Corman: Ballot questions will settle debate — should a governor have unilateral control?

For more than 14 months during the COVID-19 pandemic, Governor Wolf has exerted nearly unlimited power to suspend state statutes, spend money without the authorization of the legislature, impose restrictions and close schools and businesses as he saw fit.

No matter how you feel about the actions the governor has taken during the pandemic, it has become painfully clear that there needs to be a shelf life on the amount of time one person and one branch of government can have such extraordinary authority.

Most people agree that a governor should have emergency powers to step in and provide immediate aid in response to a crisis. However, few people I speak with believe those powers should be absolute or open-ended.

That is why lawmakers approved a pair of constitutional amendments to prohibit the extension of an emergency declaration without the consent of the General Assembly, and ensure lawmakers can end an emergency declaration once the danger has passed. Both questions will appear on the ballot for voters on May 18.

Although many Pennsylvanians may see this debate through a partisan lens, it is worthwhile to note that the decision of voters need not be decided on political lines.

In fact, Democrat lawmakers in New York are pursuing a similar approach to limit the emergency powers of their Democrat governor. Republican lawmakers in other states like Ohio and Arkansas have also moved to limit the power of their Republican governors.

That clearly demonstrates that this issue is not about pitting Republicans vs. Democrats. It is about ensuring checks and balances and making sure the voice of the people is not silenced during emergencies just because it’s more convenient for the governor.

It is worth pointing out that this law applies to all future governors, both Republican and Democrat — not just Governor Wolf.

We will not have a Democrat governor forever. I don’t imagine too many liberal voters would line up behind the idea of a future Republican governor controlling their lives in the same way Governor Wolf has controlled ours, but that is exactly the kind of situation they could see less than two years from now if they vote against these amendments.

Unfortunately, as lawmakers work to establish even better systems for managing emergencies, the Wolf Administration is fighting every bit as hard to keep these powers for themselves. They not only used deeply prejudicial language in the wording of ballot questions that voters will decide in May, but they have also lobbed deeply irresponsible false threats of lost federal assistance for the needy.

Let me be as clear as possible: none of the doom and gloom the Wolf Administration is suggesting will ever come to pass, and employing that sort of fearmongering is a completely unwarranted and reprehensible attack on the character of every person voters have sent to Harrisburg to be their voice in government.

No matter what scare tactics the administration employs, and regardless of the roadblocks the governor puts in the way, I am confident the voters will see through this facade and make an informed choice on May 18.

Pennsylvania voters will know that a YES vote on the amendments means protecting lives and livelihoods and limiting the damage government can do during emergencies. I trust they will vote YES to end unilateral control.

This story was originally published May 14, 2021 at 7:00 AM.