ShareThis Page

Pennsylvania lawmakers aim for budget by week's end

| Monday, Dec. 14, 2015, 12:01 a.m.

HARRISBURG — Lawmakers trickled back into the Pennsylvania Capitol for a Sunday evening start on what was shaping up as a new, contentious week, the latest round over how to end the state government's five-month-old budget stalemate.

Pressure to resolve the fight has ratcheted up amid a social services sector increasingly crippled without billions in state aid and mounting borrowing by school districts and counties that could exceed $1 billion soon, if not already.

On Sunday night, Gov. Tom Wolf's office and House leaders said they were still sorting through hundreds of pages of legislation sent by the Senate last week in a weeklong sprint to advance a $30.8 billion budget plan.

House members began their Sunday session meeting behind closed doors.

They tried to stress that they understand the pressure is on them to get a budget passed.

But both Republicans and Democrats, along with Wolf's office, are still raising problems with elements of the Senate legislation that overhaul public pension benefits, smash state control over the sale of wine and seek to advance the cause of charter schools. The last bill it passed — a 100-page education policy and school spending amendment — came up for a vote within moments of it becoming public.

“We know we've got to get a budget passed,” said House Minority Leader Frank Dermody, D-Oakmont, after leaving a meeting with Majority Leader Dave Reed, R-Indiana. “And we're looking forward to getting it done this week.”

The broad outlines of the Senate's spending bill are supported by Wolf and House Democrats. It would be accompanied by a $1.2 billion tax increase, the details of which have not been settled or written into legislation.

The lack of a tax bill from the Senate is a key point of contention for House Republicans, some of whom say a tax increase is not necessary to balance the budget.

“Everyone's anxious to get it done,” said House Rep. Ron Marsico, R-Dauphin County. “Of course, we haven't seen the tax structure from the Senate.”

Wolf's office has sought to put heat on House Speaker Mike Turzai, R-Bradford Woods, and the conservative House Republican majority that has revolted against the Senate's spending and tax plans.

“Right now, they are the obstacle getting in the way of a final budget,” Wolf's press secretary, Jeff Sheridan, said Sunday night.

The plan arrived with a range of provisions that were drawing objections from House Republicans, House Democrats and Wolf's office.

Wolf has demanded a tax increase to deliver a record boost to public school aid — and help wipe out deep education funding cuts in 2011 — while meeting counties' requests for an increase in social services aid and narrowing a long-term budget deficit.

The Senate's budget plan met those goals. But it also brought surprises.

The governor's office said it had insisted that a provision affecting the creation of a federally required state plan for reducing carbon emissions from power plants not appear in a massive spending-related bill. It showed up anyway.

House Democrats were unhappy over provisions that could lead to the rapid growth of charter schools in Philadelphia, with no end to it or ability to review the effectiveness of new charter schools that result. House Republicans complained about proposed cuts in reimbursements to cyber-charter schools.

Meanwhile, the Senate's massive pension bill lacked an independent actuarial note — something that is otherwise required by Pennsylvania law on legislation affecting pension systems.

Another provision raised eyebrows in the education community and left them wondering from where it emerged. It would require the Department of Education to provide online math tutoring to public school students in grades 3-8 and train teachers to promote its use.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.