I'm having trouble making sense of a lot of this recent drama the Pa House, since most of the public has little knowledge of the normal internal processes and procedures of the legislature. I have no idea what is normal business in the state house, and what isn't.

This is all further complicated by the fact that the GOP will technically continue to hold the majority until special election are held to fill Democratic vacancies.

> It's PA taxpayer money that existed in those accounts to do the business of the legislature. It's theft. Imagine if an outgoing president transferred all the taxpayer money to fund the operations of the white house and executive offices to their own accounts and those of their political party!

It's worth noting that none of these transfers are leaving accounts internal to the structure of the state legislature.

Fight for control of Pa. House rages on as Republicans move $51 million in state funds >In the Pennsylvania House, the caucuses of both parties are allocated separate funds to be used for things like payroll, office costs and more.  > >In 2022, “Caucus Operations” for both parties were allocated a total of $140,044,000. According to Cutler, this total is usually divided into 52% for the majority party and 48% for the minority party, which would mean Republicans got about $72,822,880 and Democrats got about $67,221,120. > >Cutler said Republicans have allocated some of their funds into various accounts that benefit both parties, such as an account used to pay for technology upgrades in the Capitol. For example, it was used to pay to upgrade the House chamber voting board last summer. Republican leadership said they planned future projects like upgrading the Capitol media office, which still has an entrance sign reading “Newspaper correspondents” and only has a men’s bathroom. > >Funds from the information technology accounts made up most of the $51 million transfer to the Republican House Special Leadership account. Republicans said because the money was allocated to and saved by the Republican Caucus, they should get to keep control of it. > >“It’s essentially 12 years’ worth of surpluses that have accumulated because we’ve managed our finances very responsibly,” Cutler said.

Pretty sure that's a lot of what got Iran pissed at the US in the first place.

Edit - right, we helped install the Shah.

Does this mean we're getting to a point where parties will refuse to settle cashflows into state coffers, but act like fiduciaries for the money until the acting reps & administrators want to allocate / purpose it?

i'm not even sure that could work. I'm trying to liken it to how other countries have many parties in the governing body, and each has to barter to get things funded/etc. Same in this model — each of 'the two parties' is really a network of PACs and NGOs, with their own access to donations/financials.

Today those groups are already deciding where to allocate based on trust / alliances. Are we headed toward a model where they more like fiduciaries, trusting a lesser amount of political hierarchy?

(all of this is aside from what Cutler did, should do, or consequences)

please, analysis only. No partisan trope responses.