Daniel A. Bosh – 4/3/09

This page was last updated on April 12, 2009.

Size of Legislature should stay is [sic] it is; Daniel A. Bosh; Beaver County Times; April 3, 2009.

If you’ve read Mr. Bosh’s letters over the years, you recognize him as a died-in-the-wool leftist. In the 2004 presidential campaign, Mr. Bosh was a Democrat national delegate committed to Dennis Kucinich. Mr. Bosh is a representative of the Steelworkers Pension Trust. There’s nothing wrong with Mr. Bosh representing the USW but it means Mr. Bosh isn’t an impartial observer when it comes to labor union issues.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject letter.

“If the size of the Legislature is reduced, as is advocated in Tuesday’s editorial (‘Down to size’), the size of each legislative district and the number of constituents to be serviced by each legislator must necessarily increase.

“The amount of time and effort spent by legislators campaigning and raising campaign money will also increase. The influence of wealthy special interests will, as a result, increase, causing the influence of the people to decrease.

“Additionally, larger, more populous districts would make running for office a more daunting task for ordinary citizens. We could see a substantial decrease in challenges to incumbents.

“These could be the unintended consequences of such an action. It’s quite possible that the few bucks saved in taxes would not be worth the loss of democracy.”

[RWC] Here’s what I really believe is behind Mr. Bosh’s position. Labor union management already has activists/lobbyists spread throughout the state and has all kinds of member dues to lobby all of our legislators. Cutting the number of legislators would help organizations that don’t have the same financial and manpower resources as labor union management. I believe Mr. Bosh’s opinion is guided by a desire to maintain labor union management’s lobbying advantages.