanians.”

Shapiros’ office did not address how this new office differs in activity from the press and digital offices.

It’s no surprise that most politicians care at least a bit about how they’re perceived—whether they admit it or not. But Shapiro’s focus on his image goes beyond the typical.

Indeed, in 2019 we learned then-Attorney General Shapiro was using his taxpayer funded digital communications director to turn his Wikipedia page “into an exaltation so sugary that a reader complained it was ‘fawning so much it’s creepy.’”

A 2021 Philadelphia magazine profile of Shapiro observed, “The deal Shapiro offers to voters has always been this: I’m working for you, and I’ll get things done — as long as they benefit me as well, on my timeline, in a way that makes me look good.”

As for any progress Shapiro makes, it’s “done with an eye to his image and future success.” And  one Philadelphia political operative described Shapiro as “nakedly focused on his own political advancement.”

Unfortunately, when it comes to actually getting things done, Gov. Shapiro’s record doesn’t quite live up to his TikTok and Twitter images.

His first state budget season turned into a state budget stalemate after he reneged on his promise to support school choice scholarships for children in low-performing schools. A month later, Shapiro claimed victory when he signed the state budget—and vetoed the scholarships. But the reality is the budget isn’t done, as Shapiro’s betrayal put the implementation in limbo.

What’s more, according to an analysis from the Commonwealth Foundation, Shapiro’s first six months as governor “were the least productive [legislatively] of any gubernatorial term in at least 50 years.”

Comparing general legislation as well as budget legislation enacted by the end of July for first-term governors, the analysis found “only fifteen bills reached Shapiro’s desk. This contrasts with an average of 86 bills enacted in the same time frame in the previous twelve terms.”

For a governor who claims to “get stuff done,” it appears little has actually gotten done.

Generally, fewer new laws is a positive. But when the inaction involves the core responsibility of a state budget, Pennsylvanians suffer. Additionally, Shapiro has been unable to deliver on his campaign pledges of cutting taxes on business and families, reducing regulatory red tape, ending permitting delays, or expanding educational choice for kids. It’s clear, at least so far, that those were just campaign slogans to get elected, rather than promises to “get stuff done.”

Unfortunately, Shapiro seems more focused on his image—whether for reelection, running for higher officer, or other reasons—than delivering on the policy changes that would actually make Pennsylvania more competitive and prosperous.

Pennsylvania families, businesses, and students—and even Shapiro himself—would be better served if the governor were less focused on optics and more focused on results.

Update: This article has been updated as the response from Shapiro’s office was received after the article’s original publication date.

Officials at the Commonwealth Foundation, Pennsylvania’s free-market think tank, aren’t fans of Gov. Josh Shapiro’s $51.5 billion 2025 budget.

During a recent press call, they lambasted the governor for proposing a spending hike of  $3.5 billion — 8 percent more than last year — for the general fund, while raiding the state’s Rainy Day Fund and savings fund to plug a $5 billion budget deficit.

Not that Shapiro’s plan would leave taxpayers untouched.

He proposed new taxes on skill games — the approximately 70,000 slot-machine-style gambling machines in bars and clubs across the state. And in what many political observers believe is a longshot at best, Shapiro’s plan to pay for his spending includes both legalizing and taxing recreational marijuana.

Shapiro also wants to change how corporate taxes are calculated, lowering the rate of the state’s corporate net income tax rate, but requiring Pennsylvania businesses to combine their profits from all of their subsidiaries, including ones that operate outside of the state, to determine taxable income. Republicans have long objected to that approach, which would be a net tax increase for many employers.

Commonwealth Chief Policy Officer Nathan Benefield said Shapiro’s proposals are just “showmanship.”

According to Benefield, the outcome of Shapiro’s approach would require a $1,900 tax increase for a family of four “in the near future.” Also, with its savings depleted, Pennsylvania would see its credit rating drop, increasing its cost of borrowing.

State Sen. Doug Mastriano (R-Adams) introduced a bill for a state Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), similar to the federal DOGE ushered in by President Trump. The Pennsylvania DOGE would be able to audit every agency.

DVJournal asked Benefield whether a DOGE for Pennsylvania’s state government is a good idea.

“Yes. That is absolutely something that would benefit the state and get a better handle on where the money is going,” he said.

Benefield noted Shapiro wants to spend nearly $4.8 billion more while revenue growth is less than $1 billion. The biggest increase—almost $2 billion—is in human services, including Medicaid, said Benefield.

There’s another $800 million in state support for public schools.

Shapiro also proposed a nearly $300 million bailout for SEPTA. Benefield said that takes money from poorer, rural residents who drive to benefit wealthier suburban residents.

Shapiro’s budget includes $1.6 billion from the Rainy-Day Fund, which is by law supposed to be used only for emergencies or during recessions.

Shapiro also calls for a slight reduction in the corporate tax rate but includes a new “combined reporting” requirement of all revenue wherever those companies operate, which Benefield said would increase their regulatory burden.

When Shapiro ran for governor, he campaigned on a 4 percent tax on corporate income by 2025, which stands at 8 percent. He wants to reduce it to 7.24 in 2026 with this budget, said Benefield.

Shapiro has also proposed an energy tax, PACER, similar to the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), “which he is still pursuing.”  PACER would be a $500 million tax “on the backs of energy,” said Benefield, a cost which utilities would pass on to residents and businesses. Indeed, electricity rates are already rising in anticipation, he said.

Benefield said Shapiro’s budget estimates more revenue than is likely.  While there is a significant increase in education and human services spending this year, there is almost no increase for those areas in the governor’s charts for the next five years, “which is a pretty ridiculous assumption,” said Benefield.

Shapiro’s budget would “create a $27 billion hole over the next five years,” Benefield said.

Benefield said Shapiro does not include educational funding that “follows kids” or addresses the unaffordable Medicaid costs.

He increased support by $824 million in new spending for public schools, bringing the total to $18 billion. That has increased by more than $4 billion in the last four years. However, students’ performance has declined, Benefield said.  While the state is spending more on public schools, there’s been a 4 percent decline in student enrollment in the last decade and a 3 percent decline in test scores, he noted.

“We have more teachers and fewer students,” said Benefield. “There’s a student shortage in public schools.” School districts “have grown their reserves by almost 70 percent in the last decade,” while school boards continue to increase real estate taxes.

“The biggest challenge for lawmakers is how to make Pennsylvania more competitive as a state,” he said.

Pennsylvania lost 11,500 people in 2024, 34,823 in 2023, and 39,957 in 2022. “We’ve been losing population to other states. Residents are migrating from states with high taxes [and] high regulatory burdens to states with lower taxes and lower regulatory burdens.”

“For an alternate viewpoint, see “Counterpoint: Marijuana Prohibition is a ‘Quint and Curious Relic of the Past'”)

Gov. Josh Shapiro’s pre-election concern for legalizing cannabis has now turned into a need to balance his wish-list budget through a consumer tax if recreational marijuana becomes legal in Pennsylvania. This should be an affront to parents and those interested in working for a healthy Pennsylvania. Now that he has spent time studying the issue, he ostensibly feels enlightened and suggests that those who oppose legalizing this harmful substance are kidding themselves.

However, the governor is mistaken in thinking that legalizing cannabis will eliminate the “shadow market” or that this new enterprise will be run by upstanding entrepreneurs and investors who will adhere to the rules and regulations designed to keep cannabis out of the hands of our youth.

Expecting this nascent industry to act responsibly in controlling minors’ access to these products is naïve. We have decades of experience showing that youth are drawn to forbidden fruits such as tobacco, alcohol, and now vaping. Public health and school systems’ educators have proven to be no match for the marketing tactics employed by these enterprises.

While the rules for marketing this knowingly hazardous consumer product are well-intended and well-written, the governor underestimates the challenges state agencies will face. They simply do not have the time, talent, or inclination to manage this substance effectively. This is not what they were established to do. Strategies aimed at controlling youth access to marijuana will likely follow the same struggling strategies used to thwart historical risky teenage behavior.

If cannabis is officially considered a controlled substance and states recognize its medicinal potential, a reasonable and responsible solution would be to sell it through pharmacies. Creating a redundant cottage industry solely for the benefit of the state and investors prioritizes profit over the health of our youth.

We have already seen the results of the experiment in selling medical marijuana. For example, one medical marijuana dispensary in Pennsylvania is named “CURE,” while another is called “Curaleaf.” A dispensary setting up in Philadelphia is branded “Restore,” with the tagline “Dispensing Happiness” in its print ads; another is called “Beyond Hello.” The examples continue, with names that give the impression, at a minimum, of suggesting “Don’t worry, be happy,” and “Have we got the elixir for what ails you!”

The fact remains that cannabis is classified by federal agencies as a Schedule I substance, indicating a high potential for abuse and no accepted medicinal value, warranting its treatment as a controlled substance. Furthermore, while the former administration pressured the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration to downgrade cannabis’s risk, President Donald Trump has decided to leave that determination to scientists.

It will be a tough battle to prevent legislation from reaching the governor’s desk that would unleash the incubus surrounding this “evil weed.” For decades, pro-cannabis advocates have portrayed those concerned about legalization as puritanical or as apologists for the nanny state.

Additionally, it is likely that enough Republicans may acquiesce to join nearly all Democrats in legalizing cannabis, especially as it has become uncool to oppose pot today. The allure of easy revenue generated by consumer taxes is hard to resist for the General Assembly.

The governor and legislators should continue their due diligence on this issue, regardless of what neighboring states have done. In layman’s terms, The Atlantic has published an investigative piece detailing that the promised benefits of legalizing pot have not materialized in the states that have implemented it.

Reports are readily available indicating that today’s marijuana, which teens experiment with, is far more potent than in the past. Supporters of legalization rationalize that not enough is known about the deleterious effects of cannabis consumption due to the tight federal control that has hindered thorough research.

Not only is there ample research showing serious concerns regarding both short and long-term cannabis use, but health reports continue to accumulate, revealing that consuming cannabis poses health problems from head to toe. And these health researchers are not kidding.

When Democratic Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro sued the Trump administration over its federal funding freeze, he said he was just making sure the Keystone State gets what it deserves.

Political strategists, however, say Shapiro could also be ensuring he gets what he wants: More press attention as the Democratic Party ponders its 2028 nominee for president.

“This is good policy as the governor of Pennsylvania, and it happens to make for good national politics at the same time,” Dan Turrentine, a Democratic strategist and co-host of the popular Morning Meeting program on 2Way, told DVJournal.

Shapiro was reacting to a late January White House memo ordering a “temporary pause” on federal grant, loan, and other financial assistance programs. The freeze was lifted days later following an order from a federal judge. States also complained the Trump administration’s order would impact Medicaid funding as well.

Despite the judge’s intervention, Shapiro still filed suit Feb. 13, claiming the Trump administration was refusing to release $2.1 billion allocated to Pennsylvania through federal grants.

“Federal agencies are now unilaterally and arbitrarily suspending or restricting Commonwealth agencies’ access to the congressionally appropriated grant funds that have been committed to them,” Shapiro alleges in his court filing. The funds were appropriated in the Inflation Reduction Act and Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, two massive spending bills signed by former President Joe Biden.

Shapiro said his office tried to work with the feds and Pennsylvania’s congressional delegation to get the funds released, but to no avail. He argued the government was breaking a contract with the Commonwealth because the funding was approved by Congress.

“We have committed [the money] to serious needs–like protecting public health, cutting energy costs, providing safe, clean drinking water, and creating jobs in rural communities,” said the governor.

The Governor’s Office said the money would be used to plug 500 orphaned and abandoned gas wells and build or maintain more than a dozen water treatment systems to deal with runoff from abandoned mines.

Calling the withholding of the funds “flagrantly lawless actions,” the filing suggests the action is being taken because President Donald Trump didn’t like how Congress divvied up the money. The petitioners added no law permits federal agencies from refusing to spend cash because of policy disagreements with a state.

But the Trump administration isn’t backing down.

White House deputy press secretary Harrison Fields told Axios the White House is ready for a fight.

“Radical Leftists can either choose to swim against the tide and reject the overwhelming will of the people, or they can get onboard and work with President Trump to advance his wildly popular agenda,” Fields said.

Shapiro’s suit said state agencies use the funds to avoid massive debt and obligations that “cannot be reimbursed.” The agencies can use some discretionary spending and reserves to cover “small unexpected debts” but not the whole $2.1 billion.

Shapiro’s filing also features a laundry list of complaints about Trump’s executive orders, more evidence of a political motive, observers say. And picking legal fights with presidents in the other party for political gain is hardly new.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott sued the Obama administration almost 50 times over alleged policy disagreements, while California Gov. Gavin Newsom sued the first Trump administration more than 120 times. California’s legislature recently set aside $50 million for future lawsuits against Trump.

Turrentine said it’s a smart strategy because it raises the governor’s profile for future Democratic primary voters. “He is standing up for what he thinks is right for his state, and for a lot of Democratic primary voters, they will agree.”

Republican strategist Vince Galko of Mercury Public Affairs, on the other hand, is less impressed.

“It’s window dressing that these elected officials have to do to show that they’re standing up for their party and showing some kind of token resistance,” said Galko.

The national media portrayed Shapiro as a more moderate Democrat compared to last year’s ticket of Kamala Harris and Tim Walz. But Galko suggested the Shapiro suit put him in “100 percent lockstep” with the unpopular Biden administration.

“I don’t recall any suits coming from Shapiro on cuts or policies related to the Biden administration,” he quipped.

It sets up an interesting dynamic for a state that backed Trump in 2024 and saw Republicans sweep every statewide election. Shapiro, whose term ends in 2026, is widely believed to be running for a second term as governor, while keeping his eye on the 2028 presidential contest.

Gov. Josh Shapiro portrays himself as a governor who gets stuff done.

Republican Senate Pro Tempore Kim Ward disagrees.

“I would say that he is much more of a political animal than he is actually a ‘get-stuff-done’ governor,” the Westmoreland County Republican told DVJournal during a podcast interview.

“He has 26 people, I understand from our appropriations folks, 26 people working in his office that, doing all that social media, following him around with cameras,” Ward said. “Gov. (Tom) Wolf had 12. Gov. Shapiro has 26, and there’s a reason for that, right?”

The reason she believes is that Shapiro has his eye on a White House run.

Ward drew another contrast between the state’s current Democratic governor and the previous one.

Unlike Wolf, she said, Shapiro doesn’t send bills to the legislature addressing his priorities.

“When I worked with Gov. Wolf, they would say, ‘Here is our priority,’ and they would send over something that they worked on legislatively. Then we would all go to work on the governor’s priority,” Ward said. “But we don’t have that from Gov. Shapiro.

“He talked about marijuana legalization and skill games last year. We never received a bill. He just kind of says, ‘Here’s what I want to do. Let the legislature handle it, and I’ll sign it.'”

Ward says that isn’t the way to handle politics in Harrisburg.

“Maybe it’s his way of governing. But that’s not the way to get anything done with the legislature. He has to take a lead on these things. He’s got to get out of the middle of the road, get off the yellow line and let’s go. Let’s get to work.”

Ward said she and her fellow Republicans weren’t impressed by Shapiro’s budget address either — all 90 minutes of it. His $51.4 billion proposed 2025 budget would use $4.5 billion from the state’s budget surplus and rainy-day fund.

“Well, that will not be happening, as far as the Republican leadership and the Republican Senate are concerned,” said Ward. “Because his budget, well, it dipped in (the rainy day fund), and it took us way down in the next couple of years. It takes us into a deficit, so we won’t even have a rainy day fund.”

Ward said Shapiro’s budget trick of relying on revenue from skill games and marijuana legalization, which aren’t even the law yet, is “unreasonable.”

“Even if those would pass and get up and running, you’re not going to see that money this year,” said Ward. “And it’s a guess on the money.”

On education, the biggest budget item, Ward said Republicans are going to continue pressing for more Lifeline Scholarships for children trapped in failing schools.

“We keep pouring more and more money into public education and schools are still failing,” said Ward. Meanwhile, Republicans are asking for a relatively modest $100 million for their school choice initiatives, which Shapiro has said he supported.

Until he wasn’t.

“I heard the governor say the other day again, ‘I’m fully supportive of vouchers for these schools.’ And then, he blue-lined them. He is not.”

Shapiro had campaigned on providing more funding for the Lifeline Scholarships but in his first budget, when the Democrat-controlled House balked, Shapiro used a line-item veto and penciled it out.

“We have a duty to the next generation to give them every possible tool to succeed,” said Ward. “I’m going to keep fighting.”

The national Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee released a list of state legislatures to flip in 2025 and 2026. The Pennsylvania House is on it, but not the Pennsylvania Senate. It’s a sign, Ward said, of the GOP’s growing strength in Pennsylvania.

She said it’s really exciting that Republicans flipped a seat in northeast Philadelphia with Sen. Joe Picozzi.

“I think they’re not going to take the Senate away,” said Ward, despite having more money than the GOP. “I’m sure they’ll be in here with millions of dollars still targeting, but they’re not going to win it.”

There’s plenty to criticize about Gov. Josh Shapiro’s budget address, as many have done. Yet, one of the strangest aspects of the governor’s speech is not what he said but rather what—or whom—he didn’t talk about. Though not referenced explicitly, government unions greatly influenced the governor’s recent budget address.

The word “union” appears just once in Shapiro’s prepared remarks, but only when mentioning “Union County,” the location for a new—ironically, non-union—pasta-manufacturing facility. Aside from one historical footnote about Pennsylvania’s role in the labor movement during the Industrial Revolution, unions were alive and kicking between the lines of Shapiro’s proposal.

Public sector unions stand behind every special interest group that benefits from Shapiro’s nearly $51.5 billion budget. Teachers, firefighters, police, corrections officers, state workers, transit workers, social workers, childcare workers, and home healthcare workers received substantial attention during the address.

Shapiro’s budget is chock-full of recklessly expensive union handouts. The proposal adds another $824 million to state support of public schools—to hit $17.7 billion—giving the Pennsylvania State Education Association (PSEA) exactly what it wants: $526 million for districts and $40 million for student-teacher stipends.

Meanwhile, more funding for in-home health care is the Service Employees International Union’s golden goose. Shapiro also promised $300 million for agencies like the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA), where the Transport Workers Union Local 23 regularly threatens strikes. And, of course, the influx of new state employees Shapiro hired by lowering traditional standards helps increase membership dues for the 18 unions representing state workers.

These are Shapiro’s most powerful political allies. Like the governor and the rest of the Democratic Party, these unions want bigger government, more government services, and higher pay for public employees. Given the precarious balance of power in the state legislature, union lobbyists help Shapiro advance legislation in Harrisburg. Moreover, they aid in the dirty work to kill bills the governor doesn’t like so he doesn’t have to veto them.

So, why would Shapiro downplay his close relationships with those running government unions?

First, Shapiro is fully aware of the stink—and the appearance of impropriety—that comes with accepting millions in government union money. In 2022, he received more campaign donations from the country’s biggest government unions than any candidate nationwide. And it wasn’t close: The next three politicians on the list combined received less than Shapiro’s $4.5 million.

Unsurprisingly, Shapiro scratches the backs of those who scratch his. Last year, the governor agreed to a huge contract with executives from two of his biggest union donors. The contract negotiated by Shapiro included a record 20 percent increase in pay and benefits for state employees represented by the same unions who together contributed more than $2.75 million to his campaign. The Wall Street Journal labeled this move “Pennsylvania’s Big Government Union Payback.”

Shapiro also downplays his relationship with government union executives to avoid the conclusion that they—not Shapiro—call the shots in Harrisburg. But given Shapiro’s record and proposed budget, it’s difficult to conclude otherwise.

Shapiro’s biggest failure as governor resulted from unions pulling the strings. The governor couldn’t stand up to the PSEA, the state’s largest teacher union, and enact the Lifeline Scholarship Program. He received national accolades for supporting the popular school choice measure on the campaign trail, only to wilt under pressure and veto the measure when the teacher unions outflanked him politically. Shapiro’s flip-flop sent the state budget negotiations into a tailspin, resulting in a six-month impasse.

And the unions will never let the governor forget who’s in charge. Even though Shapiro’s support for school choice remains entirely hypothetical, union-funded organizations killed his chances of becoming Vice President Kamala Harris’s running mate because of his previous stance.

Shapiro, who generally seems to have fooled the national press into thinking he’s a moderate Democrat, doesn’t want more bad press ahead of his likely presidential run. The governor is a clever politician who has learned not to say the quiet part out loud. Instead, he hides the unpleasant reality that he and his party are as beholden to government union executives. And together, they want to run up the bill in Harrisburg once again.