Once again, control of the White House will likely come down to about 100,000 voters in three or four swing states this November. But the future of Pennsylvania’s state legislature, which is also on the ballot, is expected to be decided by an even narrower set of margins.
After a contentious redistricting process in Harrisburg in 2022, the legislative map for state-level races got a serious shakeup. In November of that year, Democrats won a majority in the House for the first time in 12 years. Albeit, it was a 1-seat majority, in a 203-seat chamber — where the average district holds just 64,000 people on average. Not registered voters, but people.
Experts actually believe that the new map will pose less of a threat to incumbents of both parties on the whole — i.e. there will be fewer competitive seats — than the prior map. Of the 228 seats on the ballot this November (every House member and half the Senate), less than two dozen of those races are considered competitive.
And yet the results of those contests could have far-reaching implications for Philadelphians, deciding the party control of both chambers in Harrisburg. Major legislative efforts on Governor Josh Shapiro’s agenda — including gun regulation, recreational marijuana, and raising the minimum wage to $15 — could all hinge on a few hundred votes in those competitive districts.
So, what’s at stake for Philly in the state’s legislative races this cycle? Here’s what you need to know.
#1: A potential power vacuum for Southeastern PA
The biggest storyline for Philadelphians is what’s being closely watched throughout the state: Can Democrats maintain their control — or even increase their lead — in the PA House?
One reason that matters is the status of Representative Joanna McClinton, who became the first woman, and first Black woman, to be elected to that position after the Democratic takeover two years ago. McClinton represents the 191st District (parts of West and Southwest Philadelphia) and is a young, reform-minded star within the party. One statewide poll recently indicated broad public approval for an agenda that she’s shaped as the head of her caucus. But a resurgent Republican majority could halt that momentum. McClinton would no longer be speaker and a diminished status as minority leader is no guarantee.
Currently, McClinton oversees the House, which directs the purse strings and budgeting process for the entire Commonwealth — a function of state government with everyday consequences for residents in the city. Beyond the speaker though, the chairs of the powerful appropriations committees in each chamber are from Philadelphia: Representative Jordan Harris and Senator Vincent Hughes.
“If you look at the current Democratic leadership in the House, the top of the food chain is predominately from Southeastern PA,” says Jessica Cosmé Platt, a former political strategist and president of Bellevue Public Affairs. “We haven’t seen power coalesce like that [for Philly] for 15 or 20 years, since [former Governor Ed] Rendell.”
As a lifelong Philadelphian, McClinton is also uniquely positioned to work as a liaison between Harrisburg and City Hall, a relationship that’s been fraught at best under speakers of the recent past. Given the current surplus in the state coffers of more than $10 billion, the next few years could result in pivotal resources coming to Philly — or not — depending on whether or not the Dems, and McClinton, don’t stay on top.
Which brings us to …
#2: Gridlock for Shapiro?
It’s an uphill battle for Democrats in the state senate, which has been in GOP control for 31 out of the last 32 years. With only half the seats up for grabs this cycle and with Republicans currently holding a 28-22 advantage, Democrats would essentially have to run the table in every race that’s borderline competitive — including wins in Northeast Philly, Erie, and the Pittsburgh suburbs.
But if Republicans can win both chambers, history suggests that Shapiro could be facing a firewall to block his policies.
That’s what Governor Tom Wolf had to deal with for eight years. In terms of ambitious legislation, it was a forgettable period in state government. Many of Wolf’s campaign promises from 2015 went unfulfilled as a result. His approval ratings tanked. And the public’s trust in the state government waned.
Another red surge in Harrisburg could test the strength of our current governor in ways that we’ve never seen before. Sure, he’s surprisingly popular right now. Shapiro is not a political neophyte, which Wolf was when he took office. But one of the many reasons that Josh Shapiro has been a breath of fresh air in the minds of voters is his capacity for bipartisan deal-making. If Donald Trump were to win the presidential election, on top of a GOP legislature in Harrisburg, the recipe could be there for another obstructionist era in Harrisburg.
#3: How did all the PAC money fare?
According to a report released last week by AdImpact, a political-ad tracking firm, $954 million has already been spent in Pennsylvania on campaign ads, with still a month to go before the election. It’s the largest amount to pour into any one state, in any one cycle, in the history of the country.
Most of that ad spending derives from Super PACs funded by out-of-state billionaires like Michael Bloomberg (the former New York City Mayor) and Kenneth Griffin (a Miami-based hedge fund founder), with the bulk of it being funneled into high-profile federal races — like the Bob Casey-versus-Dave McCormick contest for the U.S. Senate.
However, as we saw in 2022, contests for the Pennsylvania legislature are increasingly a target for spending from special-interest groups too. Spotlight PA recently reported on an advertising push by Pennsylvania-based conservative billionaire Jeff Yass, who is trying to help pick off vulnerable Democrats in districts where Trump performed well in 2016 and 2020:
Multiple mailers seen by Spotlight PA claim vulnerable Democrats voted alongside “Philadelphia liberals,” and thanks to their vote, “it could become easier for the politicians to pardon murders, rapists and child molesters.”
Since Citizens United — the 2010 Supreme Court decision which opened the floodgates of spending by special interest groups in our elections — the Philly area has been no stranger to billionaires’ attempts to influence the vote.
As a general rule of thumb, candidates who spend the most money are more likely to win — although not always. Especially in local races, the track record of outside money (meaning, not directly from the candidates campaigns) is more nebulous. During last year’s mayoral race, candidate Jeff Brown came under scrutiny for receiving support from a dark money PAC based outside of the city. Despite spending millions of dollars to get him elected, Brown finished a distant fifth place in the primary. On the other hand, out-of-town billionaire George Soros successfully poured $1.7 million into the District Attorney’s race in 2017 to help get Larry Krasner elected.
If PAC money can tip the scales of the Pennsylvania House, it will only encourage more spending in future cycles. It remains to be seen what that means for Philadelphia voters.
#5: Bills, bills, bills.
With less than 10 days left on the legislative calendar before Election Day, a number of high-profile pieces of legislation being pushed by Democrats are likely to be kicked to the 2025 session. They include: a bill for strengthening monetary relief for sexual-abuse survivors, a bill to raise the minimum wage to $15, and one that would create new revenue streams for public transportation across the state. With only a one-seat majority for Democrats, those bills face uncertainty at present.
But the November election presents a high-risk opportunity. If Democrats can increase their lead, some of those efforts might sail through the House — and create a dicier road for GOP senators to vote them down. Alternatively, a net loss of just one seat for Democrats could result in some of those proposals being tabled indefinitely.
Maybe no legislative proposal has more riding on the election results than recreational marijuana. Democratic leaders have been publicly advocating for the legalization and taxation of recreational weed since the second Wolf administration. But it’s taken them at least five years to solidify support within their own caucus and to bring along a few Republicans. One advocate for legalization recently told the Citizen that if a bill does not pass this year, the math “could be really precarious” going forward. In addition to the uncertainty over the strength of the Democratic majority in the House, a Republican champion in the state senate is not seeking reelection.
The answer is … turnout
We care a lot about voter turnout here at The Citizen. And it’s safe to say that apathy has been a worrying trend in Philly. A paltry 27 percent of registered voters cast a ballot in last year’s mayoral primary election (and just over 30 percent did so in the general election). Now, another presidential election might be decided by the strength — or lack thereof — of turnout in the most populous city of the largest swing state.
But here’s the thing: Voter turnout challenges exist across Pennsylvania. In fact, a comparison of 2022 and 2024 primary results reveals there was a double-digit dip in turnout for all but one county in Central Pennsylvania. While that could have something to do with the lack of competition at the top of the major party tickets this year, it speaks to the fact that Philly isn’t on an island.
When turnout is low, we all lose. The old adage that “all politics is local” only holds true when elected officials have a reason to be accountable to their constituents. To that end, if Pennsylvania voters can break the turnout record set in 2020, regardless of the election outcomes, it will be a moment to celebrate.
After all, voting is not a God-given right. As author Michael Eric Dyson noted at a recent Citizen event, it’s a necessity to have your own voice, and community, recognized. “Voting is like an on-off switch: If you don’t use the vote, other peoples’ voices get amplified,” Dyson said. “One way or another, you’re being counted.”
