He added that his cosponsorship of the bill had nothing to do with the fact that he earned an annual income, which he has declined to specify, from Jacob George Ford, his brother's dealership.
Nine months after The Inquirer detailed how Pennsylvania lawmakers routinely take legislative actions that benefit their outside business interests, the legislature ended its 1999-2000 session without making any changes to its ethics and disclosure rules, which are among the nation's least restrictive.
In the meantime, legislators have continued to involve themselves in matters in which they or their firms have a financial stake, often without the public's knowledge. In George's case, he stood up on the House floor and asked permission to vote on the bill after disclosing his interest in the car dealership. That is a step that many legislators in similar situations do not take.
The House speaker told him he was allowed to vote under House rules because the bill affected all auto dealers, not just Jacob George Ford. Had it affected just that one dealership, the rules would have barred George from voting.
As for the state's ethics law, it did not apply. The law, which covers all public officials, prohibits them from taking actions that would benefit them, their relatives or businesses in which they have an ownership interest.
But the state's ethics commission ruled in 1989 that legislators were not subject to the law when acting in their broadly defined lawmaking capacity.
The Inquirer reported in March that of the 253 legislators in Harrisburg, 68 - or 27 percent - had introduced legislation since 1991 that could specifically benefit the type of business with which they or their close relatives are associated.
And 52 - or 21 percent - were serving on legislative committees that have oversight over those business interests.
