Should Pa. governors and lieutenant governors run on the same ticket? | Pro/Con

In Pennsylvania, as in roughly half the states of the union, voters pick their lieutenant governor — the second-in-command, who is also president of the Senate and chair of the Board of Pardons. Specifically, voters pick a lieutenant governor in the spring primary, and the winners are added to the ticket of their party’s pick for governor.

Some lawmakers would like to change that.

In the Pennsylvania legislature, a bipartisan bill has circulated for years that proposes adding a constitutional amendment that lets gubernatorial candidates pick their own lieutenant governors, who both run on the same ticket.

Proponents of the bill argue that the change will avoid the rocky relationships that have marked some partnerships in the past, while detractors want to keep giving voters the final say.

We asked two state senators to make their case: Should Pennsylvania governors be able to pick their lieutenants?

By David Argall

Remember when the relationship between Lt. Gov. Mike Stack and Gov. Tom Wolf was so bad they admitted they didn’t speak to each other for weeks at a time? That was an embarrassing waste of taxpayer dollars — and the reason why I have introduced Senate Bill 106 to overhaul how we select lieutenant governors in the future.

Currently, the nominees for governor and lieutenant governor are elected separately. My constitutional amendment would permit the nominee for governor to select their running mate, similar to how our presidential candidates select their choice for vice president. The voters would make the final choice in November, voting for both these positions at the same time, on the same ticket.

Some Pennsylvania governors have worked very well with their lieutenant governors, assigning important tasks to be accomplished. Lt. Gov. Mark Singel and Gov. Bob Casey worked together as an effective team, despite a few notable policy differences. Lt. Govs. Bill Scranton, Mark Schweiker, and Jim Cawley have also been active and involved members of the governor’s team, leading the administration’s efforts on many important issues.

Other governors have ignored — or worse — their No. 2 officials, with the end result that considerable amounts of taxpayer dollars are wasted on an office with few, if any, responsibilities.

A leadership team can’t be separated into two warring factions that ignore each other. My son’s old Scout troop didn’t operate like that. My daughter’s soccer team couldn’t have won any games with that kind of leadership. My wife’s family farm would never have survived under that kind of an ineffective, inefficient, wasteful arrangement.

“A leadership team can’t be separated into two warring factions that ignore each other.”

Conflict between a governor and a lieutenant governor has nothing to do with being a Republican or a Democrat or an independent. This public bickering has been highly embarrassing for our state and is no way to efficiently run the executive branch of our state government.

Lt. Gov./acting Gov. Mark Singel was one of a bipartisan group of three former lieutenant governors who testified before the Senate in support of my constitutional amendment. Former Republican Lt. Govs. Jim Cawley, who served with Gov. Tom Corbett, and Robert Jubelirer, who served with Gov. Mark Schweiker, shared similar comments.

Additionally, this bill was supported by a former chairman of the Pennsylvania Republican State Committee, Alan Novak, a former chairman of the Pennsylvania Democratic State Committee, T.J. Rooney, and is cosponsored by the current vice chairman of the Pennsylvania Democratic State Committee, my friend and state senator from Philadelphia, Sharif Street.

Regardless of their political views, all these former and current officials supported this legislation due to its ability to reduce conflict and save taxpayer dollars in our government. Imagine that, a bipartisan agreement, even in today’s hyper-partisan climate!

» READ MORE: Behind the Stack-Wolf split

All constitutional amendments must be approved in two consecutive two-year legislative sessions and then approved by the voters via a ballot initiative to take effect. The bill has received overwhelming, bipartisan support in the Senate, with votes of 43-4 and 46-2. With its passage in the House in 2019 and 2021, this issue is almost ready to be presented to Pennsylvania voters for a final decision.

Once given an opportunity, I believe that Pennsylvania voters will strongly support this constitutional amendment. Pennsylvania deserves a team leading the executive branch that works together with a shared vision for the commonwealth, not the kind of embarrassments we have seen too often in Harrisburg.

David Argall is a Pennsylvania state senator representing the 29th District, which covers Berks and Schuylkill Counties.

By Katie Muth

Elections are the one way that you — the voters and taxpayers of Pennsylvania — can make your voices heard and impact the direction of your communities, your counties, and your commonwealth.

Since the 2020 election, voting rights have been under attack nationwide. The influence of corporate special interests and unfounded stories of election fraud have driven partisan politics into the heart of our constitutional rights to free and fair elections.

» READ MORE: Rep. Dwight Evans: Attacks on our democracy didn’t end Jan. 6. We must protect the vote | Opinion

The latest attempt to undermine the voice of Pennsylvania voters is a proposed constitutional amendment (Senate Bill 106) that would allow candidates for governor to choose their running mates for lieutenant governor after the primary election. Currently, Pennsylvanians can vote for a candidate for lieutenant governor as part of the primary election. The winner of the primary election for each political party’s nominee for lieutenant governor is then paired with their respective party’s candidate for governor on the ballot for the general election in November.

The proposed constitutional amendment would eliminate Pennsylvania voters’ ability to vote for lieutenant governor — the second-highest executive office in the commonwealth — and, in essence, enable political parties to handpick a governor’s running mate.

In order to amend the constitution, the General Assembly needs to pass the same legislation in two consecutive legislative sessions, and then it will appear on the ballot for Pennsylvanians to decide on whether it becomes law. Lawmakers who support this measure will argue that ballot questions are a way to “let the people decide.” However, the only proposed constitutional amendments or legislative initiatives brought before either chamber are those supported by the majority party in Harrisburg. Therefore, voters are really only deciding on issues supported by Republican majorities through an often complicated and confusing ballot question that makes it very difficult for voters to understand the actual intent or consequence of the proposed amendment.

I voted against this measure last session and oppose it again this session because I believe that you, the voters, should have a say and a vote on this important office. Political party elitists and deep-pocket donors that enable pay-to-play politics should not have the sole power to select the candidate for the commonwealth’s second-highest office. The lieutenant governor has several important roles, such as serving as the president of the Senate — ensuring the decorum, order, and direction of the Senate Chamber; serving as the chair of the Board of Pardons; chair of the Local Government Advisory Committee; and serving on various boards involving military installations, emergency management, and statewide fire safety. Pennsylvanians deserve to vote for the person they believe can best fulfill this important role.

“I voted against this measure last session and oppose it again this session because I believe that you, the voters, should have a say and a vote on this important office.”

Public servants should be encouraging voters to participate in the election process and to learn about the candidates on the ballot, instead of advancing initiatives that give more power to the political machine and its special interest donors. Pennsylvania has some of the weakest campaign finance laws for state- and local-level offices. Instead of eliminating opportunities for voters to participate in democracy, we should be implementing campaign finance reforms that ensure voters’ voices won’t continue to be overpowered by special interests.

Government has a moral duty to protect and empower its people. As a legislature elected to serve the people, we should work to guarantee that everyone can register to vote and has access to the ballot box. We must also finally end the toxic, corrupt, harmful pay-to-play politics that prioritize corporate profits and harm the hardworking families and people of our commonwealth.

Katie Muth is a Pennsylvania state senator representing the 44th District, which covers Montgomery, Chester, and Berks Counties.