Leadership elections will tell the tale
This will already go down as one of the most significant election years in Pennsylvania history. A record number of lawmakers were tossed out of office in the May Primary prompting one of the losers, Senate President Pro Tempore Robert Jubelirer to dub it a “political earthquake.” Chances are more than the usual number of incumbents will go down to defeat in November as well.
Voters are clearly sending a message to Harrisburg that the time has come to reform the way state government does business. But, two smaller – and potentially more significant – elections will be held about a week after the November 7th balloting. They will determine whether or not real structural change comes to Pennsylvania’s General Assembly.
That is when members of the new House and Senate will gather to elect legislative leaders. With Jubelirer and Senate Majority Leader David “Chip” Brightbill have been voted out of office in the primary, a wide open battle is underway in the Senate for the top two spots. In the House, an internal rebellion is brewing against Speaker John Perzel that will grow in intensity if, as now looks probable, Republicans lose a considerable number of seats and perhaps even their majority status.
Such “insider ball” rarely captures the attention or interest of the average voter. But, especially this year, leadership elections will decide whether or not the reform movement has any lasting impact on the General Assembly. This is because Pennsylvania’s General Assembly is one of the most leadership dominated legislative bodies in the nation. Over the years rank and file members have ceded a tremendous amount of their power to leadership, which now uses that power to control the actions of its own members.
A former Congressman from Pennsylvania recently told me the power concentrated in the hands of Pennsylvania’s legislative leadership would make even the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives jealous. He said no leadership post in Washington holds such ironclad power over its own members.
That is why – on critical issue after critical issue – Republican leaders of the Pennsylvania House and Senate have voted differently than the vast majority of their own caucus members, yet still remain in power. It is why, even after 10% of the House GOP caucus went down to defeat in the primary, Speaker John Perzel was able to hold onto his position. Simply put, he has enough power to scare his opponents or potential opponents into line.
A pitched battle is underway inside the Senate Republican caucus for leadership posts. Republicans are almost certain to maintain their majority status in that chamber and the top two posts are going to be vacant. The lead contestants for President Pro Tempore (depending on the day of the week and to whom you talk) are Jeff Piccola from Dauphin County, Joe Scarnati of Warren County, and Jake Corman of Centre County. The only one with bona fide reformer credentials is Piccola, so the election of anyone else would signal a continuation of “business as unusual” within the Senate.
Over in the House the situation is much more complex in that Perzel and Majority Leader Sam Smith (R-Jefferson) are both likely to be re-elected by voters in their districts. There are no open leadership seats, thus campaigning for the jobs has been discrete and below the radar screen. Complicating the House leadership races is uncertainty over which party will control that chamber. If Democrats reclaim the majority, they will get to elect the Speaker (likely Bill DeWeese) and Republicans would have internal warfare over the Minority Leader post. Perzel is likely to want to be Minority Leader if the GOP loses control of the House, but the sudden diminishment of Republican standing likely would embolden opposition to him and increase the likelihood of a new leader emerging.
Bottom line: If Perzel and a pay-jacking Senator are elected to lead their respective chambers, look for little substantial change in Harrisburg. When the dust settles, unless new faces are sitting in the leader’s chairs the electoral upheaval of 2006 will have been great theatre – but nothing more.