Power in the PA House in 2007

==Who will hold the power in Pa. House?==
: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 by James O'Toole, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
The Democratic majority's support for a Republican
speaker was a startling answer to the question of who
would wield the House gavel, but one that raised still
more questions on how power would be exercised in the
closely divided chamber over the next two years.
Overshadowed by the blind-side blow to former Speaker
John Perzel yesterday was the legislators' decision to
defer action on the sometimes arcane but potentially
crucial issue of a new package of House rules. That
deliberation, to be rejoined in the next two months,
is to produce the rules of the road that will
determine both the way the Legislature does business
and the extent to which the new speaker, Dennis O'Brien, can deliver the reform he promised in his brief maiden speech.
"It's inside baseball, but it's vitally important
inside baseball," said Tim Potts, an activist and
former legislative staffer who has campaigned for a
more open process in Harrisburg lawmaking.
The office of speaker is enshrined in the state
Constitution, but that document is relatively terse on
the precise extent of its powers, noting that he or
she will sign bills or resolutions passed by the
General Assembly.
The more substantial powers associated with the role
-- such as selecting committee chairs, calling special
elections, calling on members and ruling on points
raised during House debate -- are delineated in the
House rules, which, while built up over time and
tradition, can be changed by a vote of a majority of
members.
The adoption of those evolving ground rules has rarely
been a matter for intense public attention. The
Legislature's outside and internal critics hope that
will be different in a new session that follows nearly
two years of controversy -- controversy that has now
felled, in one way or another, a series of the caucus
leaders who presided when a spectacularly unpopular
legislative pay raise was enacted then repealed in
2005.
The Senate's two senior Republicans were ousted in
last May's primary. Rep. Mike Veon, the former No. 2
House Democrat, was upset in November. His ally, Rep.
Bill DeWeese, in backing Mr. O'Brien, was forced to
forgo his own ambitions to return to the speaker's
chair, and Mr. Perzel, after seeing his party lose its
majority in November, was finally outmaneuvered in his
bid to cling to the gavel.
Rep. Kathy Manderino, D-Philadelphia, an advocate of
reform within the House Democratic caucus, said she
was cautiously optimistic that yesterday's stunning
developments -- though they themselves were the
product of classic closed-door maneuvering by a
handful of legislative insiders -- would,
paradoxically, be a step toward a more transparent
lawmaking process, one that would give more voice to
rank-and-file members while loosening traditional
control of a handful of caucus leaders.
Mr. O'Brien promised just that as he acknowledged his
unexpected elevation.
"There are new rules that we are going to try to adopt
to make this process move forward in a way that's
credible for the people of Pennsylvania," he said.
Rep. David Steil, of Bucks County, one of the handful
of Republicans who voted for Mr. O'Brien, said he did
so in the hope that it would pave the path toward the
legislative perestroika sought by many members of both
parties.
"I took a chance because I wasn't convinced of the
total support for some of the rules changes we wanted
to make," Mr. Steil told The Associated Press. "I
don't know that we can get to 102 votes without the
support of leadership."
Bruce Ledewitz, a Duquesne University law school
professor who has written on the state Constitution,
decried yesterday's process as an indictment of the
Legislature rather than a step toward change.
"This whole process illustrates perfectly that
politics as usual and the back-room deal are alive in
the Pennsylvania Legislature," he said. "The
politicians in Harrisburg act as if the government
were their private playpen ... it's all deals and
personalities."
Mr. Potts, the legislative critic, tempered his
skepticism with hope.
"There are two possible motives here. The Democrats
finally figured out that if they're going to get
anywhere, if they're going to stay in control in two
years, they're going to have to establish some kind of
track record. The other motive is that this is a pure
vendetta against John Perzel," he said. "We'll find
out which in the next two or three months."
The election of a speaker from the minority party is
unprecedented in Pennsylvania and rare in any
legislative body. Tim Storey, an analyst for the
legislative management program of the National Council
of State Legislatures, said that the phenomenon of a
bipartisan coalition electing a presiding officer was
not unheard of, but that yesterday's events defied the
usual pattern.
"That's a unique fact pattern," he said. "Usually,
it's the other way around. You'll see members of a
minority party uniting with majority party dissidents
to elect a member of the majority."
One of Mr. O'Brien's first acts yesterday was to
appoint a new House parliamentarian favored by
Democratic leaders. Members also said that they
expected majority Democrats to chair House committees,
in contrast to the power-sharing arrangements
reportedly proposed by Mr. Perzel as he bargained to
hold onto the office.
Ms. Manderino, daughter of the powerful former House
Speaker James Manderino, said she hoped that Mr.
O'Brien's election would be a vehicle for reform, but
that she wouldn't be able to reach that conclusion
until she sees how the House organization proceeds.
"The rules ought to be shaped in a way that favors
getting work done in a fair process that all the
members get to vote on," she said. "They shouldn't
favor the majority or the minority."
== == 
* Politics Editor James O'Toole can be reached at jotoole@post-gazette.com or 412-263-1562.
category:news coverage