HARRISBURG - Like thieves in the night, legislative leaders conspired, lied, connived and pulled a major political sleight of hand during the past two weeks in a move designed to give Pennsylvania voters fewer ballot-box options. The purpose was to preserve their own power and to ensure that Gov. Tom Ridge's self-perceived juggernaut ride to the White House in the year 2000 is unimpeded.

At issue is a measure intended to discourage, if not outright prevent, independent or third party candidates from running for governor or U.S. Senate next year. It was secretly attached to another bill and approved in a post-midnight legislative session with no debate. It's a matter of political mathematics. Re-election victories for Ridge and incumbent U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter by major double-digit margins should translate into deep "coattails." That means more Republicans are likely to be elected to the state Legislature as a result.

Their ploy, however, may have backfired. Alert public interest groups discovered the maneuver and succeeded in generating public outrage. Thus, Ridge faces a very controversial decision. He can sign the measure into law, veto it, or let it become law without signature. All the choices are politically damning.

It also has made the issue of ballot access a subject of gubernatorial and senatorial election debate in 1998. Ridge's handlers and advisers, however, apparently view next year's election as both a political necessity and an inconvenience in their quest to get him to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., Washington, D.C., three years hence. They also are promoting his image as a political Goliath - someone to be feared because of his war chest of $10 million and growing.

No doubt that war chest has scared off several Democratic political heavyweights. But it apparently hasn't struck fear in the heart of one Marguerite (Peg) Luksik, a diminutive housewife and mother of several, from Johnstown. Luksik is feared by members of the governor's political inner circle. She may not win if she runs next year, but she could wreck Ridge's White House juggernaut. Thus, she is considered to be a political "David."

Thus, the law was secretly drafted and passed to prevent a 5-foot tall, 100-pound (estimated), gray-haired housewife and mother from challenging a 6-foot tall, strapping, dark-haired (although heavy on the Grecian Formula), incumbent governor. Here's why:

Ridge is one of 30 Republican U.S. governors. And there is nothing that makes him stand politically above the crowd. His hot-button issues, such as school choice, simply haven't garnered political favor even in Pennsylvania. A recent USA Today survey indicated 18 possible Republican presidential prospects. They included several GOP governors, retired Gen. Colin Powell and former Vice President Dan Quayle, but no Tom Ridge.

Thus, Ridge must win really big in his expected re-election bid next year. He has to crush and demolish any Democratic challenger to gain national political recognition if he is to be a serious GOP presidential contender in the year 2000. And few doubt that he wants to be.

Democrats will find a candidate, even if he or she is a so-called "sacrificial lamb." That Democrat is likely to be a statewide unknown and probably under-funded for a traditional campaign. And Ridge should have a political cake walk.

Luksik, however, presents a problem. In 1994 she won about 14 percent of the statewide gubernatorial vote. And several sources privately said that confidential polling indicates Luksik could pull 20 percent or more in a three-way race against Ridge and an as-yet-to-be-selected Democrat.

In a three-way, Luksik pulls votes from Ridge. They would mostly likely come from the Christian Coalition, anti-abortionists, anti-public school parents, anti-gambling and other politically right-of-center factions. Luksik might not win such a contest, but she could cut the margins for both Ridge and Specter. Moreover, she could snip the expected GOP political coattails and deflect votes away from Republican legislative candidates.

With the growing public disdain for both Democrats and Republicans, Luksik could win in a three-or-more-way gubernatorial contest, resulting in severe diminution of power for both Democratic and Republican legislative leaders. Thus, Luksik is viewed as a dangerous threat to the political status quo. And that resulted in the secret change to state election laws aimed at preventing Luksik and her ilk from gaining access to next year's ballot. It was done by tripling the required signatures to nominating petitions.

Legislative leaders used a bill written to boost the pay of local election judges, their first raise in 20 years. The anti-third-party provision was added without notice or comment. Thus, even rank-and-file lawmakers were deceived. Fortunately, the minor parties and political independents have only been activated by this legislative ploy.

But what happens if politicians use the same tactics to suspend constitutional rights, such as the requirement of warrants for searches and arrests, or detainment without charge? Such a possibility deserves consideration especially since the politicians were arrogant enough to secretly change the election laws for self-protection.