Pennsylvania lawmakers haven’t supported the Bonusgate grand jury recommendations 11 months ago promoting a scaled-down state government.

And, from lawmakers’ perspective, there’s a good reason: The recommendations, if implemented, might result in some eventually losing their jobs.

Meanwhile, even if a smaller General Assembly weren’t accomplished, grand jury members also advocated smaller legislative staffs. However, that too would fly in the face of the Keystone State’s longstanding record of bloated government.

State residents tired of what’s been happening — and not happening — in Harrisburg have to be wondering how the commonwealth’s dire budget situation ever is going to be resolved.

But, as lawmakers wrestle with the $4 billion-plus deficit that they must solve as part of the 2011-12 state budget, it’s necessary, although unpalatable from their perspective, that they examine how changes in the Legislature would help resolve the daunting deficit challenge now before them.

Barring an unexpected economic upturn, the challenges regarding a 2011-12 budget will be repeated for the 2012-13 fiscal year and possibly beyond.

The state’s fiscal year runs from July 1 through June 30.

Butler Eagle readers concerned about the financial condition of the state as well as the embedded, consistently uncompromising partisanship in state government probably agree with most of the Bonusgate panel’s suggestions, reported in an article in Sunday’s Butler Eagle, “Savings may be close to home.”

Meanwhile, readers might have been surprised — and dismayed — at the findings of a review of the state government by the Pennsylvania Associated Press Managing Editors organization and the Associated Press. That review reinforced the Bonusgate panel’s conclusions.

Jerry Sterner, who spent two years as the grand jury’s foreman, summed up not only panel members’ viewpoint but also what the editors group and AP found in their study of the size and operations of the state’s 3,000-strong legislative staff.

“The size of the Legislature . . . can be significantly reduced without harming the process,” he said.

Meanwhile, the grand jury, in addition to taking aim at the size of the Legislature and legislative staffs, urged the adoption of related changes.

One topic Sunday’s article didn’t cover was the need for a constitutional convention.

Beyond trimming the Legislature’s size, a fairer and more logical redistricting process should replace what now happens after each national census.

The best interests of citizens have not been served by district lines drawn primarily to benefit the party in power. Redistriciting, or gerrymandering, is done to benefit politicians.

Are any positive changes likely as a result of the grand jury’s recommendations and the findings contained in the editors’ and AP’s review? Probably not.

The Legislature controls whether a constitutional convention will happen, and it has virtually full power over redistricting.

Sterner, a retired plant manager and management consultant from York County, was likewise pessimistic about significant change. He indicated that members of the General Assembly probably would remain in the “time warp” currently strangling the legislative process.

With nothing having been accomplished over the past 11 months regarding the grand jury’s unsolicited suggestions, most lawmakers appear content to ignore every proposal.

Yet the state’s $4 billion-plus budget deficit cries out for a smaller, more efficient, more statesmanlike state government than what has been in place in Harrisburg for decades.

What exists is an unhealthy scenario — and residents should demand change.