ShareThis Page

Status quo? Try nonpro

| Wednesday, April 25, 2012, 3:46 p.m.


A since-deceased legislator told me in the 1980s that he hoped then-Rep. John Kennedy would be "hit by a Mack truck."

So to say Kennedy was despised would be an understatement.

"I got my brains beat out," Kennedy says, thinking back to his state House tenure (1980-88). "I got my teeth knocked out" by fellow members, including those in his own Republican Party.


Kennedy turned down a state pension. He criticized lawmakers' growing number of perks. And he talked out of school about it to any reporter who would listen.

After his self-imposed term limit took effect, Kennedy went back to the private sector in the railroad industry.

Fast-forward to 2005 and the middle-of-the-night pay grab by lawmakers. Kennedy jumped into the fray again as a reformer and one of those calling for repeal. Under intense public scrutiny and burgeoning anger from the electorate, the Legislature -- in November 2005 -- rolled back the pay hike for themselves and the executive branch. Judges would take the money and run, thanks to a state Supreme Court ruling approving it for the judiciary.

In 2009, Kennedy, seeing little post-pay raise change in the General Assembly, decided enough was enough. He became chairman of Citizens Alliance of Pennsylvania, based in Camp Hill, which is committed to changing the face of the Legislature.

"We have a choice: follow the status quo driven by attorneys and organized labor or move to a nonprofessional Legislature," he says.

Kennedy frequently cites Article II, Section 8, of the Pennsylvania Constitution, which provides that lawmakers receive salary and mileage and "no other compensation whatever." It doesn't allow for Cadillac pensions and health care or state-paid car leases and per diems.

Kennedy's goal through Citizens Alliance is to elect candidates, enough to eventually reach a critical mass in the House and Senate, willing to take the tough steps to scale back the excesses built up over the past 40 years. The goal: 15 senators and 50 House members. By no means a majority, it is, however, enough to demand change. Candidates must be willing to turn down a pension and agree not to make the Legislature a career.

He says 13 more in the Senate and 46 more in the House will help CAP reach its goal. Two senators who Kennedy believes meet CAP's standards are Sen. John Eichelberger, R-Altoona, and Sen. Mike Folmer, R-Lebanon.

Legislators, in lieu of a state-guaranteed pension, should be able to have a 401(k) plan -- the "same as the marketplace, the same as taxpayers," Kennedy says.

"We have a professional Legislature now, professional politicians. I'd like to see a Legislature with payroll producers and employers" committed to improving the business climate, Kennedy said.

You can connect with Kennedy's group at

A column last week might have given the wrong impression about protester Gene Stilp's antics at a Marcellus shale commission meeting.

The column said Stilp called Lt. Gov. Jim Cawley a "prostitute" and crawled under a table rather than exit the room. Stilp crawled under the table -- not to hide, but to get better access to Cawley -- then called him a "prostitute."

This is important to Stilp, the dedicated reformer and prolific litigant.

He says he doesn't hide from anyone.

Having observed Stilp's numerous protests and stunts over the years, there is no doubt about what he's saying.

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.