New effort to reduce state House

Another effort is underway to reduce the size of Pennsylvania’s unwieldy House of Representatives from 203 to 151 members, but this time the ball-carrier is freshman Rep. Valerie Gaydos, R-Allegheny.

During the House’s last two-year session, which ended in 2018, Rep. Jerry Knowles, R-Schuylkill and Carbon, came close to sealing the deal, which he had championed for most of the second decade of the 21st century.

After some political shenanigans torpedoed the bill when it seemed destined for passage, a frustrated Knowles said he was relinquishing the effort to Gaydos, who had been a strong supporter of the legislation even before her election in 2018.

Knowles promised to be a key co-sponsor and help Gaydos in any way he can so she doesn’t have to reinvent the wheel. Among the other 25 co-sponsors are Republican legislators Ryan Mackenzie, R-Lehigh and Berks, and Justin Simmons, R-Northampton and Lehigh, who is not seeking re-election in 2020.

The bill does not affect the 50-member state Senate.

“Pennsylvania has the second-largest state legislature in the country,’’ Gaydos said. “Reducing the number of seats in the House will not only provide a significant cost savings to taxpayers, but also streamline the legislative process and make it easier for lawmakers to reach consensus.’’

With legislators’ base pay topping $90,000 this year, the reduction of 52 lawmakers would save nearly $5 million just on salaries. Once other perks are factored in, such as pensions and other benefits and daily stipends, the savings could approach $15 million annually, according to independent research.

“I believe in smaller government, cutting costs and streamlining services, so I would support this bill on those merits alone,’’ Knowles said. “A smaller House would lead to better discussion, clearer debate and more opportunity for each member to make his or her point. Too often that is lacking with such large numbers.’’

The bill faces a number of obstacles, including the practical matter of legislators in some cases eliminating their jobs. In addition, because such a change would require a state constitutional amendment, identical versions of the bill would need to pass both houses of the General Assembly in back-to-back sessions. Then, voters would have to approve the change in a statewide referendum.

Even if all of this occurs, the change would not take effect until after the 2030 decennial census, because Gaydos’ bill requires the Legislative Reapportionment Committee to establish new district boundaries. There is not enough time for this to happen after the 2020 decennial census.

Some critics believe the reduction will mean less representation, but Gaydos and Knowles disagree. “With the constant improvement and evolution of technology, legislators can respond to constituents more quickly and efficiently than ever and save taxpayers money,’’ Gaydos said.

There is an inside joke among legislators that the person who proposes a member-reduction bill will be the first to lose a seat. This doesn’t faze Gaydos. “This job doesn’t define me,” she said.

Currently, the ideal population of a House district is about 62,600; under Gaydos’ plan, it would rise to about 84,000. This would mean, for example, that Carbon County with a population of about 63,000, which is now self-contained except for Summit Hill borough, would be lumped with one or more contiguous counties.

In trying to prevent this from happening, Gaydos’ bill says that “unless absolutely necessary” no county or municipality would be divided in forming the new districts.