Building Relationships, and a Record of Service
In April, Senator Tim Kearney introduced legislation to reform statutes of limitations for reporting of sexual crimes against both adults and children.
Pennsylvania 26th District State Senator Tim Kearney and his chief of staff Sara McCullough recently met with The Swarthmorean to review results achieved during Kearney’s first eight months in office, and to discuss the political life of a first year senator as a member of the minority (Democratic) party. The former Swarthmore mayor has been active in Harrisburg — he’s sponsored or cosponsored 197 pieces of legislation and secured more than $6 million in state funds for the district — and back home, where he and his staff have responded to more than 750 cases for constituents, conducted 17 community events ranging from a town hall session on gun violence to a mobile tax clinic to a pet expo.
Assisted by 11 legislative, communications, and constituent services staffers at the Capitol and in district offices in Springfield and Upper Darby, Kearney is keeping the plates spinning both in Harrisburg and back home in his district. Excerpts of our talk follow.
The Swarthmorean: What are constituents most interested in talking about?
Tim Kearney: It’s all over the place, but we can divide the constituent calls and office visits — with about 2/3 being personal issues that people need help with, and 1/3 legislative. Our experience is the issues change as the news changes. Most emails are about legislative issues.
Sara McCullough: If people call about legislative issues, they’re generally not just dialing it in but feel really strongly about it.
TK: Our walk-ins are largely seniors looking for direction on 55+ issues. Some people call and make appointments to come in. The majority of my staff is here and we’re doing everything we can to respond in the office and out in the community. At the very beginning, many people expressed reluctance about coming to us because we’re Democrats. We had to make sure everyone understood we didn’t care about party registration or any other demographic when you walked in the door, we’re here to help.
TS: What resources do you have to help constituents?
TK: There are specific state level phone numbers for various government liaisons … we have a liaison who works in every department in the Capitol and their only job is to respond to our questions and requests. Each senator has access to these liaisons. It’s sensible, but slightly annoying too, because citizens should have access to this person. In some ways, we’re helping constituents navigate a challenged state system.
TS: Many observers feel the Pennsylvania legislature is too large. Have you developed an opinion on that matter?
TK: The general consensus is that the Senate [with 50 members] is the right size. It’s hard to say this without sounding self-serving … but the House is 203 people. There are people who believe fervently that we need that many because of constituent services, or districts get too big and reps become unresponsive. There was a constitutional amendment [to reduce the number of legislative districts] that passed, then came back in the second year. [Passage in consecutive sessions is required to change the state constitution.] ... But when it came back the second time, look what happened: it was amended and had to be re-set. And the amendment that they put on it from the House said that the Senate had to be reduced too. It was … very interesting. We’ve learned a lot in the last 8 months.
TS: Is there anything you’ve wanted to do that you’re not going to be able to do? Any disillusionment?
TK: Well, I think the disillusionment is really understanding that you’re completely at the mercy of the majority. That within the Senate itself, because the majority caucus controls the committees, you have the best bill, which means the world to people, and never comes out of committee. If we want to pass something, people bend over backwards to find a Republican to sponsor it. And then you lose credit for it…I think there was just one bill that we passed this year that was from the Democrats.
SM: And the idea [prevails] that, if we don’t have a majority and we’re not going to be able to get changes passed, then what do we need to do to keep the issue alive until we have the political will to get things done?
TK: The classic example: I was the prime sponsor for Senate Bill 540 which eliminates the statute of limitations on sexual abuse [claims.] … It applies not only to children but also applies to adults, because we know that the effects of trauma don’t follow calendars … So what happened was, the House sent over bills which essentially were trying to do the same sort of thing, but theirs was only for kids, and required a constitutional amendment … Our Attorney General, Josh Shapiro, is of the opinion that passage is constitutional. But the Republicans who sat on our bill last year in the Senate now have an out. They can position their move as “doing the right thing” and say “Yeah, we want to help the victims too but we’re going to do it through proper channels, the constitutional amendment.” Ultimately, that serves to delay justice; there’s no guarantee that those amendments will pass, or it could be further delayed by becoming a statewide referendum.
TS: What’s an example of a good collaboration? Or a relationship that helped advance legislation?
TK: Senator Tom Killion and I are co-sponsors on about 20 bills around the pipeline in various ways. The majority of those bills were co-sponsored; we’re on the same page on environmental issues…those are bipartisan to a certain extent. But there are lots of people in his party who are going to vote against them just because of gas money.
TS: Are you and Senator Killion on the same page on pipeline safety?
TK: Yes. There are many pipeline safety bills that are in committee that we would like to see brought to the floor for a vote. There are powerful people in the oil and gas industry, whose primary interests are financial and will push to get the pipeline completed without fully acknowledging the potential risks and dangers to local individuals and families.
TS: What other local issues are on your agenda?
SM: We’re going to have a Senate opioid hearing in early 2020, one on October 3 about fire and emergency response, resources, and costs. What should a modern fire and emergency response look like from a countywide perspective based on dwindling resources and volunteers?
TK: One of the reasons for a Senate hearing is to hear from expert witnesses. I’m very interested in all of the systems like 911 that exist in the firehouses. People now understand that we don’t have the volunteers, and in places like Swarthmore they understand how much it costs to have full time people…
TS: Has your mayoral experience been helpful to you in your Senate Committee work?
TK: Certainly in Local Government. I’m on the Local Government Commission which is bipartisan and bicameral, and the lion’s share of the work that goes through it winds up in committee. Some are are yawn issues like the code for second class counties but it’s all really good stuff, with staff that has been there a long time. The confidence and competence level within the commission is amazing. For example, we worked with them on a bill we introduced which will essentially say that if you have a referendum that passes in a municipality, the referendum can outweigh an antiquated deed restriction.
TS: That sounds germane to Swarthmore.
TK: It comes from a property rights point of view. Pennsylvania is known as a property rights state, so it will be interesting. We talked with a lot of people on both sides of the aisle on what the issue was and how to frame it, how it would help other [communities] besides Swarthmore. We took what we learned, talked to local government people, considered three or four different ways of going, then we introduced the bill and got five or six co-sponsors, which is fine. Then it got referred to committee which is where it is now. Hopefully this fall we’ll actually have a hearing, and get it out of committee and up for a vote.
