In disciplines such as algebra and geometry, no credit is given for a correct answer if the the methodology used to produce the answer is flawed.
That's not the case in the wonderful world of politics, of course, so we can support Westmoreland County Commissioner Tom Balya's recent endorsement of a home rule form of county government even if his conclusion is based on seemingly self-serving reasoning.
Frustrated by what he called "an archaic system" of government that requires him to build coalitions and work with other elected officeholders, Balya last week embraced the home rule concept he has twice previously rejected.
The current setup requires the commissioners to sit with various county row officers on boards that oversee the county prison, pension fund, job creation and salary scales.
A home rule form of county government could -- but not necessarily would -- enable the elimination of such boards, allowing Balya and the other commissioners do basically whatever they want.
Based on the reasoning that prompted Balya's about-face on the home rule issue, it would seem creation of a kingdom and elimination of his colleagues on the board of commissioners would be even more to his liking.
But while we may question Balya's rationale, we cannot find fault with his conclusion -- Westmoreland County should at least consider creation of a home rule charter.
In the wake of Balya's change of heart on the issue, Republican Commissioner Charles Anderson said he will formally ask commissioners to put such a referendum before voters.
"I expect he'll second it," Anderson said of Balya.
The proposed referendum would not ask voters to approve a switch to home rule, but instead ask for the formation of a commission to study alternate forms of government. At the same time, voters would elect members to serve on that commission.
Certainly no harm can come from simply looking at possible ways to improve the status quo when it comes to county governance.
That's why we like the idea.
