There’s ongoing talk in Harrisburg about cutting seats from Pennsylvania’s legislature and judiciary and eliminating the lieutenant governor’s position to cut expenses. In that vein, a Philadelphia journalist has put forth a suggestion most Pennsylvanians would find entirely reasonable, even palatable.

Make the office of Attorney General a nonpolitical appointment of the governor.

That’s the idea put forth by associate editor Joel Mathis of Philadelphia magazine.

Mathis suggests the federal approach: making the office an appointee of the chief executive — the governor — with confirmation from the legislative branch.

That would make the position a little less beholden to electoral politics and more responsive to the law.

Mathis writes there is one solid reason to consider such a change now, and the reason is Kathleen Kane herself.

Indeed, the current attorney general has made a number of controversial and rash decisions, some of which appear to be politically motivated.

When the Philadelphia Inquirer broke the story that Kane, a Democrat, refused to prosecute four Democratic state representatives and a judge when they were video recorded accepting cash and gifts from a lobbyist, she threatened to sue the newspaper. And when Philadelphia District Attorney Seth Williams, another Democrat, criticized her handling of the case, she “double-dog dared” him to take the case, which Williams eventually did, with plans of a grand jury investigation.

Kane further declined to defend the state’s ban on gay marriage.

And earlier this week, following up on a campaign pledge, Kane released a report on an investigation into the prosecution of former Penn State football assistant coach Jerry Sandusky. The case was handled by her predecessor, Gov. Tom Corbett. During her campaign, Kane said she suspected Corbett of foot-dragging to delay the case, but her investigation absolved Corbett of any such political motivations.

Mathis makes the point that Kane is making a name for herself, but it’s not necessarily good for her office, work or political career.

“There was a lot of excitement a couple of years back when she — almost unexpectedly — became attorney general,” Mathis wrote. “But there’s a growing amount of evidence that Kane can’t handle the dual nature of the office as it’s currently arranged: One of the top political jobs in the state, as well as being an impartial purveyor of justice.”

The idea makes infinite sense. There’s wisdom in removing the attorney general from the political front line and buffering the office from politics. The complex and weighty matters routinely processed by the attorney general deserve a full and unfettered focus — and they are not getting that under the politically charged current way of running the office.