HARRISBURG -- By handing out hefty performance bonuses to House Democratic staffers last year, Majority Leader Bill DeWeese said he was just trying to attract and retain good workers and reward them for long days of legislative work.

The $1.9 million in bonuses given to House Democratic staffers last year had no relation, Mr. DeWeese has repeatedly insisted, to 2006 campaign work to elect Democratic legislators and enable the party to take control of the House for the first time since 1994.

But the 2006 bonuses, which were considerably more than the $435,000 handed out in the nonelection year of 2005, attracted criticism -- from staffers who didn't get a bonus, from citizen groups who questioned their real purpose and from the news media.

So, under fire from several directions, Mr. DeWeese, D-Waynesburg, in February temporarily suspended future bonuses. Now, he announced in an internal memo late last week to House Democrats and employees, he's ending the practice of paying bonuses.

Mr. DeWeese denied that bonuses were tied to 2006 political campaign work, which would be illegal. Attorney General Tom Corbett has, nonetheless, begun an investigation of the practice of bonuses, which were given by other legislative caucuses on a much smaller level than that of House Democrats.

"The public views bonus programs for government employees with great skepticism," he said in the memo. "Rightly or wrongly, the awarding of performance bonuses to public employees is viewed as fiscally suspect and therefore threatens to undermine confidence in the [House Democratic] caucus."

Democrats barely regained control of the House in November by a 102-101 margin, so the loss of just one seat next year would throw control back to the GOP. Mr. DeWeese can thus ill afford to engage in practices that upset voters.

Mr. DeWeese said that giving bonuses for legislative work to employees who might also have worked in political campaigns "risks the perception that the bonuses were paid -- at least in part -- for campaign activity. This perception, although wrong, also threatens to undermine public confidence in the caucus."