Shapiro and Steil on PCN (Again)

PCN Call-In Show, with host Bryan Lochman

Tuesday, October 23
Topic: Changing PA Government
Guests: Rep. Josh Shapiro, Majority Chair, Speaker's Commission on Legislative Reform
Rep. David Steil, Minority Chair, Speaker's Commission on Legislative Reform

Here are my rough notes from the online broadcast of the show. I am trained neither as a journalist nor as a transcriptionist so “rough” is a kind adjective to use. Also, I apologize in advance for any errors or misinterpretations.

Questions from the host, Bryan Lochman (Q) as well as callers ( C) are included.

Q: house rejected a bill with some ethics reforms:

JS: You have to look at the record. Commission advanced more than 30 reforms adopted by house. Open Records bill delayed until next Monday to file and read amendments. Some of the other issues there are certainly debatable issues.

Q: any roadblocks

DS: There have been some amendments. Ultimately it did pass. With regard to constitutional convention, being considered by bipartisan reform caucus.

Q: open records

JS: not a member of the state govt comm., many of the amendments attached not productive. Several amendments I will file to strengthen the bill. Very important to look at the core issue. Currently citizen must prove why they should have access, new bill flips presumption, considered open unless agency can prove why it should be shielded. Will help lead the fight to improve bill

DS: already 50 amendments filed

Q: how does this work?

JS: amendments change what’s in bill, in the case of Rep. Joseph’s amendment that went in 24-0, others are more troublesome. In the process of addressing and fixing the bill. Groups opposed to the bill, there is some posturing going on. Have agreement on flipping presumptions, and other issues. There will be a lengthy and spirited floor debate. As discouraging as that long debate will be it is the reform process that lets it happen, encourages involvement of all in house

Q: reforms and then chairman of committee can change bill?

DS: any member has the right to amend a bill, different parts of the state, different district, representing constituents, then floor debate over amendments

Q: people worried that leadership not constituents drives action

DS: cannot recall a single instance when people voted against the interests of their district

Q: Dwight Evans proposal to study state constitution, voted down

JS: voted in favor of Evans proposal. This session is really a session where we have an opportunity to change, reform commission, significant burden and responsibility to change the way the state does his business. If we fail to reform this session I will be at the head of the pack for a constitutional convention. It is consistent with my view that it is too soon to call convention but a commission to study the constitution and if we need convention. Other reforms in the works, 10% spending cut to rein in legislative costs, etc.

DS: voted against the proposal. Agree always worthwhile to study. Make up of committee not balanced. Didn’t provide for commission to come up with means to amend constitution.

C: sunshine act, senate passed an amendment raising fine, now in house committee

DS: not familiar with that particular bill. Several bills on related issues. Senate passed legislation, house passing, then conference committee to come up with [missed this]

JS: not familiar with that bill

C: open records, [makes disparaging comments on the legislature]

JS: working on reform, more work to be done

C: 6 casinos up and running, open 24/7, free booze, comping system, bill HB 783 make gaming operators mail patrons monthly statements

DS: Rep. Clymer’s bill, passed house last year, did not pass in senate. Back this year, in house committee. Thinks it is problematic but doesn’t have a problem with it.

JS: not sure what the upside would be, could cost a lot for the state to mail statements

DS: As a Republican I people have to take responsibility for their own actions

JS: Democrats believe that too.

Q: size of the legislature, bill to cut the size

JS: bigger issue is cost of the legislature. When ask people why to cut size they say it costs too much. Compare to other full time legislatures, more expensive, in 3rd place nationally. We recognize need to reduce cost of legislature. Recommend immediate 10% cut, look at bipartisan staffing, purchasing agreements, etc.

DS: Compare our size to number of people we represent, we are 14th. Rural areas very difficult to represent if larger districts, house represent 60K, senate over 200K

Q: Bill to cut size of legislature, only chairwoman Rep. Josephs can release bill to house

DS: chair can control committee’s agenda, probably 80-100 bills before a committee. Chairs must take up bills with most need and urgency. There is a process for a committee to discharge responsibility of bill.

JS: Rep. Josephs has committed to holding hearings on that issue.

Q: looking at power of chair

DS: believe in automatic calendar, every bill must be considered at some point

JS: Dave and I have both voted for term limits for chairmen, healthy to have new leadership.

C: redistricting a bad idea, urban caucuses have too much power now. Senator Rose’s proposal on property taxes?

DS: there are a lot of efforts going on with tax reform, going to see some of those bills coming out of committee tomorrow. Bucks co members put together a website where people can leave suggestions on property tax reform

JS: I am on the finance committee and so will see the bill, have submitted measures to voters and voted down. Expanded prop tax rebate, need to do more

DS: There is a belief that act I failed. Did not. 6 parts to bill, only 1 failed

Q: measure defeated on how house ethics committee constituted

JS: reform commission looked at house ethics committee, policing arm for the house. Believe there needed to be some additional independence, under current rules house leaders get to appoint members, proposed that leaders appoint some , some chosen by house, wanted 2 hours of ethics education, compilation of ethics handbook. Unfortunately independence from leadership stripped out (gentlemen from philly took out).

Q: Kate Harper opposed naming members of ethics committee at random from people interested [video] is her analogy [that if the Phillies hired players based on who was interested her mother would be on the team] correct , end up with unqualified people?

DS: disagrees with baseball analogy. By selecting members at random from those interested, picking people interested, they would be good

C: reform process always turns out to be window dressing but really no changes, 2 hour ethics requirement, can’t teach someone how to be ethical in 2 hours you either are or aren’t. vote out all judges as another message

DS: a number of changes made in ethics resolution. One piece of the resolution, how committee made up, didn’t make it but rest of it passed. Made a number of changes, particularly important that ethics committee has a responsibility to come up with ethics training

Q: what can be taught in 2 hours

JS: not there to teach someone to be ethical. Lots of changes to rules, teach people about those issues. Reforms more than window dressing. Ethics bill – voted against it, not good enough, even though it was my bill. Made great progress but more to do.

C: my concern is clean air act, has asthma, doesn’t like smoke in restaurants

JS: senate passed smoking ban bill that had too many exceptions and holes in it. The house after several days of debate passed a bill with virtually no exceptions. Now goes to conference committee where differences ironed out.

C: sportsmen, takes 2 daughters hunting and fishing, straighten out game commission, take a look at their records and ethical conduct, unfair what they have done to the sportsmen

DS: you are talking to two suburban legislatures. Never had a phone call regarding game commission but have read a little about it. Committee on game commission very active

C: bonuses given in 4 caucuses. He and his wife work 4 jobs, kids in college

JS: apparently at the end of the last cycle bonuses given out by all four caucuses, theoretically to reward good work. Believe it’s an issue for 2 reasons, size of bonuses, agree with caller, too much. Second issue, subject of Attorney General’s investigation, looking into whether bonuses proper, for govt work or political work, leave that to AG. House Democratic caucus has outlawed practice of bonuses. Senate banned bonuses except for performance based with public criteria.

C: if someone is working for a member or caucus is line between legislative and campaign work clear?

DS; campaign work clearly cannot be done on government time, no work on behalf of caucus should be for campaign

C: how much do you pay for health care and retirement?

DS: has been a lot of discussion on compensation package for legislators, seems to be not competitive with private sector. Need to look at entire package. Some portions may not be competitive with private sector, some may go beyond, salaries and benefits. In terms of health care, does have co-pays and set asides. It is a pretty good plan.

JS: it is something we are looking at, speaker says he will create a commission to look at. I voted against pay raise and didn’t take it.

C: reform commission, what can be done to inform citizenry what local reps and senators do each day. Would like to be more informed but with work and kids has limited time, can’t watch PCN each night. Wants to be more informed through newspapers, etc.

JS: commend you for your interest. My responsibility as a legislator not only to come to H’burg and do job but must also keep constituents informed, held more than 30 townhall meetings last year. Now more time before voting so people can go to website and see what bills are up, now members vote, etc. reach out to local reps, call or write.

DS: access to internet important. We post what we do, committee meetings schedules, and so on. Important to be in touch with legislator. I send out weekly emails.

Q: redistricting

DS: one of the primary issues bipartisan reform caucus, with Rep. Mandarino, looking at that issue, probably will require a constitutional amendment, but process doesn’t require an amendment, just a commission.

C: skeptical of leadership of reform commission, and of Steil’s sincerity, don’t think some of these reps have been very genuine

DS: not sure what caller’s objection was to. Whole reform process began with [missed this] in 2005, in 1996 bipartisan group started some of the reforms that are finally begin put in place now.

JS: Ten years ago PCN wasn’t doing a call in show on reform but DS was in the trenches, we are benefiting from his work now.

C: two things disturb me. Debate on 447 resolution. At least one member less than willing to let it go through. Shapiro, you were interrogated by rep from Lehigh valley. Does the bipartisanship fall down in some debates and discussions

JS: I do remember the interrogation by Rep. Reichley, a skilled debater and legislator, he was off the mark and I don’t take it personally. He believed that members of the house shouldn’t have ethics education. He only got 40 votes on this. It is evident that we have a speaker elected with D and R votes, that DS and I co-chairs and adopted many of the reform commission’s recommendations adopted show that there is much bipartisanship.

DS: 447 resolution asking congress to override president’s veto on children’s health.

Q: what is the point of that

DS: to express our opinion to federal congress. Important that we express our will to congress.

C: act 1, DS said only 1 part was voted down.

DS: The other 5 parts were not on the ballot. Only part on the ballot was if voters wanted to shift property tax to local tax. All the other parts in place.

C: Rendell administration lawsuit to prevent implementation on state ethics commission on his cabinet secretaries [call lost]

JS: familiar with fact that some senators had objections to some cabinets but were later confirmed.

Q: redistricting and referendum

DS: some states have initiative and referendum, I am not a great supporter of this. We live in a representative democracy. With I&R no longer a republic

JS: don’t have a problem with I&R itself but does have a problem with how it played out in California. If there is a fiscal impact or understanding there must be an understanding of what it will mean

C: when can we shrink legislature. It’s too big. Too expensive

JS: We are too expensive. Have a 13 point plan to cut money from legislative spending.

DS: we voted and decided to cut expense not size.

C: eliminate incentive of poor govt, special interst groups, limit individual contributions

JS: I agree. We need contribution limits in PA. If someone gave me a million dollars there would be nothing illegal bout it. I wants to have same limits as federal govt. My legis would also increase disclosure, who gives and how much

DS: I agree. Money is a huge issue in campaigns and why we don’t have trust of the people. I won’t accept pac contributions.

C: [finish question] spouses of state cabinet secretaries work for organizations that get state monies

DS: can’t comment because administration has not provided any information on it.

Q: where does the speakers commission on reform go from here

JS: we exist and serve at wish of speaker. Stand ready to serve if there are more areas speakers wants us to look at. On the books until the end of this session