The ruckus on Pennsylvania’s Senate floor highlights how bitter state politics have become
Unhappy with election results, court decisions and the governor, Republicans seek to change the rules
.Only 69 votes separated Mr Brewster from Nicole Ziccarelli, his Republican rival. His district spans two counties. Each county counted mail-in-ballots a little differently, with one allowing undated ballots and the other not. Ms Ziccarelli challenged these ballots. Pennsylvania’s supreme court allowed the disputed votes to be counted and the state’s secretary of state certified the results. This did not satisfy the Republicans, who continued to challenge the votes in federal court. When a federal judge upheld the state court’s decision, Ms Ziccarelli dropped her suit and Mr Brewster was at last sworn in on January 13th. “I hate to say this, being a political conservative,” says Joseph DiSarro, a political scientist at Washington & Jefferson College, “but we may have to federalise elections and the rules…take it out of the hands of the states.”
The ruckus on the state Senate floor highlights how bitter state politics has become. Two proposed amendments to the state constitution will add to that bitterness. Republican legislators want to change the way the state judiciary is elected. Some have proposed that judges on the state’s highest courts—the supreme court, commonwealth court and superior court—should be elected in regional districts created by the General Assembly (that is, the legislature). Democrats call this judicial gerrymandering. The districts could be drawn to ensure one party controls a majority of the court seats. This idea has been floating around for several decades, but the recent court decisions related to state and federal election results, which found in favour of Democrats, have given the proposal momentum. Furthermore most of the judges are from in and around Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, so the more rural parts of the state are not being represented, according to the bill’s proponents.
The second proposed amendment would curb the power of the governor, in a way that is reminiscent of how Wisconsin Republicans curtailed the Democratic governor’s power in 2018. The Pennsylvania bill would reduce the governor’s emergency declarations to 21 days from 90 days. Charlie Gerow of Quantum Communications, a Republican political consultancy, says this amendment, in effect, is a referendum on the performance of Mr Wolf. Republicans have called his pandemic shutdowns, as well as a dozen opioid-related emergency declarations, an overreach (though without the shutdowns, the state might have lost even more people than the 19,400 who have died of covid-19). headtopics.com
Mr Fetterman compares what is happening in Pennsylvania to American football. “It would be like if the Steelers lose a game, and then they try to change how many points a touchdown is [six points]. Well, we lost by a touchdown, so we’re gonna change the rules. So now a touchdown is worth only four points.”
Baarack, the sheep with over 30kg of wool, gets a haircut - CNN Video
CNN News, delivered. Select from our newsletters below and enter your email to subscribe.
They better start changing the corrupted GOP,s with honest one Judicial Gerrymandering. When Conservatives don't like election results, they decide to pick the winners for you. 'Limited Gubment' 😂 Threats to US democracy are still clear and present. Pa should be thrown out of the Union until they allow elected officials take their rightful places.
Deplorable! Or should I say... deplorables? Re-establishing democracy