INTERVIEW WITH SENATE PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE JOE SCARNATI

By Nate Collins
Pennsylvania Legislative Services

I got involved in it very early on in life. In my mid-twenties I ran for borough council because I thought it needed some new ideas. I served 10 years on Brockway borough council. My family was in business so we had a real desire and concern to make sure the community did well.

The seat was open because John Peterson ran for Congressman (William) Clinger’s seat, who had retired. There was the field of candidates without much political experience. None of the House members ran so there were four of us in 1996 that ran in the primary and I lost. I was just as content going back to the family business. I saw it as an opportunity to help serve my area. We never had anybody from the southern part of the senatorial district serve. I ran again in 2000 and I won.

It is difficult. You don’t make it to three events in one evening. It is a challenge, but not any more than my colleagues in a suburban or urban district who have to go through 50 stoplights to get somewhere. My district initially was part of 10 counties and it is now consolidated to parts of eight counties. It is still the largest district and it is geographically larger than before.

From the get-go I remember going to Senator Jubelirer before I had a committee chairmanship, and I was always bantering to him that wanted to be involved. I don’t want to be a backbencher. If I’m going to be here for three days I want to be doing something. Typically, if you are not a committee chairman and you don’t have issues in front of you, the days can be less than exciting. Senator Jubelirer put me on as Chairman of Labor and Industry, where I served for two years, and then I was appointed as policy chair. With a turnover of the election and the thought of a completely new leadership team, I thought it was something that would do well for the state. I felt we needed someone to pull the Republican Party together. My thought was to be a uniter, and that is what I said when I went around and ran for President Pro Tempore. I think it is the biggest role that I can serve here.

Absolutely. When you are serving as “Joe Senator” you put some blinders on pretty quickly. Not that I still don’t put those blinders on for some issues but I don’t put them on as quickly. You have to listen, and you have to pay attention, and recognize that there’s a broad scope of issues. Whether you are talking Republicans or policy, the state varies. I think being a good leader requires keeping your options open, but never compromising the core values that you bring from your district.

I think it has worked out well with the leadership team that has been put together. It certainly wasn’t planned but it is very well-balanced geographically. It gives all the members a sense of connection with leadership.

Absolutely.

Yes, I do. I was sitting in a Finance Committee meeting last week and I was watching the chairman. It’s a role that is so vitality important. Even now with the structure we have, committee chairmen have much broader latitude. There are days when I look and say it wouldn’t be bad to be a committee chairman to have a certain issue to solely work on it. I wouldn’t trade my job though.

Absolutely, and it is two-edged. At some point it has to provide a blueprint for us to work within for spending because it is all about the spending. I think we need to have it done before we leave this legislative session.

Jobs, without a doubt. We need family-sustaining jobs. I look at the unemployment rate and the numbers and I think they are very misleading. We have a low unemployment rate but we have a lot of seniors who have had to go back to work to pay their bills. We have scores of people who have lost good manufacturing jobs. We have jobs in the service and retail sector which are not the same quality in pay and benefits so I think it is very misleading. You have many people working two jobs. If you take all those factors into consideration and do some math you would find an alarming rate of higher unemployment.

First, it begins with this budget because we have to get spending under control so we don’t need another tax increase and we don’t further hamper our competitiveness as a state. It is a huge philosophical difference between our caucus and the administration. They feel we can tax, spend and borrow our way to prosperity and we say we need to reduce taxes and we need to end government involvement in many of these issues and allow the tax base to expand. Yes, we are working on it beginning with the budget. We worked on it last year with raising the cap on the net operating loss and changing the single sales factor. Those are two issues that the job creating community said they needed. As we work through the budget that is one of the major roles we can play. We can’t postpone the phase-out of the corporate stock and franchise tax. Some people want to postpone the phase-out but that would be a huge tax increase and a huge mistake, and would send a bad signal to the job creators.

I think he gets that but he doesn’t get the spending. He wants to spend well beyond the level we can sustain.

It is an eye opener. I think we all wish we could be a king for a day but it takes a consensus to get things done. It can be difficult to get consensus working within your own caucus, let alone four caucuses. It doesn’t come by chance getting the state budget done. There is a lot of hard work and effort, not only from us but from our staffs. The staffs have spent tireless hours working to forge a consensus.

I would have to say it’s the same as when I ran my businesses. I have a personal level of relationship with members. I spend time reaching out to the caucus keeping people together. The best role I play is that I keep people together, and keep them focused. That can be a very time consuming job.

The increased level of meetings is incredible. Caucus members don’t see me out roaming the halls or out at dinners because it is a very tough schedule. I kid all the time about my pediatrician’s schedule because it’s like I see somebody every fifteen minutes. It is what it is. It shouldn’t have been a surprise but I thought at some point it would level off but it hasn’t.

I think it’s excellent. Dominic [Pileggi] and I have reached out and worked with the House and they work with us. I think that relationship has to continue to develop but it is off to a great start.

Yes, there is a level of trust that has been established and a relationship that’s there. It certainly gives us a leg up.

We have a great relationship. I find that [Minority Leader] Bob Mellow is extremely interested in always wanting to do the right things in keeping the process moving. I can’t speak highly enough of his wanting to work together.

My opinion is that he bit off far more than he can chew or the industry can chew. He put this together without having input from the hospitals or the Medical Society. I find that so egregious because those are the people who are in the trenches. I have tremendous respect for those groups. That being said, we have an interest in making health care affordable and accessible while putting some stability into the system. However, his path and our path are vastly different. I think we need to squeeze out and wring out every ounce of savings that we can, but to put a payroll tax on employers who don’t offer health care because they can’t afford it further exasperates the problem. Small employers can’t take another tax, it’s just not going to work. I question the constitutionality of the whole payroll tax. I don’t think it has ever been upheld before that you can do that.

I support a smoking ban. I supported it long before I got into this office. It has to be across the board. If you are going to have a smoking ban you should have a smoking ban. I will vote for the exemptions but ultimately I have a problem with exemptions.

[I support it] as long as we aren’t hurting our local residents who use it for short travels. But, there are trucks that are running from New York City across our state and the taxpayers of Pennsylvania are subsidizing that industry and I think they have to pick up some of the freight.

It plays into TABOR. If we go down the road with a TABOR bill, whether we do it in statute and/or with a constitutional amendment, to me it’s all about spending. We need to set the example here and put our house in order and once we do that I think we can go to our school districts. I think we need to put a strong backend referendum and spending controls on school budgets. It is not a very glamorous issue but it is about spending. Voters have made it really clear that they don’t want to shift taxes. They know it’s a shift and they are not going to tolerate it.

We passed it out twice since I have been here, once the court threw it out and once the governor reneged on signing it. Unless the governor would agree on something I think it’s an exercise that we don’t need to consume our time. I support it, but there is a reality and I find it very frustrating. It should be part of his Prescription for Pennsylvania.

PLS – Where is your favorite place to eat in Harrisburg?

I will throw everyone off on this one, The Spot, I love hot dogs. I could go down there anytime and have a hot dog. There is also a pizza shop I like, Giuseppe’s, and Brother’s Pizza in Camp Hill. I think Roxy’s has one of the best breakfasts in town.

I couldn’t name just one. The Grand Canyon in Tioga County and what was the Kinzua Bridge. It is still an awesome sight to go and see. I would also say the state parks, which are all beautiful.