In the Pennsylvania Legislature the Month of November Was a Time of Gearing Down
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
United Methodist Advocacy in Pennsylvania November 30, 2016 Following is my UM Advocacy report for November 2016: In the Pennsylvania Legislature the month of November was a time of gearing down. The 2015- 16 legislative session ended November 30. Governor Wolf was busy with the session’s final batch of legislative bills to be signed or vetoed. And of course, November is the general election month, with all state representative seats and half the state senate seats up for election. I only needed to go to Harrisburg one day this month, to attend a Pennsylvania Council of Churches Public Witness Committee meeting. November Elections Gerrymandering Legislative Caucus Legislative Pay Raises Sanctuary Philadelphia State Deficit Wolf Vetoes Police Identity Nondisclosure Bill Disclosure Guidelines for Police Shootings AG Pornographic Emails Report Mike Veon Kathleen Kane Governor Signs Bill Prohibiting State from Contracting with BSD MORALtorium Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Woodland Community Crowd Funding ________________________________________________________________________ November Elections Republican Donald Trump won the majority of votes in the Pennsylvania presidential election to win the state’s 20 Electoral College votes. Republican Pat Toomey won the Pennsylvania US Senate election. On Election Day, pollsters had rated both as underdogs. However, surprise surprise, sometimes underdogs win. Everybody has an explanation. I don’t have anything to add. In the Pennsylvania Legislature, the Republicans gained three extra seats in both chambers. The Republicans now have 122 in the House and 34 in the Senate. The Democrats now have 81 in the House and 16 in the Senate. This strengthens the Republican Party’s majority, which is the largest in half-a-century, in either chamber. However, Democrats were elected to all three row offices (Attorney General, Auditor General and Treasurer). Why? This one is easy to figure out. Registered Democrats outnumber Republicans in Pennsylvania by over 900,000. However, Democrats are concentrated in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh. The Republicans are more uniformly spread out, creating more local majorities. Row office elections are statewide. But, legislative elections are local. Of course, many believe that all else being equal, gerrymandering of the legislative districts tips the scales in the Republican Party’s favor. On the other hand, Republican leadership would say that their success is a result of the quality of their candidates. Gerrymandering In Pennsylvania, new legislative districts are created after each US Census. State legislative district boundaries are drawn by a five-person commission consisting of the Senate Majority Leader, Senate Minority Leader, House Majority Leader, House Minority Leader and a fifth member, appointed by the other four, to act as chair. As you know, gerrymandering is the creation of legislative districts with the intention of giving an advantage to one party or the other. Whichever political party controls the legislature appears to have the advantage in drawing the district lines. In Pennsylvania, both parties have attempted to use that advantage. Currently, the Republicans have control, as they did during the last redistricting. There is currently a movement to change the redistricting procedure and to take it out of the hands of politicians—or power-brokers, as some see it. Recently in Wisconsin, a three-judge federal court panel struck down that state’s legislative district boundaries, on the grounds that they were gerrymandered to the point they violated the equal protection clause of the US Constitution. Could this groundbreaking decision have ramifications for Pennsylvania? In Wisconsin, the nonprofit Campaign Legal Center developed an analytical method to determine the impact of each party’s voters in a given district. The center’s deputy director, Ruth Greenwood, observed that in Wisconsin, Democrats were concentrated in a few urban areas while Republicans were distributed more evenly across the state, providing just enough of a margin to win many districts. Sound familiar? The center developed an index for examining legislative districts, called an “efficiency gap.” The concept was created by Nicholas Stephanopoulos of the University of Chicago and Eric McGhee of the Public Policy Institute of California. According to their method, the current Pennsylvania legislative map has been influenced by gerrymandering to the point where control of the House will likely remain Republican regardless of how well the Democrats do. If the redistricting procedure is to be changed in Pennsylvania, it will require an amendment to the Pennsylvania Constitution. For this to be accomplished it first takes legislative approval in two legislative sessions (a “session” is the two-year period of a state House of Representative term, e.g. 2017-18). Then it must be approved by the voters of Pennsylvania. The earliest this could be completed is 2020. In recent months there have been efforts in the House to draft legislation for changing the redistricting procedure. As a new session begins in January, this effort will likely continue. If it is to succeed, I suspect that it will require a groundswell of popular support. In the interest of creating a more neutral and level playing field, I support the effort to change the redistricting procedure in Pennsylvania. I believe the goals are good, in theory. With this in mind, I have had contact with FairDistrictsPA (you can check its website), a nonprofit special interest group focused on influencing a change in the redistricting procedure. They recommend creating a nonpolitical, nonpartisan commission to oversee redistricting. I plan to attend one of their meetings in Pittsburgh, early in December, to learn more about them. Legislative Caucus Leadership The Republican party and the Democratic party in each chamber of the Pennsylvania legislature have their own organizations, or caucuses. Each caucus has a leadership team. The leadership members are chosen before a new legislative session begins. Caucus leadership for the next session was chosen last month. Following are the leadership rosters for the new session, beginning in January: SENATE DEMOCRATS: Minority Leader Jay Costa, Allegheny Co. Minority Whip Anthony Williams, Philadelphia Minority Caucus Chair Wayne Fontana, Allegheny Co. Minority Caucus Secretary Lawrence Farnese, Philadelphia Appropriations Chair Vincent Hughes, Philadelphia Policy Committee Chair Lisa Boscola, Northamption Co. Caucus Administrator John Yudichak, Luzerne Co SENATE REPUBLICANS Majority Leader Jake Corman, Centre Co. (UNITED METHODIST) Majority Whip John Gordner, Columbia Co. Majority Caucus Chair Bob Mensch, Montgomery Co. Majority Caucus Secretary Richard Alloway, Adams Co. Appropriations Committee Chair Pat Browne, Lehigh Co. Policy Committee Chair David Argall, Schylkill Co. (UNITED METHODIST) Caucus Administrator Charles McIlhinney, Bucks Co. HOUSE DEMOCRATS: Minority Leader Frank Dermody, Allegheny Co. Minority Whip Mike Hanna, Clinton Co. Caucus Chair Dan Frankel, Allegheny Co. Caucua Secretary Rosita Youngblood, Philadelphia Appropriations Chair Joe Markosek, Allegheny Co. Caucus Administrator Neil Goodman, Schuylkill Co. Policy Chair Michael Sturla, Lancaster Co. HOUSE REPUBLICANS: House Speaker Mike Turzai, Allegheny Co. Majority Leader Dave Reed, Indiana Co. (UNITED METHODIST) Majority Whip Bryan Cutler, Lancaster Co. Caucus Chair Marcy Toepel, Montgomery Co. (new to position) Caucus Secretary Donna Oberlander, Clarion Co. Appropriations Chair Stan Saylor, York Co. (new to position) Caucus Administrator Kurt Masser Policy Committee Chair Kerry Benninghoff, Centre Co. (UNITED METHODIST) House Republican Appropriations Chair Stan Saylor was formerly United Methodist. In 2015 I had a one-on-one with him. Among other things, I asked him about his church membership. He told me that he became discouraged and left his UM congregation because of internal church drama and pastoral misconduct. Folks like to talk about corruption in state politics, but in the church we sometimes don’t do much better. Legislative Pay Raise Pennsylvania lawmakers have the second highest base salary of all state lawmakers in the country—only California’s is higher. Pennsylvania legislators will receive their first pay raise in two years, a 1.34 percent increase. Rank-and-file member's annual pay will increase by $1,140, to $86,478.50 for 2017. This increase will boost legislative leaders' pay to between $98,609 and $134,998. A state law provides a formula for automatic cost-of-living adjustments for the members of the Legislature. In addition to their salaries, lawmakers receive a generous benefits package, free parking, unvouchered per diem allowances, and a defined benefit pension plan. Following are the new salaries for the top legislative leaders: Senate President Pro Tempore Joe Scarnati - $134,998 House Speaker Mike Turzai - $134,998 House Majority Leader Dave Reed - $125,296 Senate Majority Leader Jake Corman - $125,296 House Minority Leader Frank Dermody - $125,296 Senate Minority Leader Jay Costa - $125,296 Most of the other caucus leadership positions receive $115,938 Sanctuary Philadelphia According to Mayor Jim Kenney, Philadelphia remains a sanctuary city. As you recall from my past reports, a “sanctuary city” is one where its law enforcement officials do not cooperate with federal immigration officials in holding undocumented immigrants in custody, unless that person has been convicted