False Flag Operation?
The Speaker of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives Slams His Gavel and Hits the Road.
Maybe the person best able to preside as Speaker over the sharply divided and highly contentious Pennsylvania House of Representatives lost his election to the House in November by 53 votes out of 33,547 cast.
Todd Stephens was a six-term Republican representing a Democratic-leaning part of Montgomery County, near Philadelphia. The 151st District was reapportioned in 2022. The website utilized by the Pennsylvania Legislative Reapportionment Commission analyzed the district as leaning 61% Democrat to 38% Republican.
Stephens could persuade Democrats to cross-over. He could not have done so by perpetuating a Republican stereotype. He is pro-choice. He affirmed the integrity of our elections. He managed to bridge the political divide. But our state constitution requires that the “House of Representatives shall elect one of its members as Speaker.” Since Stephens is no longer a member, he could not have been chosen anyway.
There are 203 seats in the Pennsylvania House. Eighty members faced no opposition in the November election — even after legislative reapportionment. In only nine districts was the margin of victory 5% or less. Of these nine, only five went against the grain of the district’s analyzed political predisposition. In other words, there is a dearth of House members with experience in winning close elections and even fewer who can successfully appeal to voters to cross-over.
As it presently stands, the House has 101 Republicans, 99 Democrats, and 3 vacancies. Since it takes a majority of the entire House to elect a Speaker, neither party can elect a Speaker without a 102nd vote.
When it convened on January 3, however, the House did manage to elect a Speaker — Mark Rozzi, a six-term heretofore rank-and-file Democrat from Reading. Rozzi was nominated by a Republican, and that nomination was seconded by the whip of the Republican Caucus in the House. He received all 99 Democratic votes and 16 Republican votes — including all those of the Republican leadership.
When he took the rostrum, Rozzi startled the House when he announced that he would no longer caucus with his party and would become independent. “The Commonwealth that is home to Independence Hall will now be home to the Commonwealth’s first independent Speaker of the House,” he said, “I pledge my allegiance to no interest in this building, to no interest in our politics. I pledge my loyalty to the people of the Commonwealth.”
But no “era of good feeling” was suddenly realized. Instead, “acrimony” became the watchword within less than 48 hours. Rozzi did, and has done, little or nothing to distance himself from the Democratic Caucus. He has not changed his party affiliation. The Republican who nominated him has publicly regretted doing so. The Republican majority leader has accused him of breaking pledges — particularly in regard to party affiliation. In a recent podcast, Seth Grove, Appropriations Chair of the Republican Caucus, said that Rozzi, in exchange for votes to make him Speaker, promised Republicans control of the House Calendar — that is, control of what bills will be called up when for a vote.
Regardless of what was said or not said, promised or not promised, the House has undeniably accomplished nothing since electing a Speaker on January 3. The bone stuck in the craw is the failure to agree on the rules by which the House will conduct itself for the next two years. Yielding to the stubborn recalcitrance, Rozzi has adjourned the House until February 27. (You might find his body language interesting as he slams the gavel.) By then, the results will be official from the three special elections to fill the vacancies in the House — vacancies that are for “safe” Democratic districts. At that point, Democrats will have a one-member majority — assuming Rozzi continue to caucus with them.
It is hard for me to tell whether Rozzi is Machiavellian or more dupe than the Republican leadership in all this — or somewhere in between. He seems sincere, but I’m easy. He has formed a “special workgroup” to work with him “to find bipartisan agreement to end the gridlock.” This group is comprised of three Republicans and three Democrats. None of whom had a close election in November. In fact, three were unopposed. Two others ran with no less than a 25-point party advantage. The one exception is Valerie Gaydos, a Republican of Allegheny County. Her district analyzed to have a 1-point advantage for her party. She won by nearly 10 points. Of the workgroup, by her public comments, she appears the most engaged to find a compromise.
Mark Rozz’s district has a 17-point Democratic advantage. He won by nearly 28 points. His pledge to become independent may not have played well back home. But he has a lot at stake. If his flag is a false one, he nonetheless nailed it to the mast. That flag is in the form of a constitutional amendment to benefit survivors of childhood sexual assault. He wanted to get that amendment passed in January so that it could have been placed on the ballot in time for the May primary for final approval by the voters. That will not happen. His disappointment is palpable.
Three days after he became Speaker, he issued a statement which said in part: “I am a survivor of childhood sexual abuse. I know firsthand the trauma that comes with surviving such a vicious attack. I have childhood friends who initially survived their assault only to succumb to the trauma years later and to take their own lives.” He went on to assert that, as long as he is Speaker, the House will consider no other legislation until the General Assembly passes that constitutional amendment.
Between now and February 27, Speaker Rozzi is undertaking what might be called his “Harrisburg is Broken Tour.” He has invited the special workgroup to accompany him. The first events are scheduled in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia. His expressed purpose is “to hear directly from our citizens” and his expressed hope is to develop “a clear idea how to heal the divisiveness in Harrisburg.” In particular, to develop “what a fair set of House Rules should look like and a plan to finally get survivors of sexual assault the justice and truth they so desperately deserve.”
The Speaker seems out of the box. I’m not in a hurry to see him put back in. I’d like to see where he goes on behalf of the “people of the Commonwealth.”
In the Weeds:
Someone once said: “I don’t belong to an organized political party. I’m a Democrat.”
You don’t have to scratch the surface much to see that the Democrats could have won the Speakership with no Republican support on January 3.
After the legislative redistricting, it was predicted by most informed observers had a slim advantage to gain a majority in the House. Why were there three vacant seats on January 3? Not because Democrats hadn’t won those seats.
In the 34th District, Summer Lee ran unopposed. She also successfully ran for election to Congress. She resigned her legislative seat.
In the 35th District, Austin Davis cruised to victory over his Republican opponent. He also successfully ran for lieutenant governor. He too resigned his legislative seat.
In the 32nd District, 85-year-old Anthony DeLuca chose to run for a 20th term. He died in the weeks leading up to the election when it was too late to remove his name from the ballot. Unopposed by a Republican, he won posthumously. By all accounts, Representative DeLuca was a well-regarded member of the House. But the latent ruthless-political-observer in me wonders what unfinished business he hoped yet to accomplish, and why, after redistricting, did he not regard it as time to pass the torch to someone of a younger generation. Especially since that younger someone would have been a Democrat and would have in all likelihood won.
And then there is the 170th District which is in part of Philadelphia County and where Democrats were predicted to have a one-point advantage. Yet no Democrat ran to represent the district.
With three of these seats, Democrats control the House — though just barely. The James Carville wannabes should have seen this coming,
The statewide Democratic organization doesn’t seem capable of the self-discipline necessary to achieve what I suppose it would call the greater good it aims to accomplish.
More in the Weeds:
It seems worthwhile to cite by name, and place, those five members of the Pennsylvania House who swam against the current in gaining their election victories. Most had the advantage of incumbency. The currents varied in strength.
Parke Wentling, now a two-term Republican representing part of Mercer County, won by 3 points in a district where Democrats were analyzed to have a 4-point advantage.
Kathleen Tomlinson, now a two-term Republican representing part of Bucks County, won by 5 points in a district where Democrats were analyzed to have a 10-point advantage.
Joe Emrick, now a seven-term Republican representing part of Northampton County, won by 2 1/2 points in a district were analyzed to have a 1-point advantage.
Craig Williams, now a two-term Republican representing parts of Chester and Delaware Counties, won by 4 1/2 points in a district where Democrats were analyzed to have a 1 1/2-point advantage.
Joe Hogan, a first-term Republican representing part of Bucks County, won by 3 points in a district where Democrats were analyzed to have a 1-point advantage.