RSS FEEDS
Recent Research
APRIL 30, 2010 | Testimony by NATHAN BENEFIELD
Does Legislative Size Matter?
Testimony of Nathan A. Benefield to the Pennsylvania Senate State Government Committee
In summary, our analysis suggests that a reduction in the size of the Pennsylvania General Assembly could improve the lawmaking process, but only if it includes other, more comprehensive reforms such as those I just outlined. We, at the Commonwealth Foundation, would be pleased to work with you on any of these good government reform me
MARCH 11, 2010 | Policy Brief by NATHAN BENEFIELD, ELIZABETH STELLE
The Case for a Citizen Legislature
The operating cost of the Pennsylvania General Assembly has steadily increased, while Pennsylvania's economy has been stagnant. The Keystone State's burden of state and local taxes is among the heaviest in the country, while it ranks near the bottom in economic growth and freedom. This reality can be addressed by a number of reforms that woul
AUGUST 19, 2008 | Testimony by MATTHEW BROUILLETTE
Reducing the Size of the General Assembly
Testimony before the House State Government Committee, August 19, 2008 Thank you, Chairwoman Josephs, and members of the House State Government Committee for the opportunity to testify today on the issue of reducing the size of the Pennsylvania legislature.My name is Matthew Brouillette and I am a president and CEO the
Recent Blog Posts
JANUARY 26, 2012
Does Pennsylvania Need Fewer Legislators?
A proposal to reduce the Pennsylvania State House from 203 representatives to 153 will be voted on in the coming weeks by the House. The proposal is certainly popular, but is it much ado about nothing?
As Daily News columnist John Baer notes, the reduction wouldn't take effect until after the 2020 redistricting plan goes into effect— at least 10 years from now. This date assumes the proposed constitutional amendment passes both the House and Senate this session, and next legislative session, and is then approved by voters.
The proposal is often sold as cost-savings. At $314 million, the cost of running the legislature is no small matter, but reducing the number of legislators need not reduce costs. The biggest cost in the state legislature is not its 253 members, but its 2,919 staff members, the largest legislative staff in the nation. Indeed, lawmaker salaries are only a bit more than 10 percent of the General Assembly's total cost. And reducing legislative spending need not wait a decade, it can happen in the next budget.
The more important question is whether this is good policy. Our analysis shows almost zero connection between the number of legislators and policy outcomes like spending, taxes, or economic freedom. As we've repeated time and time again, it is unlikely that minimizing the legislature's size without other reforms will improve Harrisburg's spending problem.
posted by NATHAN BENEFIELD | 03:00 PM | 0 comment
AUGUST 11, 2011
Which Government Structure Reforms will Benefit Taxpayers?
This week, the Pennsylvania House State Government Committee held a hearing on bills to reduce the size of the General Assembly (i.e., the number of legislators). While CF did not testify on this particular hearing, we have written on this and related issues in the past.
Earlier this year, I spoke to a Pennsylvania Bar Association Commission on structural reforms to the legislature; that presentation is below.
Our conclusion is that, absent other reforms, simply reducing the number of legislators may not generate cost savings or improve transparency and accountability in government. Nor is there any link between legislative size and policy outcomes: taxes, spending or economic freedom.
However, other substantive reforms, including term limits and the "professionalization" (full-time vs. part-time, salary and benefits, and number of staff) do correlate with policy outcomes.
Pennsylvania Government Structural Reforms
posted by NATHAN BENEFIELD | 05:59 PM | 0 comment
NOVEMBER 1, 2009
Size Isn't Everything
Sen. Dave Argall has introduced another attempt to reduce the size of Pennsylvania's General Assembly.
Pennsylvania is ranked 2nd in the nation for largest state legislator size (totaling 253); 4th in the nation for highest paid legislators ($76,000, base pay per year), and 1st for most expensive operating legislature in the nation.
The proposed bill would eliminate 5 positions in the Senate and 50 positions in the House by 2053. Similar bills to reduce legislators' size have failed to gain support in the past, but Sen. Argall has also proposed extending House term limits from two to four years to gain endorsement.
Advocates for reducing the size of the General Assembly say it will save millions in the Legislature's operating costs. As we've repeated time and time again it is unlikely that minimizing the legislature's size without other reforms will affect Harrisburg's spending problem. Studies have shown it is a state's number of legislative staff that really drives the costs up. Pennsylvania is ranked 2nd in the nation in this area, with over 11.6 staff members per legislator.
States with larger staff sizes per legislature spend more per capita; have higher tax burdens, and less economic freedom. Any reduction in the size of legislature must be coupled with additional reforms, such as limited sessions and limited terms.
posted by KATRINA CURRIE | 04:00 PM | 0 comment
