Four years ago this week, Pennsylvania state lawmakers approved a generous pay raise for themselves at 2 a.m. Voter outrage over the pay-raise vote and related abuse of expense reports used to put the extra money into the lawmakers' pockets before the state Constituton would allow, resulted in the pay raise being reversed months later and about one-fourth of incumbent lawmakers being replaced in that November's election.

Responding to the outrage over the pay-raise vote and how the stealth legislation was moved through the Legislature with no debate and no public discussion, state lawmakers promised change and more-ethical behavior.

But what have Pennsylvanians seen from Harrisburg since the summer of 2005?

• Numerous ethics scandals involving state lawmakers.

• Not a single state budget passed on time.

• Quick passage of legalized slot machine gambling, to the public's surprise.

• The successful prosecution of former state Sen. Vincent Fumo, D-Philadelphia, by federal officials on corruption charges involving misuse of $2 million in state funds as well as the assets of two nonprofit agencies worth millions more.

• The Bonusgate scandal in which leading state lawmakers paid legislative staffers big year-end bonuses for campaign work using $4 million in taxpayer money, which is illegal.

One high-profile defendent in the Bonusgate scandal, former state Rep. Mike Veon, D-Beaver, has had subpoenas issued to 44 people, including former and current lawmakers and staffers. Veon argues many people were involved in the bonus scheme.

Among those served with subpoenas are Majority Whip Bill DeWeese, D-Greene County, and state Revenue Secretary Steve Stetler, a former state representative and former member of the House Democratic Campaign Committee.

A Pittsburgh newspaper published a story recently in which grand jury testimony suggested Stetler rejected a plan to shift "opposition research," a campaign job involving digging up dirt on political opponents, to private companies and out of the hands of legislative staffers. Stetler reportedly opposed moving the work to private firms, saying, "We have a perfectly good system in place already."

That taxpayer-funded system might have been perfectly good, but it also was illegal.

Veon's defense argument asserts that other people were involved in the illegal use of taxpayer funds for overt political activities, so he should not be prosecuted — or many others should be prosecuted also. So far, 12 people have been indicted, but the investigation is ongoing.

Veon's defense in this corruption case is "lots of other people did this, so I should not be prosecuted." But instead of giving Veon a pass, state prosecutors should cast their net as wide as possible and charge anyone and everyone involved in Bonusgate or any other act of public corruption involving misuse of taxpayer funds for political or personal gain.

Too often in Pennsylvania, it seems that the political class and other insiders look the other way when corruption is evident. It took federal investigators to investigate, charge, prosecute and convict Fumo, though hundreds of people in Harrisburg and Philadelphia must have known that he was abusing his political power and Senate position.

The political backlash caused by the 2005 pay-raise vote helped advance a few reform efforts, including some lobbying regulations and a new open records law. But much more needs to be done.

Tim Potts, of Democracy Rising PA, says the pay-raise scandal finally got "public officials looking over their shoulders." But Potts also noted that many of the same lawmakers who promised better behavior after the pay-raise scandal of 2005 "gave us the bonus scandal of 2006."

There is hope that public outrage and activism at the voting booth will again send new people to Harrisburg. Between Bonusgate and its related investigations and the closely watched state budget battle that finds taxpayers largely against a broad-based tax increase, the public is watching Harrisburg. And that's good.

Much more change is needed, and voters have had plenty of reasons to demand further reform since the 2 a.m. pay-raise vote of 2005.