HARRISBURG -- The day after a special grand jury recommended sweeping changes in the way Pennsylvania's Legislature conducts its business, the state's two candidates for governor said reform will be at the top of their agenda next year.

"It's really time to focus and bring people together on this issue," said Brian Nutt, campaign spokesman for Republican Tom Corbett. "It really comes down to leadership from the governor's office."

Democrat Dan Onorato stressed his efforts as Allegheny County executive, where he led the move that reduced elected row offices from 10 to four.

"This will be a battle, but it's a battle we can win," he said. "We have to strike now. I've never seen a better environment to accomplish these changes than we have right now."

Both camps were commenting on a wide-ranging report issued by the grand jury that investigated the Bonusgate scandal. The grand jury condemned the Legislature as "irretrievably broken" and urged a wide array of reforms to repair a system it said was fraught with corruption and waste.

The grand jury's major ideas for reforming the state Legislature would require action by a constitutional convention, but if such an important step is to be taken in 2011, the assembly has to act soon.

By mid-June, the Legislature needs to pass a measure that would go on the November ballot, so voters can say if they want to hold a special constitutional convention next year, citizen activist Tim Potts said Tuesday.

Both Mr. Corbett and Mr. Onorato said he would support a constitutional convention, limited to specific issues.

But getting legislators to make major changes aimed at limiting their jobs, staffs and pay won't be easy. For example, Mr. Potts, leader of Democracy Rising PA, has been working for months and has gotten only nine of the 253 House and Senate members to support such a referendum bill. He needs a minimum of 102 House members and 26 senators.

While the grand jury's stern, wide-ranging report outlining many shortcomings in the Legislature should generate support for a November referendum, "I'm sure many legislators will ignore it," said Mr. Potts, who used to be a legislative aide. "Much depends on what citizens and the news media do about the report."

The report called for, among other things, reducing the size of the Legislature; increasing terms for representatives from two years to four years; cutting staff and eliminating money held in special accounts to fund the Legislature; eliminating per diem payments for elected officials; and making members of the General Assembly part-time rather than full-time legislators.

Chris Borick, political science professor and director of the Institute of Public Opinion at Muhlenburg College, said few governors have been able to deliver on their promises of reform.

"What happens is governors who talk reform when they are campaigning get into office, and they don't want to go after the Legislature because they need votes to push their agenda," he said. "The question is, when push comes to shove, are they willing to go head to head with the Legislature?"

Another close observer of the Legislature, Matthew Brouillette of the conservative Commonwealth Foundation, said the report is important but shared skepticism that it would bring about positive change anytime soon.

"Legislators hope that they can wear us out by inaction and that we'll finally give up," said Mr. Brouillette.

Mr. Borick said consistent public pressure is needed to push changes. He noted that limited changes occurred after the aborted pay raise attempt in 2005, but then the public lost interest.

"There are pockets of unrest. [Citizens groups] are working hard," he said. "It's an awkward situation. The institution must ultimately reform itself, and that will take consistent and thorough public pressure."

House Democratic spokesman Brett Marcy was critical of the report, saying it "seems to be based largely on the past and incorrect assumptions about the legislative process, rather than an accurate reflection of today's legislative operation."

Senate leaders could vote in June on "new rules of ethical conduct" that would address many issues raised in the report, but those would apply only to the Senate.

Gov. Ed Rendell welcomed the report, but said he doubts if a referendum bill will be passed by mid-June. He said legislators have a lot on their plate in the next few weeks, including resolving the state's $1 billion budget deficit this year; adopting a new spending plan for the year starting July 1; and finding additional funds for transportation.

The issue of a referendum to set up a constitutional convention "could be the first initiative of the new governor," who takes office in January, said Mr. Rendell.

Amendments to the state constitution can be made in two ways. The same bill must be passed in two successive sessions of the assembly and then approved by voters in a referendum; or by a constitutional convention, which would include citizens and elected officials from around the state who discuss issues and recommend changes, which then have to be approved in a referendum.

Two big ideas would need a constitutional change -- increasing a House member's term from two years to four years (senators already serve for four years) and limiting (to some unspecific number) how many terms a lawmaker can serve.

Rep. Jim Christiana, R-Beaver, agreed with the grand jury's call for openness, saying, "We should make public how every single penny is used by state government." He is co-sponsoring House Bill 1880, which would create an online database to track all spending.

Other recommendations could come about either by administrative changes by legislative leaders on their own or by passing a new law.

The grand jury called for eliminating taxpayer-funded political caucuses that Democrats and Republicans each have in the House and Senate. It also recommended eliminating a $200 million "slush fund" legislators keep to pay members during a budget impasse, such as happened in 2009.

The jury also called for an end to "special leadership accounts" that leaders use to reward loyal behavior by the rank-and-file members by funding pet projects; called for annual "full independent audits" of legislative spending, made available to the public; and said each lawmaker should have only one district office instead of several in some cases.

On Tuesday, Mr. Rendell carried out one grand jury recommendation -- eliminating a 35-member unit of "PennDOT legislative specialists."

That unit handled "nothing other than the paperwork received from the elected members of the General Assembly," the grand jury said. "The nature of the work received is, for the most part, routine (driver's) license and (motor vehicle) registration renewals and title work."

The jury said it didn't see why legislators should "serve as intermediaries between their constituents and PennDOT."

Mr. Rendell said he would have disbanded the unit long before but "I didn't know about it." He said the 35 workers would be moved into other, vacant jobs because it wasn't their fault they'd been assigned to that unit.

Spokesman Rich Kirkpatrick said PennDOT spent $2 million a year "processing motor license and vehicle registration transactions brought to us by legislators." In 2008 there were 266,000 such transactions and last year, 246,000, he said, and the unit got 100,000 calls per year from legislative staff.

In a related matter, the grand jury said House Republicans and Democrats also have employees who do nothing but PennDOT-related work for constituents. Eliminating that group would save nearly $900,000 a year in salary and benefits for the 20 GOP employees and 14 Democratic staffers.

The grand jury also recommended elimination of the $168 unvouchered "per diem" payments that legislators get for food and lodging on each business day, on top of their salary (rank-and-file now $78,315 a year, with leaders up to $122,000). The jury also said that legislators should forfeit their pay and per diems for each day the budget is late (beyond July 1).

Looking for more from the Post-Gazette? Join PG+, our members-only web site. You'll get exclusive sports content, opinion, financial information, discounts from retailers and restaurants, and more. Our introduction to PG+ gives you all the details.