It's Time to deflate state's Bloated bureaucracy

There are 253 legislators in Pennsylvania's General Assembly. It is the largest full-time legislature in the United States and the second largest overall. Only New Hampshire's is larger with 424 members.

There are 203 members of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives and 50 members in the state Senate.

Maybe in a bygone era, when communication was fragmented and nowhere nearly as reliable or as pervasive as it is today, we might - and I stress "might" - have made a case for such a large body, but, today? No way. This is a bloated bureaucracy, and someone needs to stick a needle into it to let out the hot air.

After years of debate that ultimately went nowhere, we might - and I stress "might" - be seeing some movement. The state Senate last week approved a resolution to reduce the number of House members from 203 to 151. The House had passed a similar resolution last year, along with a companion measure to reduce the number of senators from 50 to 37. The Senate last week, though, voted only on the House's reduction, not its own.

To reduce the numbers requires a state constitutional amendment. This means that both chambers of the General Assembly must pass the resolution in consecutive legislative sessions (two years apart), and the voters must approve of the change, as well.

There is no question in our mind that if the legislators let us, we'll be happy to take it from there and boot the bloat.

Pennsylvania is the sixth-largest state in population. California, which is three times larger than we are, has just 120 legislators.

Alaska, the largest state in land area and 14 times larger than Pennsylvania, has just 60 legislators; Texas, which is nearly six times larger in area than we are and about twice our size in population, has 181 legislators.

Rank-and-file Pennsylvania legislators make $85,339 a year. Those in leadership positions make more than six figures. Each legislator also gets $159 expenses each day the Legislature is in session or whenever business takes him or her to Harrisburg.

Only California pays its legislators more - $97,197 annually - plus $168 a day for each day the Legislature is in session.

Although Pennsylvania's lawmakers are considered full time, they are scheduled to be in session just 43 days during the first six months of this year. Of course, they will be in Harrisburg on other occasions for committee meetings and other nonsession business.

Many also point to one of the most important functions they perform - constituent service - often done back in their home districts on nonlegislative days.

If there were 65 fewer legislators, as the resolutions in Harrisburg propose, this would save us taxpayers more than $5.5 million a year on salaries alone. Then tack on the savings from the per diem payments to each legislator.

Even if we figure, conservatively, 160 trips to Harrisburg a year for each legislator, this would add up to another $1.7 million a year in savings.

Then, if we add in the benefits, including a super generous pension, which for longest-serving legislators can be hundreds of thousands of dollars a year, and the $20,000 annual expense account for each legislator, here is another $10 million a year in savings.

Add them all up, and we could be looking at savings in the $20 million-a-year range, probably a lot more.

We'll take it. Bring on those constitutional amendment question so we can blast the bloat.

Bruce Frassinelli | tneditor@tnonline.com