What Does the Dem Trifecta Mean for PA?

Pennsylvania Democrats enjoyed their first outright trifecta since 1978. It is unlikely that they will lose it anytime soon. 

It is noteworthy that even in a great year for Republicans, such as 2024, they only won one seat in the state Senate and none in the state House. In 2026, Republicans lost three seats in the Senate and eight in the House.  These losses were concentrated in the collar counties around Philadelphia, the Lehigh Valley, and the Pittsburgh suburbs. 

The midterms were a referendum on President Trump and his loyal Republican party.  It is quite likely that a comparable dynamic will play out in 2028. 

However, it is more likely that key demographics that voted for Trump in 2024 will continue to punish the party that unleashed a war of choice on Iran and Stephen Miller’s vision for ICE throughout the country.

Thus, Republicans will fight on what is becoming an increasingly hostile terrain and may extend their losses in the state Senate.  And then Democrats will draw the new maps for the state House and state Senate after the next decennial census. 

It is possible that Republicans will figure out how to change the politics and policies to appeal to an increasingly diverse and educated state. Of course, by that logic, it is possible that Democrats might crack the code of appealing to blue-collar whites who remain the Commonwealth’s largest demographic. 

How might Democrats do that?

Democrats have pledged to increase the minimum wage. Today’s $7.25 has less purchasing power than minimum wage earners had in 1944. Moreover, Pennsylvania has the lowest minimum wage in the mid-Atlantic, lower even than West Virginia’s. Raising the minimum to $15 over several years would raise wages for more than a million workers in the state. This would affect the wages of one in four rural employees.

More than two thirds of Pennsylvanians support an increase in the minimum wage. Studies throughout the country have found that job losses are more than offset by increased purchasing power of poor workers, whose newfound spending would quickly become others’ business. 

The governor’s office argues that increased wages will generate $80 million more in state revenue.  Even critics, such as the Commonwealth Foundation, argue that it would only be $50 million. This would be comparable to line items in the budget such as funding the rebuilding of homes to remove lead from low-income households.

Thus, it is possible that increasing the minimum wage would attract white blue-collar workers to support Democrats. Such support would necessitate a fundamental change in Republican politics or doom them to minority status for a decade or so.

The terrain is more fraught when it comes to the issue of AI data centers. Opposition to data centers is a rare bipartisan perspective, passionately held, by voters. It is unlikely that public opposition to tech companies’ projects will lessen in the coming months and years. Will Democrats sunset the tax breaks given out to AI data centers? 

These are estimated to have cost the commonwealth almost $2 billion in lost revenue from sales tax and other revenue. Of course, the building trades, as well as data companies, strongly support the industry, whose interests would typically prevail. 

A related issue of Democrats’ resolve is whether, or to the extent, they limit the considerable influence from powerful vested interests.  Will they pass legislation that limits political spending by companies or limits their gifts, such as meals, to legislators?  Such bills were introduced in 2026 but did not pass the House.

Democratic spending goals, for education, public transit, and beyond, will quickly require raising revenue.  For decades, Republicans have raised revenue by raising fees and taxes that fall hardest on workers. Will Democrats raise taxes on the rich?

Once Democrats agreed to leave vastly larger sums of revenue off the agenda.  As part of the 2026 budget bill, Democrats agreed to drop out the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI). A 2025 simulation found that it would raise $968,000,000 for the Commonwealth.  To put that in context, that would be about 2.5% of all of the revenue for the state.

A comparable plan by Shapiro, the “Lightning Plan,” would raise considerably less money but return 70% of it to electricity rate payers and spend the balance on weatherization programs.

Democrats have returned to power as a result of harnessing long-term demographic trends and a politics that matches Pennsylvania voters. But voters are in an angry mood, and Democrats will have to seriously address the issues of affordability and corruption – or their trifecta may be shorter than they expect.

John Hinshaw is Professor of History at Lebanon Valley College.