Great news: The lame duck is dead, at least in one chamber

Following is a statement on today's decision by Senate leadership not to convene lame-duck session this year:

The Senate's decision not to hold lame-duck session is an important step in the right direction. For at least this year, it gives Pennsylvania citizens the same protection against post-election deal-making that citizens in most states already enjoy. Since the House cannot enact legislation without the Senate, citizens may rest easy after Election Day.

This is an improvement that 82 percent of Pennsylvania voters want, according to a 2007 Keystone Poll. It's good to see that Senate leadership values demonstrating that things really can change for the better in the Capitol.

Questions

* Will House leadership make the same declaration?
* Will House leadership pass legislation amending the Constitution to prohibit lame-duck session permanently?
* Will House leadership pass a law to the same effect until a Constitutional amendment can take effect?
* Where do your legislators stand on this issue?

My answers:

I am against all lame duck sessions.

I would try to amend the Constitution, and the city charter, to prevent the spending of any money in a lame-duck period.

I'm not sure where our state reps stand on this issue. If you do, please inject into the comments.