Here’s an idea whose time has come.

According to an Associated Press report published Tuesday, Pennsylvania state senators are signaling support for amending the constitution to eliminate some top state government offices, including lieutenant governor and two Supreme Court justices.

Each proposal faces a multiyear path in the Legislature before going to voters in a statewide referendum no sooner than 2015.

Two bills that passed the Senate State Government Committee on Tuesday would affect all three branches of government.

Under the measures:

• The House would shrink from 203 to 153 seats.

• The Senate would shrink from 50 to 45 seats.

• The post of lieutenant governor would be eliminated and the Senate president pro tempore would temporarily succeed a governor who dies or otherwise vacates the post.

• The state Supreme Court would be reduced from seven justices to five.

The proposals make good sense for Pennsylvania, home of the largest and highest-paid General Assembly, particularly as a shrinking population over recent decades has reduced the state’s congressional delegation — although in the past decade the population has stabilized and increased slightly.

On average, each representative serves about 62,000 residents; under the proposed reduction, the average district would grow to 84,000 residents. That’s not an unreasonable increase in the population or geographic size of the districts.

The savings could be substantial — estimates go as high as $23 million a year, taking into account not only the eliminated pay of 50 state representatives, five senators and two judges, but also the expense of their staffs, pensions, travel and per diem, and district offices.

But House Speaker Sam Smith, R-Jefferson, who favors the reductions, says the cash savings is not the only incentive for the change, and perhaps not even the greatest incentive; rather, Smith says the reductions will enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of the legislative body.

He reasons that it’s easier to work about consensus among 153 voices than among 203 — and consensus, not discord, is the crossroads where legislation gets done.

Opponents disagree. They say a smaller assembly could thwart the debate that is vital to the legislative process, and that fewer legislators translates into less opportunity for the public to be heard.

But the ubiquity of technology and social media has streamlined communication between politicians and their electorates. Legislative sessions are televised. Political dialogue is flowing like never before in history.

In addition, online databases and documents enable constituents to help themselves to government forms and information that they traditionally relied on their legislators’ district offices to provide for them.

The time is right for reductions in the state House, Senate and Supreme Court. The change would make for better and less costly government — two objectives all of us could get behind.