In Pennsylvania Legislature, less would mean more

In Pennsylvania’s last legislative session, the state House and Senate approved legislation calling for a state constitutional amendment that would reduce the size of the House from 203 to 151 seats. If both chambers approve it again during the 2017-18 session, voters will get to decide the matter in a statewide referendum.

House Bill 153 was introduced by Rep. Jerry Knowles, a Schuylkill County Republican. One of the co-sponsors is Rep. Steve Mentzer, a Republican whose district includes Lititz, all of Warwick Township and most of Manheim Township in Lancaster County.

Sometimes bigger is better — a piece of pie, your high-definition TV, a first-class seat on an airplane.

But sometimes bigger equals bloated, excessive and unnecessary.

Such is the condition of our oversized state Legislature.

Pennsylvania has the second largest legislature in the nation, trailing only New Hampshire. This is not a good thing.

The push to reduce the size of the General Assembly is not new. Lawmakers tried it in 2012 and 2013.

Like just about everything else in Harrisburg, it’s a complicated process.

As Mentzer wrote, “to amend the state constitution, identical legislation must pass the House and the Senate in two consecutive legislative sessions.

The key word here is identical. If a single word or the content is changed, the bill reverts to square one and the two-session clock starts all over again.” It’s worth another try. Reducing size will lower costs and, as Knowles said last year, “it will bring it (the Legislature) down to a number where I think it will be easier to build consensus.”

If there’s a downside to this, we’re missing it.

As Mentzer pointed out, each House member represents approximately 62,000 constituents. If downsizing were to become a reality, that would increase to 84,000.

“I believe serving 84,000 constituents is very reasonable and would not have an adverse effect on service to Pennsylvanians,” he wrote.

How did Pennsylvania settle on a 203-seat House anyway?

A decree from on high, perhaps?

An entry on sacred, state parchment? Nope.

It was ... get ready ... a mistake – a map-drawing error after the 1968 Constitutional Convention. What else?

“Drafters simply didn’t fix the map and settled on 203; that sort of says it all,” Mentzer wrote. Indeed it does. So, Pennsylvanians have been living with this mistake for almost 50 years, as lawmakers have been unable to generate a consensus or muster enough gumption to undo it. Truly one of the commonwealth’s underrated and more aggravating head-scratchers, and the competition is stiff.

The effort to reduce the number of House seats seems to be gaining traction among both Republicans and Democrats. We urge our representatives to support House Bill 153. In a meeting with the LNP Editorial Board Monday, state Sens. Ryan Aument and Scott Martin, both Republicans, said they support downsizing the House. As currently constructed, Aument said, “It’s a significant sized body to try to find and reach consensus.”

Historically, our General Assembly has not been a model of self-examination.

The Caucus — an LNP Media Group watchdog publication covering state government — reported in March that in the 2015-16 session alone, state lawmakers proposed more than 100 bills aimed at reforming the oversight, operation, ethics, transparency, pay and perks of their colleagues, according to an analysis of legislative records. None passed. In scope, the current legislation is really pretty modest. Many might argue that 151 seats is still too many. But it’s something.

“Reducing the size of the Legislature would be a great first step, as we lead by example,” wrote Mentzer.

If you’re skeptical that this will ever happen, it’s with good reason, and you’re not alone.

When he proposed in June reducing the size of the state Legislature, among other things, Philadelphia Daily News columnist John Baer was downright fatalistic.

“Problem is, I doubt our legislative leaders want to give up determining their own districts or getting gifts or hiding in the warrens of our overgrown General Assembly,” Baer wrote.

“I just wish I’d be proved wrong.” As do we. Lawmakers, here’s your chance.

— Lancaster Newspapers