Post by mikekerstetter on Mar 19, 2011 8:20:40 GMT -5
dailyitem.com/0100_news/x1498156952/Keller-Let-s-shrink-House
March 18, 2011
Keller: Let’s shrink House
Proposal afloat to cut 50 of 203 seats
By Joseph Deinlein The Daily Item The Daily Item Fri Mar 18, 2011, 10:46 PM EDT
A call has been made for years to shrink the size of Pennsylvania’s Legislature.
The chamber is the second-largest in the nation, trailing only California’s.
But the Golden State has three times Pennsylvania’s population of 12.6 million residents.
The speaker of the state House is looking for co-sponsors of a bill that would shrink the size of his chamber from 203 representatives to 153.
Sam Smith, R-66, of Punxsutawney, had opposed the idea. Now the speaker argues that reducing House membership would make the chamber a more effective legislative body.
Valley lawmakers generally agree.
In fact, Rep. Fred Keller, R-85, of Kreamer, said he signed on as a co-sponsor should the legislation make it to committee.
“We all got a pretty clear message during the election,” Keller said. “If we keep doing the same thing tomorrow that we’re doing today, and don’t get a different result, that’s the definition of insanity.”
Rep. Kurt Masser, R-107, of Elysburg, said he would want to read the proposal first.
“I want to make sure we’re not losing representation too badly for the rural areas, but on its face, I support it,” he said. “I’m all for shrinking size of government.”
Rep. Lynda Schlegel Culver, R-108, of Sunbury, said she would be cautious, too.
She said the reduction of 50 seats as proposed might not be the right number, and a study should be done to demonstrate how it might impact Pennsylvanians.
“My first concern is it how would affect the constituency,” she said. “Right now, we represent approximately 61,000 people. In the new census, that will become 65,000. The public needs to define what they’re comfortable with.”
State representatives are among the most easily accessible lawmakers with ties to the state or federal government, she said. State senatorial districts, let alone senators and congressmen in Washington have much larger districts.
And like Masser, Culver is worried about rural districts having a voice in state government. If redistricting ends up putting a rural township in the same district as a big city, that could create a problem.
“Pennsylvania is a very diverse culture,” she said. “When I’m in Harrisburg talking to people from Philadelphia or Pittsburgh about an issue important to us, they say, ‘There’s just no way that’s going to work for our area.’”
The point of the lawmaking body is to represent the people properly, she said.
“I’m not trying to save a job,” said Culver, who like Keller and Masser is three months into her first term. “When we’re elected, we know we have two years.
“We need to be doing what’s right for the entire state. We need to think it through carefully.”
March 18, 2011
Keller: Let’s shrink House
Proposal afloat to cut 50 of 203 seats
By Joseph Deinlein The Daily Item The Daily Item Fri Mar 18, 2011, 10:46 PM EDT
A call has been made for years to shrink the size of Pennsylvania’s Legislature.
The chamber is the second-largest in the nation, trailing only California’s.
But the Golden State has three times Pennsylvania’s population of 12.6 million residents.
The speaker of the state House is looking for co-sponsors of a bill that would shrink the size of his chamber from 203 representatives to 153.
Sam Smith, R-66, of Punxsutawney, had opposed the idea. Now the speaker argues that reducing House membership would make the chamber a more effective legislative body.
Valley lawmakers generally agree.
In fact, Rep. Fred Keller, R-85, of Kreamer, said he signed on as a co-sponsor should the legislation make it to committee.
“We all got a pretty clear message during the election,” Keller said. “If we keep doing the same thing tomorrow that we’re doing today, and don’t get a different result, that’s the definition of insanity.”
Rep. Kurt Masser, R-107, of Elysburg, said he would want to read the proposal first.
“I want to make sure we’re not losing representation too badly for the rural areas, but on its face, I support it,” he said. “I’m all for shrinking size of government.”
Rep. Lynda Schlegel Culver, R-108, of Sunbury, said she would be cautious, too.
She said the reduction of 50 seats as proposed might not be the right number, and a study should be done to demonstrate how it might impact Pennsylvanians.
“My first concern is it how would affect the constituency,” she said. “Right now, we represent approximately 61,000 people. In the new census, that will become 65,000. The public needs to define what they’re comfortable with.”
State representatives are among the most easily accessible lawmakers with ties to the state or federal government, she said. State senatorial districts, let alone senators and congressmen in Washington have much larger districts.
And like Masser, Culver is worried about rural districts having a voice in state government. If redistricting ends up putting a rural township in the same district as a big city, that could create a problem.
“Pennsylvania is a very diverse culture,” she said. “When I’m in Harrisburg talking to people from Philadelphia or Pittsburgh about an issue important to us, they say, ‘There’s just no way that’s going to work for our area.’”
The point of the lawmaking body is to represent the people properly, she said.
“I’m not trying to save a job,” said Culver, who like Keller and Masser is three months into her first term. “When we’re elected, we know we have two years.
“We need to be doing what’s right for the entire state. We need to think it through carefully.”
