|
EDUCATION (to top)
The two school districts I represent, Upper Merion and Lower Merion, are among the
best public school systems in the state. I know that it is extremely important to
our community to keep it that way. It is also important to me personally. I am a
product of public schools, as is my wife, Jen. My mother was a public school teacher
for 30 years and Jen was a psychologist for a public school district before deciding
to take a couple of years off to be with our young children. When they are older,
our two children, Brennan and Justin, will attend Roberts Elementary School. Brennan
actually starts in September. I think it is fair to say that I have been steeped
in the culture of public education my entire life.
Jen spent her professional career working with young children, and what she tells
me corresponds with what all of the studies show, namely that early educational
intervention pays off. If you can make a difference in a child’s life between kindergarten
and third grade, the following years largely take care of themselves. That is why
I was proud to strongly support Governor Rendell’s efforts to provide universal
access to pre-school for all of Pennsylvania’s children. The governor and I also
fought for full-day kindergarten and smaller class sizes K-3, as well as full funding
of special education to enable our schools to both comply with federal mandates
and give our special needs children the education and services they need and deserve.
We were successful in obtaining a significant down payment on these early-education
initiatives in the face of fierce opposition, but there is more to do. That is why
I will continue fighting for the improvements to our public schools.
One of the most important battles we are fighting in Harrisburg concerns an effort
by some to mandate something called a “Back-End Referendum” on public schools. History
tells us that this sort of mandatory provision can lead to a dramatic and steady
deterioration of public schools, particularly schools that are currently doing well.
That is why I have been leading the fight against the so-called Back-end Referendum
without exceptions that some are proposing.
Beyond the governor’s proposals, there are a few areas of education where I introduced
my own legislation. The first legislation I introduced after being sworn in as a
freshman legislator was School Construction Reform. I became involved in this because
Upper Merion School District was building a new middle school. The arcane and antiquated
rules of school construction required Upper Merion to destroy their perfectly good
swimming pool only to rebuild it several years hence. I became personally involved
and, working with Senator Connie Williams and the Upper Merion School Board, found
a creative way to save the pool. However, we need to do more. I want to ensure that
school districts have the flexibility to make their own decisions, as local elected
officials, without poorly thought out state rules forcing absurd results.
I also introduced legislation, which passed, increasing the money available for
tutoring programs and raising the eligible age from 9th grade to 12th grade.
Finally, I introduced a bill that makes it easier for school districts to spend
money to make schools LEED Compliant. LEED compliant schools are more environmentally
friendly and energy efficient. They cost a little more to build but can save a great
deal of money over the years in reduced energy costs.
The battle to provide a quality public education to every child in Pennsylvania
is an ongoing one. There are simply some who don’t support public education at all.
Fortunately, we now have a governor who has made a strong, heartfelt commitment
to public schools. I will continue to do all I can to support his vision and to
ensure that Brennan and Justin have the best possible educational opportunities
in the nation.
ENVIRONMENT (to top)
There are few districts in the state where the twin problems of sprawl and traffic
are as acute as they are in the 149th district. As your representative, I have attempted
to be diligent, proactive and creative in addressing these issues.
First, I sit on the Energy and Environmental Resources Committee.
Each time we meet, we discuss, explore and vote on legislation related to protecting
our environment. I was also appointed to be a member of the Governor’s Green Ribbon
Commission on Environmental Priorities. In these two rolls, I have been a strong
advocate for making Pennsylvania a greener state. The need to do this is an urgent
one. Perhaps the most telling statistic is: Pennsylvania is the second slowest growing
state with regard to population in the nation. Yet, we are sixth in the nation in
the percentage of our land lost to development in the last 10 years. This is breathtaking.
I have tried to do a number of things to address this issue. First, I was one of
three original co-sponsors of Governor Rendell’s visionary Growing Greener II
program that provided $625 million of new money to preserve open space,
clean up polluted streams and repair the infrastructure of our state parks. When
some legislators introduced an alternative that would have gutted all of the new
investment in our environment, I led the successful floor fight to see the Governor’s
plan prevail.
I also introduced the "Hybrid Car Act" of 2004. Hybrids are vehicles
that use both gasoline and electricity as propulsion agents. They are cleaner and
far cheaper because they get so many more miles to the gallon by using gasoline
only a small portion of the time they are running. This legislation gained statewide
attention and numerous positive newspaper editorials from all around the Commonwealth.
The legislation requires the state, which owns or leases approximately 40,000 vehicles
for its employees at any given time, to have 25% of its fleet as hybrids within
5 years.
I am pleased to report that pursuant to an agreement with the Department of General
Services and the Department of Environmental Protection, my hybrid car proposal
is now the policy of Pennsylvania. Already, state employees are driving energy-saving
hybrids. Further, the National Governor’s Association has adopted the 25% goal as
their national standard.
I have also introduced comprehensive solar power promotion legislation.
This bill will require the state to employ renewable energy in all new state buildings.
It also creates a 25 million dollar fund to assist people and businesses who wish
to install a solar energy system as well as a one million dollar fund to educate
people about the advantages and availability of solar power. This bill, once passed,
will make Pennsylvania the leading promoter of solar power in the nation.
I also worked to pass Representative Ross's Renewable Portfolio Standards Legislation.
This sounds arcane, but it is very important. Essentially the law requires all energy
companies to produce a certain percentage of the energy they sell from renewable
sources such as solar, wind and geo-thermal. When Governor Rendell signed this into
law last year, we became the first industrial state to have renewable portfolio
standards legislation.
I was a strong supporter and co-sponsor of Representative Bob Freeman's Elm
Street legislation, which will encourage redevelopment of existing
structures rather than new development on pristine lands. I have also supported
creative land-use initiatives, which will do things such as making regional zoning
easier.
One of the major successes we've had was the recently passed Open Space Initiative
in Montgomery County. We the people of Montgomery County voted to pass a $150 million
open space preservation act which will save literally thousands of acres over the
next ten years. I was on the board of directors of that effort, and sent every single
constituent correspondence in support of the open space referendum. I am proud to
say that the people of the 149th district supported open space in greater numbers
than any other district.
POLITICAL REFORM (to top)
MAKING ELECTIONS COUNT
Voters no longer choose their politicians; instead, politicians choose
their voters when they draw the district lines. I have been leading the
fight to take the politics out of redistricting.
Redistricting has become a tool used by legislative leaders to ensure that elections
are never competitive. As you know, the constitution requires that political boundaries
are redrawn every 10 years to reflect population shifts. In recent years, politicians
of both parties have become increasingly blatant about drawing these lines to ensure
that there are as few genuinely competitive districts as possible. As a result,
95 percent of us live in districts where our vote essentially does not count because
those who drew the lines have already decided which party will win. Though gerrymandering
has been a growing problem for centuries, new technology has made it increasingly
effective. Let me explain how this works. Say there are two adjacent legislative
districts, both of which typically divide their vote evenly between the Democratic
and Republican parties. When the next redistricting comes around, the party leadership
of both parties will make a deal to swap precincts so that instead of two 50-50
districts, the new map will have one district that is 70 -30 Republican and the
other that is 70-30 Democratic. People still walk to the polls on election day,
but everyone knows who will win before the first vote is counted.
I have introduced a bill (H.B.1116) which would take the power to draw the map away
from the legislature and ban any consideration of political advantage in redrawing
the lines. A new, multipartisan commission would be created, which would have to
conduct all of its deliberations in public. This bill will eliminate the back-room
deals that draw the lines now. Iowa has actually passed reform similar to my proposal.
As a result, four out of five of Iowa’s congressional districts are competitive.
That is more competitive districts than there are in Pennsylvania, New York and
California combined. That state’s legislative races are similarly competitive. The
powers that be in both parties oppose my bill because it takes power out of their
hands. The only way that reform will ever happen is if there is a public outcry
demanding it.
Congressional District 6
|
House District 172
|
LOBBYIST DISCLOSURE
New efforts already are underway pressing for quick passage of
effective lobbyist disclosure and regulation for Pennsylvania.
Pennsylvania is currently the only state without a law requiring lobbyists to report
how much they spend to influence public policy. I believe that, without expenditure
transparency, the public’s trust in the legislature is eroded. The public has the
right to know who is trying to influence the state’s legislature. I support a proposal
to require any lobbyist or client that the lobbyist represents to report gifts and
expenses which total over $2,500 annually to the State Ethics Committee or Department
of State where they will be made public.
The state Senate maintains a rule requiring lobbyists to register, but there currently
is no mandatory disclosure in the House or executive branch. It is time that we
in the House join the Senate and go further, to restore transparency in government.
Legislation has also been introduced that would prohibit former members of the General
Assembly and key legislative staff officers from lobbying the legislature for at
least two years after they leave office. We should end the practice, known as “revolving
door lobbying,” because former members of the General Assembly who immediately begin
to lobby their former friends and colleagues on behalf of special interests could
be perceived as having undue access and influence with legislators. Current state
law prohibits legislators and high-ranking staff from lobbying the legislature for
one year after they leave office.
The new bill would ensure former lawmakers are out of office for at least one entire
two year legislative session before they can lobby former colleagues. I support
this bill as an important step toward reducing the appearance of impropriety in
the way we do business.
TAKING THE MONEY OUT OF POLITICS
Campaign finance and lobbyist disclosure reform go hand in hand in restoring public
trust.
Pennsylvania is one of five states that does not set limits on individual political
contributions, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. That
means that while you can only give $2,100 to a candidate running for president of
the United States, you could give $100,000 or more to a state legislative or gubernatorial
candidate. This unlimited giving is a huge problem. I have little doubt, based on
what I’ve seen, that interests that give huge contributions have disproportionate
influence and access. However, limits on the amount of giving solve only part of
the problem. I believe that we need to eliminate money from politics entirely, and
that is why I support public financing of campaigns. I spent a good deal of time
over the past year studying the legislative process with legislators from all over
the country. I met representatives and senators from other states, like Maine for
example, which do not allow politicians to accept money from anyone. They receive
a certain amount each cycle for their campaigns and some free TV time and can spend
no more. And while this does cost the taxpayers some money, they save many times
that amount in special interest favors that never become law.
DAYLIN OPPOSES GHOST VOTING BILL
In January 2005, I bucked my party leadership and voted against allowing members
of the House to vote by proxy. Unfortunately, the measure passed and members are
now permitted to go on “Capitol leave” and have someone in their leadership vote
for them. I have never taken what is euphemistically called “floor leave” and ghost
voted. I still believe that what is said during floor debate can make a difference,
and I think legislators should be there to hear the debate before they vote on a
bill. In other states, there has been a growing trend for more accountability in
state government, not less. Lawmakers in New York recently changed their rules to
include a new voting procedure requiring members, not staffers or colleagues, to
vote personally from voting devices at their desks.
DAYLIN FIGHTS TO PRESERVE RIGHT TO VOTE!
Recently, I voted against H.B. 1318 which was designed to make it more difficult
or people to vote, particularly the elderly and minorities. Regrettably, the bill
did pass both the House and Senate, but the good news is that it was vetoed by Governor
Rendell. I have pledged to vote to sustain that veto. We should be encouraging people
to vote, not making it more difficult.
Automatic Calendar
Some states have a procedural mechanism called an “automatic calendar” that guarantees
every bill is considered and voted on.
In Pennsylvania, votes are scheduled at the whim of legislative leaders. Voting
schedules can be determined by whether they agree with a proposal or even when they
like a given legislator.
Implementing an automatic calendar would allow the minority party to have its ideas
and policy initiatives considered. Members would be held more accountable for the
bills they introduced, and since the proposal would be guaranteed a vote, a calendar
may result in better-drafted and reasoned legislation.
Because an automatic calendar forces a vote on all legislation, the General Assembly
would deal with real issues at and fewer mundane issues that dominate the floor
at times, like naming the official state cookie.
I strongly support a rule change that would institute an automatic calendar in Pennsylvania
and bring every issue to a vote.
THE PAPER CHASE
After controversy erupted in Florida over the 2000 presidential election, the Help
America Vote Act mandated that old voting machines be upgraded by this year’s upcoming
primary to ensure every vote is registered and counted. When some local counties
in Pennsylvania replaced outdated lever and punch card voting machines with electronic
systems, it was expected to make the election process smoother and more accurate.
Unfortunately, poor training of election workers and glitches that incorrectly recorded
votes or allowed votes for only one candidate have led to questioning the accuracy
of the new system.
New legislation would ensure that votes are accurately recorded
That is why I support legislation that would require a voter verified paper record
of every vote and a routine random manual audit of 5% of the state’s precincts.
Under this proposal, Pennsylvania would join 26 other states which have paper records
of ballots cast electronically for the purpose of a recount. Having a paper trail
is important since the federal government is requiring all counties to switch to
electronic voting machines. The existence of a paper record would settle disputed
close elections as well as allegations of fraud or hacking into machines. I will
continue working to protect Pennsylvanians’ right to vote, which is a cornerstone
of our democracy.
PRESCRIPTION DRUGS (to
top)
One of my proudest accomplishments is helping to successfully pass prescription
drug reform in Pennsylvania in my first term. We dramatically expanded both eligibility
and benefits for PACE and PACENET, our prescription drug programs for the elderly,
and we did this without raising anyone's taxes a dime.
Essentially, we used the purchasing power of the state to get better deals on the
drugs we buy. We also restructured the state lottery system, which pays for PACE
and PACENET As a result, we added 100,000 people to the eligibility rolls, which
amounted to a 33% increase. We also raised the amount of money a married senior
couple could earn and still qualify for some benefits, increasing from $22,000 to
$31,500 per year.
Another major change we made was to restructure the deductible. Under the old law,
the deductible for PACENET was $500 per year. Under the new law, it is $40 per month.
Therefore, if you, for example, have $100 per month in prescription drug costs,
under the old law you would not have received your first dollar of assistance until
you exhausted your $500 deductible some time in June. Under the new law, you will
get your first dollar of help in January.
I am extremely proud to say that Pennsylvania now has the single most generous prescription
drug program for seniors in the nation. This issue was important to me for many
reasons. I take a prescription cholesterol drug every day. I know what lifesavers
these miracle drugs are, and I am aware of how expensive they are. Whatever else
I can do in my career in government, I will always have a special feeling about
what we were able to accomplish for Pennsylvania's senior citizens.
In my second term we were thrown a bit of a curve ball when the federal government
passed a new prescription drug program known as Medicare Part D. The federal program
is extremely complicated and there are many plans to choose from. The right plan
for you depends on circumstances such as your income, what other insurance you may
have, and what drugs you take. However, we have been working hard to juxtapose Medicare
Part D with PACE and PACENET. Ultimately, we believe an additional 100-150,000 seniors
will be eligible for prescription drugs coverage.
WOMEN’S HEALTH (to top)
Even before I was elected, I knew that I wanted to make women's health issues a
priority. Shortly before I ran for this seat my wife's mother, Alice, died after
a long battle with breast cancer. It was an extremely difficult time for the whole
family and it gave me a new appreciation for the importance of doing everything
we can to ensure that every Pennsylvania woman has access to the health care they
need.
The bill would have provided, for the first time, state funding to allow any woman
of any age to get a free mammogram or cervical cancer screening if they were uninsured
and couldn’t afford it. My bill went through some changes as is typical in the legislative
process. I didn’t get everything I wanted. But ultimately Governor Rendell did sign
into law funding for women aged 40-49 to receive these critical diagnostic screenings.
This new law will not only save lives (reason enough to pleased with its enactment)
but will also save literally billions of dollars. Currently, there are 105,000 uninsured
women between the ages of 40 and 64 in Pennsylvania. A mammogram costs about $100,
treating metastatic breast cancer costs $40-50,000 on average. Therefore, it is
not only immoral, but also penny-wise and pound foolish not to provide access to
this critical early detection technology.
The second major piece of women's health legislation I authored was the "Contraceptive
Equity Act". As it stands now, most health insurance policies that provide prescription
drug coverage of any kind provide coverage for men's reproductive health services
including male contraception, but do not cover female prescription contraception.
This is unfair and results in more unplanned pregnancies. My legislation will bring
Pennsylvania in line with 20 other states in mandating the coverage of prescription
female contraceptive products if the health care plan provides prescription services.
This will end a discriminatory and pernicious relic of days gone by.
I was also the original author and prime-sponsor of the CARE act. This bill would
require that when women go to a hospital as the result of being the victims of sexual
assault, the hospital would be required to let these women know of the availability
of emergency contraceptives, and, if the women so choose, they would be provided
with these contraceptives. This is perhaps the most important victim’s rights legislation
currently pending before the legislature. This medication, which cannot cause an
abortion, but only prevent a pregnancy prior to conception. This will prevent women
from being re-victimized and will reduce the demand for abortions. I will continue
to do all I can to move this legislation forward this year.
In the Prescription Drug section of this website, I discussed the expansion of access
to prescription drugs for older women. That remains an important component of my
women's health agenda.
Finally, I have introduced, each year I have been in office, a House Resolution
honoring working-women. I am the son and husband of working women. I know how hard
it is for them to balance the demands of family and career. My resolution, which
recognizes the contributions they make in our community, has passed the House every
time it has been introduced.
|
|