In another example of the mind-set that prevails when spending "other people's money," the state Department of General Services says it cannot account for change orders to state agency contracts, presumably amounting to millions of dollars of additional spending.

While not the originator of the phrase "other people's money," former state Sen. Vincent Fumo, D-Philadelphia, had a talent for spending OPM, as he called it, whenever possible.

In Fumo's case, spending OPM meant using Senate employees to handle many household duties, including everything from simple errands to oversight of a major renovation of his home and management of his farm near Harrisburg. It also meant more than $100,000 in tools and other equipment purchased by a nonprofit agency in Philadelphia with which he had close ties.

Fumo's fondness of spending other people's money, meaning taxpayers' money, was behind most of the 100-plus federal corruption charges that led to his conviction and prison sentence.

In most cases, spending other people's money doesn't lead to corruption, but rather a lack of attentiveness or concern with cost efficiency.

Last year, reports documenting more than $1 billion in no-bid contracts placed by the administration of Gov. Ed Rendell made news and led to calls for investigations and tighter rules on awarding state contracts.

A request to the Department of General Services by a Pittsburgh newspaper for information related to no-bid contracts, emergency contracts and change orders in state contracts resulted in the admission that change order information was unavailable.

In most private businesses, when the owners are spending their own money, they are well aware of the added costs associated with change orders to contracts. It's their money, and they generally keep track of how that money is spent. It's a different story in government, when taxpayers' money is being spent.

Granted, there are accounting and reporting requirements intended to impose discipline and create transparency, but the incentive to watch every dollar spent and ensure cost-effective spending is not the same as when someone is spending his or her own money.

The issue of state contracts was raised by Auditor General Jack Wagner in October, when he criticized General Services, which is responsible for overseeing $4 billion worth of contracts, and the Rendell administration for lax oversight of contract spending. A review by Wagner's auditors found that a consulting company's contract with the state for computer services for 15 agencies jumped to $592 million from $382 million when change orders, emergency contracts and no-bid contracts were included.

Earlier reports that the state awarded 2,610 no-bid contracts, valued at $1.1 billion, since 2003 drew criticism from Wagner and others. Rendell defended many of the no-bid contracts, saying they had to be issued too quickly to follow normal bidding procedures, or the contract recipient had unique skills.

For the same five-year period, there were 4,648 emergency contracts awarded worth $678 million.

There might well be some legitimate reasons for emergency or no-bid contracts, but not hundreds of millions of dollars.

More troubling issues arose when it was revealed that some of those no-bid contracts went to a Philadelphia law firm with which Rendell has strong connections.

It's possible that many of the emergency contracts were awarded on legitimate grounds. But it also is possible that various agencies bent the rules in classifying a contract as an emergency contract that did not have to follow the normal bid process rules to award the work to a vendor favored for good work in the past, personal relationships or political connections.

The political aspect of pay-to-play has been at the center of criticism of the Rendell administration for placing no-bid contracts with campaign contributors or Rendell's former law firm in Philadelphia.

Among the $1 billion in no-bid contracts awarded by the Rendell administration was $1.8 million to Ballard Spahr, Rendell's former law firm and the firm where two of Rendell's former top aides now are partners.

Rendell defended the contracts, saying Ballard Spahr was uniquely qualified for the work it was hired to do. Was that really the case, or was it politically expedient for Rendell to give the firm the state work?

Wagner's audit reports and related newspaper accounts represent a solid basis for investigations into no-bid contracts, "emergency" contracts, change orders and the larger pay-to-play culture between campaign contributors and Harrisburg politicians.

In fact, state Sen. Mike Folmer, R-Lebanon County, has announced his intention to hold hearings on no-bid contracts.

Given the potential for abuse or waste when spending other people's money, these hearing should get the press coverage and public attention they deserve.