The following is a presentation of the Pennsylvania Public Television Network.

Preliminary figures indicate between 40 and 45% of Pennsylvania's voters went to the polls Tuesday to elect new judges and local government officials, and to approve 4 or 5 referendum questions.

The state legislature is considering some fundamental changes in state banking laws, changes that are pitting small banks against big ones, with both sides saying they're acting in the consumer's best interest.

It looks like Pennsylvania's 47 year old liquor laws are about to be changed, at least four so-called reform proposals have been offered.

And once again, each side says it's doing what's best for the public.

I'm Nancy Johnson and I'm John Dimsdale.

We'll have those and other stories coming up on the people's business.

The Thornburgh administration has nominated three new cabinet level department secretaries for Senate confirmation.

The Department of Revenue has been without a full fledged secretary since Howard Cohen left a year ago.

Robert Blum, who's been acting secretary since, has been nominated to take the job permanently.

The Department of Environmental Resources lost its secretary, Clifford Jones, to the PUC only a couple of weeks ago.

Deputy Secretary Peter Duncan was named acting secretary, and now he, too, has been chosen to make that a full time job.

Over at the Department of Labor and Industry, Barry Stern has been acting secretary since Charles Lieber left to help Pennsylvania adjust to block grants from Washington.

Stern is now in line for permanent secretary.

The Department of Labor and Industry grew out of what was, in the 1800s, the Department of the Factory Inspector.

It has 9000 employees and 350 locations throughout the state, and, according to Barry Stern, affects about ten of the 12 million residents of Pennsylvania.

Labor and industry is responsible for fire and panic law enforcement, unemployment insurance, vocational rehabilitation, and wage laws.

Stern says as part of his efforts, will be directed toward making the department more sensitive to the public.

I would like to see this department continue in the direction that we have been going over the past two and a half years in sensitizing our employees and in sensitizing our regulations to the needs of the general constituency in Pennsylvania.

Stern is 35 years old, the youngest of the nominees, but he doesn't think his age will be a factor in Senate confirmation.

Well, I believe that I've had the past 13 years in public service.

I've worked at the local level in Allegheny County.

I worked in the federal government at the U.S.

Department of Labor, where I was involved in the legislation for many of the laws that Pennsylvania must enforce, and that I have been in this department since the Thornburgh administration has come into office.

So I have the knowledge of the workings of this department.

I have gained the experience of meeting with the industrial community and the labor community in Pennsylvania to work with both of them.

The man tapped by Governor Thornburgh to head the Department of Environmental Resources is no stranger to Harrisburg.

Ten years ago, Peter Duncan became the director of a legislative committee set up to monitor state pollution control programs.

Now 36 years old, Duncan says he wants to make sure the public knows D.E.R is the protector of state land, air and water.

You can get varying opinions on that.

I think some of it positive, some of it negative.

A good example of of negative.

And I think an area where we have to do a better job in the future is on hazardous waste management, solid waste management.

We have to convince the public that we can dispose of solid and hazardous waste in this Commonwealth in a safe manner, that is, in a manner which protects public health and which protects the environment in general.

So far, I don't think we've been able to successfully do that.

On the crucial question of the development and the regulation of coal.

Duncan says he'll find compromises between environmentalists and the coal industry.

While we have to regulate the coal industry, there's a right way to take coal out of the ground and the wrong way.

While we have to fulfill that regulatory function, we don't want to be perceived as an onerous regulatory agency that can't make decisions.

We want to try to have a mutual respect be established between the coal industry and the Commonwealth and the Department of Environmental Resources, and to the extent that we can accomplish that over the next few months, it's what we're going to be one of our goals and objectives.

Is that a statement that environmentalists might worry about?

Well, I, I don't think they should worry about it because our mission is still the same to protect the air, land and water resources of the Commonwealth.

Duncan should have no trouble gaining the necessary votes in the Senate for confirmation.

Before going to the Revenue Department, in 1979, Robert Bloom was a member of the Public Utility Commission, and prior to that was executive secretary to Governor Raymond Shafer.

Bloom says the Revenue Secretary's job falls in line with his experience.

I think that basically it's an administrative position as opposed to policy making.

And I have been around state government now for 15 years, one way or another, and know how government works.

It's different than other businesses, as you know, and I believe that I am an administrator.

I've been here two years in acting, in this job now ten, 11 months, and I'm certain that I know enough about it to handle it.

Bloom says he'd like to see more enforcement power vested in the department, so people and businesses that don't pay their taxes on time will be disadvantaged and either have to shape up or face a heavy penalty.

The Revenue and Labor and Industry secretaries make $51,500 a year.

If confirmed, Peter Duncan will collect 55,000 at D.E.R.

About 2.5 million of the state's 5.5 million eligible voters cast ballots this week for seven statewide judgeships and five ballot questions in the judicial races.

Republicans won five of the seven.

The two Supreme Court vacancies will be filled by Republicans William Hutchinson, who's currently a Schuylkill County legislator, and James McDermott, a common pleas judge from Philadelphia.

Three Republicans will be joining the 15 member Superior Court.

Vincent Cirillo, Stephen McEwen and James Rowley were the top vote getters.

The fourth vacancy is still too close to call between Democrats Donald Win and Richard Desal.

In Commonwealth court, Delaware County Democrat Joseph Ted Doyle narrowly edged out incumbent Republican Madeleine Paladino.

Supreme Court Justice Robert Nix won a second ten year term in his retention election.

Nix is scheduled to become the nation's first black state Supreme Court chief justice in 1984, and Pennsylvanians voted yes on four of the statewide ballot questions.

The one no vote was for question number four.

That would have allowed cost of living increases and pension benefits for widows and widowers of public employees.

Sky high interest rates and competition from newcomers in the borrowing, lending and investment industry are causing banks in Pennsylvania to ask for relief from what many of them see as archaic state laws that restrict their freedom to compete.

The first change that many banks would like to see is one to allow higher interest rate charges on credit card purchases.

Right now, the state limit is 15%, but two banks have announced plans to exceed that rate, citing federal laws, which they say supersede state restrictions.

Attorney General Leroy Zimmerman is looking into the legality of those arguments.

James Smith is vice president of Commonwealth National Bank in Harrisburg.

Commonwealth National is not one of the banks that have announced higher credit card rates.

But Smith says that while banks are now allowed to offer higher interest on deposits, the state is still imposing strict limits on the amount banks can charge to loan money.

And what we're saying is both sides ought to be deregulated or we're going to have trouble and we are having trouble.

And that's why you're having all this concern about usury relief.

There's no question in my mind that credit is drying up.

We see jobs leaving the Commonwealth.

And again, we're right next to the state of Delaware.

In fact, every surrounding state has has deregulated in some fashion.

Senate Majority Leader Robert Jubilelirer is the prime sponsor of a bill to lift the state cap on interest charges for bank loans.

The most onerous situation, and it surely is going to come to Pennsylvania, will be a likeness to what Citibank did in New York State.

They left New York City with their thousands of jobs.

They went to South Dakota and established their operation there.

And now, even not only New York, but in Pennsylvania, they have credit cards coming into New York state and into Pennsylvania, and they charge a fee for them, which we don't allow in Pennsylvania, but they can from South Dakota, and they have increased the rate.

And what's happening is all your Pennsylvania companies are either going to move or get out of the credit card business.

The extreme conditions of the current economy have prompted another banking reform bill that's pitting big and small banks against each other.

This legislation would allow banks to operate statewide.

Currently, banks may only have branches in their home county and contiguous counties.

A group of big city banks are the prime movers of this bill.

To the bigger banks, this is a free market issue.

They want to reduce government regulations that they say hinder market competition.

The banking industry is taking a beating from the money market funds and from the financial service companies like Sears.

Now that's merging with Dean Witter and the Shearson American Express merger.

They've got there.

They've got insurance agents and offices operating under one name all over the country.

Smaller banks in the Commonwealth who have organized into the independent bankers of Pennsylvania, say if this bill passes, big banks will gobble up their smaller brothers, and consumers in small towns will get the short end of the deal.

Well, the thing that will happen is that the money market, center banks, the big city banks will come in and buy up the community banks.

They are more interested in making large loans, million dollar in $10 million loans.

The small community banks are customer oriented.

We're used to making loans for automobiles, for home improvements to the man in the street.

We deal in hundreds of dollars when they deal in millions, and we feel that it will restrict the credit availability of the people of Pennsylvania.

It may eliminate a few banks in Pennsylvania.

Certainly, some of the smaller ones may want to sell out for some purpose.

But in the states that have had expanded banking or statewide banking in the past, such as New York and New Jersey, our closest states.

There have been a reduction, a number of banks, but competition has increased because there have been more branches opened in areas to provide more services and different and better services to more people.

There is no question that there is a lot of funds being taken out of communities in Pennsylvania and placed in money market funds.

This is a competition within the industry today, and one that we will have to learn to live with, and there should be some restrictions put on these funds.

So I would rather deregulate the banks and have them meet the competition of the of the non-regulated financial type industries, rather than try to put regulations on somebody else.

I'm in favor of deregulation and not more regulation.

Most legislators have yet to decide on the statewide banking issue.

Many have voted against the idea in the past, but that was before interest rates hit the upper teens and even low 20s, and before money market funds sucked away millions in savings and loan deposits.

Supporters of statewide banking hope these factors will change a few minds on the House and Senate floors.

Governor Thornburgh plan to turn the state's liquor stores over to private ownership never made it out of the Senate.

That body voted 28 to 18 to table the measure.

The plan calls for private ownership of retail liquor outlets, with the state retaining warehousing.

A liquor licensing board with five members would control location a number of stores and would replace the current liquor Control Board.

Shortly after the Senate vote, two Democratic legislators, Senators Edward Zemprelli and Robert Mello, presented their own plan for revamping the state liquor system.

This calls for retaining the current three member LCB, but would reduce the emergency tax on liquor from 18 to 12%.

Establish a marketing bureau within the liquor system.

Make the Liquor Control Board autonomous.

Set up an agency store system whereby currently unprofitable state stores would be offered to private business people who would receive a percentage of the sales profit and open a limited number of stores until 11 p.m.

six days a week.

This is not the only proposal to change the way the state handles liquor.

Representative Joseph Petrarca is introducing several bills in the House to change the system, one step at a time from within.

But the primary combatants in the fight over state stores are the governor on one side.

Senate Democratic Leader Edward Zemprelli, and Daniel Pennick, chairman of the Liquor Control Board, on the other.

Actually, I am against the proposal of the governors for the simple fact that I believe, in my own opinion, that it would have considerable negative social impact and transition problems, and it create chaos in Pennsylvania, because I think it was a very poor bill.

I do not think that there's any necessary correlation between a change from a state monopoly to the free enterprise system, and an increase in the consumption or sale of alcoholic beverages.

I think what we're basically talking about is better service for the consumer.

Nobody's going to force any community to have an increased number of retail outlets.

And in fact, we will be providing those communities that do not want to have retail outlets with the opportunity to by referendum, prohibit or limit the number within their community.

This is my opinion again.

I think that what he's trying to do is trying to get control of the liquor board.

I'm not going to be there forever.

Neither is anybody else.

But just to take do this, to get control of the liquor board or any other like the Turnpike Commission.

I can't see it.

We are.

If we were doing a bad job, that would be another story.

But we're not.

We're doing a good job for the citizens of Pennsylvania.

Dan Pennick says that he thinks one of the reasons you've come up with this plan is simply to get control of the liquor board and the liquor system, since you can't get him off the board.

Well, this man's term expired in 1978.

He was an appointee of Governor Chaps, by their own admission.

The Senate Democrat leadership says the only reason they will not vote to confirm any qualified person that I send over to fill this vacancy is because they want to hang on to the patronage.

Certainly, I'd like to see a change in the leadership of the Liquor Control Board, those who are committed to the ways of the past and to the abuse of political patronage, don't deserve to be in government.

When the voters have spoken and given my administration a mandate to clean up those kinds of practices.

But that's not the reason we're proposing the change and the reform.

My reading of the public sentiment is this there was a radio talk.

They made a survey out in Pittsburgh here several weeks ago.

Out of 3700 calls.

Only 600 says yes.

Get rid of the state stores they don't like it.

That's a ratio of 4 to 1.

There was a talk show up at the State College over a week or two weeks ago, and it was running 4 to 1 to maintain the system.

Any public opinion poll that's been done since we made our proposal shows an overwhelming preponderance of the people in Pennsylvania in almost every part of the state, favoring an end to an arrogant and bloated state monopoly.

I would say to you that based on the vote of the Senate, which was overwhelming to table the bill, it would be my opinion that to get that bill from the table would be a Herculean task at this time.

And therefore, the result is that private system is out for the time being.

I've said before that this is not a sport for the short winded.

We've had 50 years of the state monopoly system, and this is the first concerted effort that's been mounted in order to put an end to that monopoly, and we're going to stick with it.

Up to now, more groups have opposed Governor Thornburghs plan than have spoken in favor of it.

The strongest opponents are unions, which represents state store employees.

While the governor's office says a number of organizations are talking about support.

So far, only some local chambers of commerce have gone on record in his favor.

The people's business tracked down one other group, which opposes the turnover to private retail liquor outlets, a group with 8000 members in Pennsylvania but which has possibly been overlooked by both sides.

The Women's Christian Temperance Union.

We caught up with members as they prepared to go to their state convention near Scranton.

State President Mrs.

Clarence Darkes says members still pledge total abstinence from alcohol, but if others aren't willing to abstain, the WCTU, you will settle for regulation.

We are definitely in favor of retaining the Liquor Control Board liquor control system as it is, because we are convinced that we need control.

But times have changed since the turn of the century, when Silas Comfort Swallow ran for governor on the prohibition platform.

And Mrs.

Darkes is a realist.

We realize we must make take steps, make regulations so that those who are using alcohol will be protected themselves, and that we will also be protected from them, especially in such matters as the safety on the highway.

Mrs.

Darkes says although the WCTU opposes the governor's plan for the LCB, it's very pleased with his stand against drunken driving.

He is convinced that drunken driving has reached epidemic proportions, so the plan would be to devise more stringent punishment, more stringent regulation for drunken driving.

Maybe I should say regulation rather than punishment, but regulation anyway.

Do you find his stand on the LCB and then on the drunken drivers inconsistent?

Well, in a way it's inconsistent, but I'm not going to say a word about that.

I'm just so glad he's taking the stand for the stricter enforcement.

While legislators continue to argue over the fate of the state's liquor store system, Pennsylvania's taverns continue to operate under some of the country's more unusual liquor laws.

When prohibition died out in 1934, Pennsylvania adopted its own set of liquor laws.

47 years later, the Commonwealth operates under the same guidelines.

It is to regulate and control and not to promote the sale of alcoholic beverages.

That's expression in the preamble.

J Leonard Langan is the newly appointed chief counsel for the LCB.

He says coming out of prohibition, the state's liquor code was a message to the public.

Drinking is legal now, but we won't encourage it.

Consider is the code was written in 1934.

It hasn't been updated.

And we're we're a long way from there.

And I think a lot of the liquor laws are antiquated or out of tune with the times.

Max McCombs is owner of Max's Place near Harrisburg and is president of the Pennsylvania Tavern Association.

He points out one outdated example.

An 18 year old can own a tavern, hold a liquor license and work behind the bar, but hes still underage and can't drink.

The law was first passed that you could own a bar.

They forgot to give the bar owner the right to purchase booze, and being 18 years of age, he he had a point of manager.

He couldn't go into a liquor store and buy liquor for his own place or or pay for beer.

As far as he knows, Langan says the law hasn't changed.

The underage licensing must find someone else to buy liquor for the place of business.

The LCB says no free food for customers.

That would induce patrons to drink.

Food must be sold at a fair cost.

Except such articles of food as the board may authorize and approve.

The LCB says exceptions are peanuts, pretzels, cheese and crackers, potato chips and popcorn.

These snacks can be given away.

The assumption is they don't induce customers to drink.

Well, it's a snack that really doesn't amount to anything and is a very little or nominal value.

And it's been an accompaniment to consuming the alcoholic beverages.

Still, it's hard to imagine saltier snacks that literally induce patrons to call for another round.

The liquor code is full of regulations gone awry.

For instance, it's illegal to advertise the liquor on the outside of the licensed premises.

Inside, windows looking out are fine.

Each display sign can be no larger than 300in, but the number of signs depends on how many a window can hold.

Advertising in the bar is restricted.

No piece of advertising shall exceed the cost of $10.

But if the owner is a preference for cheap posters and displays, tavern may be wallpapered in beer and liquor ads.

Hi, Jeff.

Hi, Nancy.

Yeah, we're having a party tonight.

Can I get two six packs of Bud and one of rolling Rock?

Okay.

Thank you.

Under Pennsylvania law, I'm buying too much beer.

The bartender can legally only sell me 144oz of beer or malt liquor.

That's the equivalent of two 12 ounce, six packs.

But taverns have developed their own way of skirting the problem.

I have a slight problem here, Nancy.

You're going to have to carry two of these out at a time, because you're only allowed to carry 144oz out.

You'll have to come back and get the other one and pay for it then.

Okay, fine.

Thank you.

Okay.

Remember, only 144oz per sale.

That means you can go in and out of the bar as many times as you like, and by as much beer as your car can hold, but only 144oz at a time.

The liquor code says music is okay, but if customers get the urge to dance, forget it.

They can't dance, they can't sing.

Somebody can't pick out a harmonic out of their pocket and start to play all of those things and plain words.

There's just no none of that type of recreation, so to speak.

Well, they may acquire that privilege by purchasing an amusement permit.

The permit allows entertainment, dancing, singing, live bands, and so on.

Price of the permit anywhere from 25 to $120 a year.

License holders are forbidden to sell T-shirts promoting their business, but sponsoring a softball team with the business name in blazoned on jerseys is acceptable.

License holders can buy their wine and liquor and transport it, but beer must be delivered to the premises in licensed trucks.

If the owner needs an emergency supply of a favorite brand, he's not allowed to pick it up.

He can, however, watch anyone else backup his pickup truck and buy all the beer he needs.

And there are laws of contradiction.

Restaurant permits for bars serving no more than Bologna sandwiches.

Hotel permits for hotels that rarely, if ever, accommodate guests, and those with the club license, the moose, the VFW and so on can stay open later, serve on Sunday with no special permit, and pay much less in license fees than their tavern counterparts.

The liquor code restricts the number of bars in any town, but thanks to grandfather clauses and resort area exemptions, Pennsylvania's quota of some 6000 licenses is overshadowed by Pennsylvania's 20,000 establishments.

The Liquor Control Board is caught in the middle.

It admits many laws are crazy or outdated, but the board only enforces regulations.

The legislature makes the rules.

Well, I think that there's a need for modernization of the code, but that will be piecemeal.

It's a continuing process.

These laws were written in 1934, and they were written at that time by a much more stringent public and a lot of different ideas about society.

You know, like some places you can't walk down the street backwards eating a pickle.

Well, this is almost the same thing.

So I think we need some updating and some changes in the laws.

But I think we need a controlled system, which we have today, but operating in a much, much better level and with a lot more common sense.

With the current inflation rate.

The insurance department says the value of many homes can rise by as much as 15 to 25% a year.

Thus, the cost of rebuilding or replacing a home can prove a financial disaster if insurance is outdated.

So the department has published a Consumer's Guide to Homeowners insurance.

It compares rates, and it also explains all the different forms of homeowner's insurance.

There are eight different forms depending on how much coverage you want, and two of the forms are for for renters or condominium owners.

So it goes through that.

It also gives tips on how to save on homeowners insurance, and how to make sure that you're adequately insured.

The guide provides information on replacement costs, deductibles, additional living expenses, and more.

It also takes into account such variables as home construction, location and protection policies.

And it compares premiums.

So it's important to to not quote verbatim from these, but to use these as a as a benchmark.

When you go to your agent or broker.

So you will have a little more understanding the knowledge of what your rate should actually be.

The insurance guide is free of charge.

To receive a copy, send a self-addressed, stamped envelope to Consumers Guide.

Pennsylvania Insurance Department, Harrisburg, 17120.

On Tuesday, a House committee takes its first look at a Senate pass measure to change the way school districts tax their residents.

The measure would allow districts to impose an income tax rather than a property levy.

Because of declining population, Pennsylvania's due to lose two U.S.

Congress seats.

Friday in Harrisburg is the third of three public hearings on how the state should be redistricted.

And on Monday, in a special people's business presentation, Pennsylvanians will get a chance to talk to the governor in a live, hour long calling program that begins at 10:00.

Join us Monday on your local public television station for Call the Governor, and again next week for our regular edition of The People's Business.