Pennsylvania lawmakers have introduced their fellow citizens the concept of "unvouchered expenses" as their preferred method of receiving a boost in pay that the state constitution says they should not receive until January 2007.

The practice, now providing increased paychecks to about 150 state lawmakers, appears to involve submitting expense reports that are increased by the exact amount that the pay raise would have provided - if it were actually permitted by the constitution.

The bogus expense reports, without documentation for increased expenses, are being approved by party leaders and the extra money is flowing.

By contrast, an expense report submitted by Rep. Gregory Vitali, D-Delaware, documented increased expenses for a quarterly mailing to constituents and for a part-time staffer, was rejected by Democratic leadership. Vitali had obtained verbal approval for the additional expenses, but received a letter from his party leadership on the day that a Philadelphia newspaper reported comments he made critical of party leadership.

So, this is the way Harrisburg currently operates: If you submit a false expense report, lacking documentation for increased expenses - and you voted for the pay raise - you will receive the check. If you submit an expense report, with a documented increase in expenses, but you voted against the pay raise - you're out of luck.

Vitali voted against the controversial July 7 pay raise package, and Democratic leadership did not appreciate his independence or vote of conscience.

The first clue that Vitali was on the outs with his party's leadership was his demotion, along with 11 other Democratic lawmakers who voted against the pay raise, as chairman of the energy subcommittee. House Democratic Leader H. William DeWeese removed the 12 lawmakers who failed to support the leadership-backed pay-raise plan and replaced them with lawmakers who voted in favor of the stealth pay raise - as leadership wanted.

The demotion cost Vitali the $4,050 additional pay that all subcommittee chairmen receive for their work.

Vitali clearly is a thorn in leaderhip's side. He had the audacity, early this year, to propose changes to House rules that would require that lawmakers have 24 hours, instead of the current 1 hour, to review a bill before voting. He further proposed that at the time of a vote a short summary of the bill should be read, rather than just the bill number with no explanation, as is now the practice. A third change he hoped to make would require lawmakers to actually vote in person, rather than turning over their votes to leadership.

Such common sense and good government changes apparently don't sit will with party leadership. And, not surprisingly, his proposed rule changes never got to a vote.