Anger over Pennsylvania lawmakers' controversial July 7 pay-raise vote grew throughout the summer and fall, culminating in the November rejection of one of two Supreme Court justices up for retention.

The passage of time has diminished voter anger somewhat. But the anger has not disappeared, it has evolved into a determination to change the people, and thus the culture, in the state capitol.

The pay-raise scandal served to educate citizens, revealing many state lawmakers to be more interested in serving themselves than in serving their constituents. And this year's legislative elections featuring the entire House and half of the Senate members will give voters the chance to begin the process of reform in Harrisburg.

The pay-raise scandal and the exposure of many lawmakers' use of "unvouchered expenses" to take the higher pay immediately, instead of waiting until after the next election, as the state constitution mandates, has shined an unflattering light on some of the methods of Harrisburg lawmakers.

This week, the most visible evidence of the legislative reform movement appeared at a Harrisburg rally featuring 60 prospective candidates poised run against incumbents in the legislature.

Not long after the pay-raise vote, a group called PACleanSweep was formed to identify and support non-incumbent candidates committed to reform in Harrisburg. As its name implies, the group's objective is a more civilized and organized variation of the old "throw the bums out" slogan expressing voter disgust.

This time, however, consistent media exposure of the inner workings of the nation's most-expensive state legislature has revealed a system that skirts the intention, if not the letter, of the state constitution. It is also a system in which most of the power rests in the hands of a few political party leaders. Most lawmakers and, therefore, most citizens are really not receiving equal representation in the current leadership-dominated system.

All of the PACleanSweep candidates pledge that any future pay raise request will be submitted to voter referendum and all bills will be subject to 10 days of public review before a final vote is taken.

This year, the chances of changing the culture in Harrisburg are better than usual. The anti-incumbent mood spawned by the pay-raise vote is expected to linger and PACleanSweep is helping viable candidates get on the ballot. In addition, some 22 lawmakers have said they will not seek re-election. This figure is the highest since 1992, when 30 legislators opted not to run again.

Russ Diamond, founder of PACleanSweep, says another 75 potential candidates have come forward, but have yet to be interviewed and vetted for his group's endorsement.

One challenger, Jay Paisley, is hoping to oust House Minority Whip Mike Veon, D-Beaver, the only lawmaker to vote against the repeal of the pay raise. Paisely, a retired teacher and football coach, was right when he said "We're not running on the pay raise. It's a symptom." The critical need for change in Harrisburg is about much more than the pay raise.

As outrageous as the minimum $11,000 pay raise was, it was only the most visible and understandable evidence of much deeper and broader problems. As voters learned how a stealth bill was manipulated by legislative leaders just before the pay-raise vote, there was disbelief and more anger. As voters given the chance to read the clear and simple language of the state constitution barring mid-term raises, voters were stunned by lawmakers' arrogance in using unvouchered expenses.

This is a critical time to encourage and support legislative challengers. Candidates can begin distributing nominating petitions for the May primary on Feb. 14. They have until March 7 to collect the necessary voter signatures.

PACleanSweep is doing an important job in screening and supporting challengers, but ultimately it is the voters who must look to the legislative candidates, putting aside his or her local self-interests, and decide who is most likely to change the arrogant and dysfunctional culture in Harrisburg.

In all but a few cases, the obvious choice will be the challenger.

— J.L.W.III