PAWaterCooler.com

The Super Bowl Saints, Katrina and Corruption
Feel-Good Stories Won’t Rebuild A City

BY CHRIS FREIND
“FREINDLY FIRE”

Off the bat, let’s get a few things straight:

1) New Orleans is a one-of -a-kind city. It should be on everyone’s list to visit at least once.
2) Despite the fact that the Colts will always be Baltimore to me, I am rooting for Indianapolis in the Super Bowl. And not because I am a Manning fan, but due to the nauseating media coverage that if the Saints win the Big Game, that will somehow heal all wounds from Hurricane Katrina.

Gimme a break.

When will people stop living in a fantasy land and speak the truth about what really happened before, during and after Katrina hit? The reality is that, regardless of whether the Saints win, New Orleans is still at risk and will continue to be until the people wake up, and no victorious football team or the infinite number of feel-good puff pieces about NFL players will change that.

People are entitled to their own opinion, but they aren’t entitled to their own set of facts. And here are the facts:

Louisiana in general, and New Orleans in particular, are among the most corrupt places in the country. This is nothing new, and residents have known this for generations. It has become such an ingrained part of the landscape that people have accepted it as a part of life. That’s their choice, but they shouldn’t turn around and expect the rest of the American taxpayers to foot the bill because their corrupt way of life finally caught up with them.

Everyone knows that New Orleans sits in a floodplain, with most of the city below sea level. So in order to protect the Crescent City, a series of levees were constructed. Rather than do the right thing, however, which would have been to follow recommendations designed to protect the city from Category Four or Five hurricanes, many state and city officials thought that diverting levee money to other projects would be a wiser course.

And since much of that funding came from taxpayers in the other 49 states, why not? It’s always a lot more fun to spend OPM— “other people’s money.”

You know kind of worthwhile projects I’m referring to — important ones that put the security of people and property ahead of all else.

Like millions for a Mardi Gras fountain. Fountains have water, and levees are related to water, so who could argue?

Or riverboat gambling schemes. Boats float, so they could just rise right along with hurricane storm surges while people continue to gamble.

Or a host of other projects, like green space, commercial buildings, and….the list goes on. And on, and on.

Because for decades New Orleans dodged the direct-hit hurricane bullet time and again, with storms diverting at the last minute and the city being spared, proper preparations still weren’t made. Many felt they didn’t need them because “God loves New Orleans.” Obvious lessons that should have been learned were simply ignored. Corruption trumped security.

In the aftermath of Katrina, attention shifted from why this wholly avoidable tragedy happened to the horrific response of leaders such as President Bush and New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin.

Coverage of both men’s bumbling was merited, to be sure. But both also had an excuse.

They were incompetent.

Here’s the bottom line. Taxpayers are sick and tired of paying for other people’s mistakes, be they bank bailouts, auto company failures, or cultures of corruption that pad the pockets of the powerful while forsaking everyone else.

And in the larger picture, why should the federal government, which is funded by we the people, have any obligation to rebuild a city constructed in a known flood plain that is regularly visited by hurricanes?

If you want to live there, great. Flood insurance should be mandated. And if it isn’t offered, maybe that’s a clue that the risk outweighs the reward. If that risk is acceptable, fine. But the rest of us shouldn’t have to shoulder the responsibility to be the risk-free safety net for people who choose to live in high-probability disaster areas.

But the icing on the cake is listening to self-serving Louisiana political hacks who get outraged that Washington doesn’t pick up the ENTIRE cost of rebuilding and maintaining New Orleans. To them, I offer Dean Wormer’s legendary advice from “Animal House”— “fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life.”

So if the Saints win the Super Bowl, become “America’s” team in the process, and make everybody feel good, it will only exacerbate the overarching problem that is endemic in this nation: looking the other way and pretending all is well.

Sticking your head in the sand doesn’t change that fact that we will be called upon — again— to pay the bill— again— should New Orleans get slammed by another Katrina.

But given that we’re approaching insolvency as a nation, the safety net of taxpayer dollars may not be there next time.

It’s time the people of New Orleans stop pretending that a Super Bowl solves anything. Fix the problem now, or face the risk of going it alone.

If their city gets leveled— a very real possibility— they will have no one to blame but themselves.

Chris Freind is an independent columnist and investigative reporter whose news site, The Artorius News Bureau, is slated to launch in mid-February. Readers of “Freindly Fire” hail from six continents, thirty countries and all fifty states. Freind also serves as a weekly guest commentator on a Philadelphia-area talk radio show, WCHE, and makes numerous other television and radio appearances. He can be reached at CF@FreindlyFireZone.com

Email Chris Freind, Start the discussion or Share This...

Sen. Anthony Williams’ Racist Remarks Are Disgraceful

By CHRIS FREIND

If you’re wondering why race relations in America haven’t improved at all, look no farther than the recent comments of state Senator Anthony Williams’ concerning the current field of Democratic gubernatorial candidates.

Fueling speculation that Williams, who is black, might throw his hat into the race, the senator ranted that none of the four Democrats was giving any attention to the black community and the issues faced by that constituency.

In other words, since they are all white, they were just catering to Whitey and ignoring everyone else.

Gee, and I thought campaigns were supposed to be color-blind.
Williams is correct that none of the Democrats has workable solutions to the monumental problems we face —black or otherwise. Ironically, it is the Republican platform that holds the key to success for Williams’ people.

But here’s the bigger irony: so-called black leaders like Sen. Williams’ do more to harm their “own people” than any white politician ever could. Despite the majority of black Americans holding Republican, and in many cases conservative, values, their black “leadership” sells them out time and time again by perpetuating policies destined to fail.

A look at Williams’ hometown of Philadelphia gives a startling example.

The city has been under Democratic leadership for sixty years — one-Party rule with no competition. And how has that bastion of leadership fared?

Philadelphia has the nation’s highest rates of murder, violence and poverty. Its educational system is abysmal, with many of the public schools being deathtraps, totally devoid of all learning and where survival is the first—and only— order of the day.

But that’s just the beginning.

The city’s pensions are insolvent. The business climate continues to decline due to the brain drain of our best and brightest. The tax system is so onerous that it ranks as worst in the nation. Its court system has completely imploded. People and businesses continue to flee to more fertile areas.

And the city’s reputation for corruption and pay-to-play is legendary.
So what do people like Sen. Williams do to address these problems? And, by the way, since the city’s population is majority black, these would be the problems facing “his” people.

Here’s the cruel joke. Williams’ actions, not those of The White Man, keep his constituents down and out, ripping hope away from the very people who most need help.

Williams’ solution to the terrible business climate? Raise the city portion of the sales tax by 100 percent and make no payments to the pension plan for two years. Brilliant Anthony! Penalize those who can least afford it (it is undisputed that a sales tax is the most regressive tax) and renege on the promises made to retired workers.

And what about education? Throw huge money at the schools, appease the powerful teachers’ unions, look the other way, and pretend that the results will somehow change. It hasn’t worked in decades, and it never will.

Until we get serious about providing a quality education in a safe learning environment, our students —our future— will continue to be thrown into the world as functional illiterates. And after the last flame of hope is extinguished for these children, they resort to violent crime because they have nothing left to lose.

The cycle simply perpetuates itself. Over and over again.

It is clear that the Democratic Party doesn’t have the answers, because nothing it has tried has worked. The GOP, on the other hand, has the solutions. It just needs a powerful and courageous leader to articulate the message. But leaders in the Republican Party are in short supply.

Up until the 1930’s, the vast majority of blacks were Republican, members of the Party of Lincoln. Why the Party and one of its natural constituencies parted ways is for another column, but there’s no reason that separation has to continue.

Consider:

Who wants and needs school choice more than the black community — people who, more than anyone else, have no choice in their children’s education?

Who advocates tough-on-crime legislation and gun ownership so that neighborhoods can start to thrive again, where children don’t have to sleep on the floor to avoid bullets?

Who is hurt the most by ever-increasing taxes, fees and regulations, and who needs a healthy business climate to attract and keep the good jobs necessary to provide opportunities and sustain families?

What ethnic group more than any other opposes gay marriage?

The answer to these questions is that all Pennsylvanians benefit from these common-sense, free-market answers to our toughest problems. But for those among us who are suffering the most, these Republican-oriented ideas are more than just workable and proven solutions. They are the difference between hope and despair— life and death.

So let me shout it to those in the cheap seats one more time (that’s you, Sen. Williams): quit the race-baiting game and stop being part of the problem. If you truly want to do something for your “people,” then embrace the solutions that will get the job done.

Anything less is just….racism.

Chris Freind is an independent columnist and investigative reporter whose news site, The Artorius News Bureau, is slated to launch in mid-February. Readers of “Freindly Fire” hail from six continents, thirty countries and all fifty states. Freind also serves as a weekly guest commentator on a Philadelphia-area talk radio show, and makes numerous other television and radio appearances. He can be reached at CF@FreindlyFireZone.com

Email Chris Freind, Join the other 2 commenters or Share This...

State Representatives Michele Brooks and Mark Longietti respond to query . . . Senator Robbins and Representative Stevenson do not

Written by Roberta Biros

You all know how much I enjoy musical references, and today I’d like to refer to a great classic by one of my favorite artists . . . Meatloaf. Today’s musical reference is “Two Out of Three Ain’t Bad”. In our case, I have to modify the reference to be “Two Out of Four Ain’t Bad”.

What on earth am I referring to?

In general, the issue is COLAs . . . cost of living adjustments. Our state legislators typically receive an automatic cost of living adjustment on December 1st of each year . . . a gift provided by Act 51 legislation which went into effect in 1995. In December of 2008, the annual COLA was a 2.8% increase in the salaries of legislators, judges, and the Governor. Many of you may recall that last year the issue of pay raises was front page news. At that time, our legislators were quick to talk to local papers in an effort to get some free press, but only SOME of those same legislators were open to discussing the issue with Mercer County’s own political blogger (that’s me). In December of 2008, the legislators representing Mercer County all pledged to ‘give back’ their pay raises. I applauded them all for it. [you can read all of my posts about COLAs HERE]

In mid-November of 2009, it looked as though there would be another automatic pay raise on December 1st. I published a blog about the issue on December 1st and I contacted the legislators representing Mercer County about the issue [read the post HERE]. I was contacted by Representative Mark Longietti (D-7th) that morning. Rep. Longietti explained that the official word from Harrisburg was that there would be NO raise for legislators in 2009-2010. One question still remained, however . . . what did our legislators intend on doing with the 2.8% increase from last year?

Well it has been a month since I sent my original query to Senator Bob Robbins (R-50), Representative Michele Brooks (R-17), Representative Mark Longietti (D-7), and Representative Dick Stevenson (R-8). This year (just like last) I only received responses from SOME of the legislators that represent Mercer County. This year, only half of our legislators were interested in discussing the issue regarding their annual raise with an interested constituent. I suppose you could say that “two out of four ain’t bad”.

I’m a bit confused, though. With people clamoring for a constitutional convention in Pennsylvania in an effort to cut back our state legislature (read HERE and HERE and HERE and HERE) and voters (and ‘Tea Baggers’) seemingly annoyed with lazy incumbents and ‘business as usual’ in Harrisburg, you’d think that our legislators would be interested in staying in touch with interested voters. It appears, however, that if they aren’t getting press in a prestigious newspaper like The Herald (yes, that was tongue in cheek), then they simply aren’t interested in sharing their thoughts.

Let’s talk about the responses . . . or lack thereof.

WHO RESPONDED? (and how quickly):

Representative Mark Longietti (responded in 15 minutes)

I sent email messages to Senator Bob Robbins, Representative Michele Brooks, Representative Mark Longietti, and Representative Dick Stevenson. Within 15 minutes of sending my original email message, I received a phone call from Representative Mark Longietti. He was in his car on his way to Harrisburg and he decided to devote part of his drive time to a conversation with me regarding COLAs.

Representative Longietti explained first that there would be no COLA in 2009-2010, but he also explained that the 2008-2009 COLA that was received last year will still be included in his check in 2009-2010. Last year (when asked the same question), Representative Longietti explained that he would be donating the amount of his raise to a local charity. This year, Representative Longietti still intends on donating the amount of the 2008-2009 raise to a charity. This year his specific charity is again his local church where he has made a donation (with a specific earmark for the use of funds).

Representative Longietti and I also discussed the process of receiving automatic cost of living adjustments. Representative Longietti and I had a similar discussion last year at this time, and we both realize that we are on opposite ends of the issue as far as our personal opinions. Representative Longietti feels that a COLA is an earned increase and is well deserved. He feels that a cost of living increase simply makes him “whole” as it raises his pay automatically each year to adjust with the increases in the cost of living. Unfortunately, having worked in the private sector for my entire adult life, I don’t agree with the concept. I’ve worked for many different companies during many very difficult times in our economy, and there were quite a few years where I received no such raise regardless of the increase in the cost of living. Raises were based on performance (primarily), and the company’s ability to provide a raise (as a secondary consideration). I, therefore, don’t agree with anything that is assigned “automatically”. Representative Longietti and I have long agreed to disagree on this particular issue, but the conversation was interesting and entertaining. I thanked him for his time and I thanked him for taking the time to call me amidst his busy schedule.

Representative Michele Brooks (responded in one day)

On December 2nd (one day after receiving my email message), I received an email response from Representative Michele Brooks. She stated that she would be giving me a call to discuss the matter of COLAs personally as soon as time permitted. During our phone conversation, Representative Brooks pointed out that in both 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 she returned her COLA to the State Treasury as a direct one-time payment. Although she will not be receiving a raise in 2009-2010, she still intends on ‘giving back’ her raise from 2008-2009. This year, however, she intends on donating the raise to a local charity. Rather than handing the money back to the State Treasury (like last year), Representative Brooks would like to see “100% of the funds make a difference in the local community”. Although she did not name the charity specifically (and I didn’t ask), Representative Brooks was pleased that raise could help a local group directly.

THANK YOU REPRESENTATIVES MARK LONGIETTI AND MICHELE BROOKS

First, a much deserved APPLAUSE! My opinion on COLA give backs is the same as it was 12 months ago. I don’t care how the money is returned, but giving the money back to ‘the people’ is the most important issue and it should be applauded because it is COMPLETELY voluntary on the part of our legislators. In my opinion, both Representatives Longietti and Brooks EARNED their raises (unlike some of our State Legislators . . . or the Governor). It is their money and they can do with it what they wish. The fact that they are willing to give those raises back to people and organizations in Mercer County that NEED the help is honorable.

I would also like to thank Representatives Longietti and Brooks for responding to my inquiry . . . and VERY quickly I might add. It is refreshing to see that there are legislators representing Mercer County that try to make a difference (even when it isn’t front page news). While “Mercer Conservatives” may be seen as the “opinions of one blogger” in the eyes of some, this blog is representative of the voices of many conservatives and independents who support good government, transparency, and refreshing reform in Harrisburg and Mercer County. I am always willing to share “good news about good government” with my friends throughout Mercer County and across Pennsylvania.

WHO RESPONDED . . . BUT DIDN’T RESPOND?

Representative Dick Stevenson

Last year, Representative Stevenson explained to the local press that he would be returning his raise to the Pennsylvania Treasury. What happened this year?

Two days after receiving my email message, Representative Dick Stevenson sent me a response to my original email query. His email message read as follows:

Ms. Biros:
As I indicated previously, and as I have confirmed with our caucus ethics counsel after he reviewed your message, I am prohibited from responding to political emails from this taxpayer funded email account. If your would like to discuss these or any other issues, my home phone number is 724-XXX-XXXX.

Why are we suddenly so formal? Representatives Longietti and Brooks (a.k.a. Mark and Michele) simply call me “Roberta”, and that is generally my preference. “Ms. Biros” is my mother-in-laws name, and it is so ‘old fashioned’. It seems perfectly used, however, if you intended to set the tone for me to be scolded.

As many of you already know, Representative Stevenson has a history of sending these types of messages. Last year he sent a similar message by snail mail on his House of Representatives letterhead [READ THE FULL STORY HERE], and the comments received statewide criticisms. Just like last time, I was annoyed with the response. I sent an email message back to Representative Stevenson as follows:

First, all of the questions that I posed to you are regarding policies and legislative issues. The questions are specifically related to your record, your plans for representing Mercer County, and your legislative activities. If every email that is sent to you regarding policies and legislative issues is considered to be “political”; and you are, therefore, prohibited from responding, then what exactly is the purpose of your “taxpayer funded email account”?

Secondly, I provided sufficient contact information that you could have responded to my query in any other form other than email if you were interested. I invited you to respond to my message by email, phone, mail, or personal visit. Instead, you took the time ONLY to tell me that you can’t answer my question unless I call you.

While you could technically say that Representative Stevenson responded to my email message, I would clearly disagree. His only purpose of writing was to tell me to “go away and don’t come back”. He never responded to my questions regarding COLAs . . . he just said “I won’t talk to you”. I, therefore, classify Representative Stevenson’s response as a “non-response”.

WHO DID NOT RESPOND . . . PERIOD?

Senator Bob Robbins

Last year Senator Robbins took advantage of the local papers to publicize the fact that he was returning his raise. He did not respond to MY inquiry regarding COLAs until mid-January. At that time he sent a letter. Unfortunately, his written response had nothing to do with my original questions [read the full story HERE].

What is the fine Senator up to this year?

I’m sure this will shock many of my regular readers, but Senator Bob Robbins once again failed to respond to my inquiry in any way, shape, or form. Senator Robbins generally doesn’t like to talk to “the press”, so the chance of him responding to a little ol’ blogger like me is about nil. Unfortunately for our fine Senator, Mr. Robbins fails to realize that this blogger is also a VOTER with many FRIENDS (Republican, Democrat, and Independent) THAT VOTE. His repeated lack of responses (now and in the past) have been noted in my little brain . . . and in the brains of my friends. I’m a bit like an elephant . . . I never forget! (No GOP pun intended)

What does it all mean?

The good news for Mercer Countians is that we have hard-working legislators who care about the community, the taxpayers, and our best interests. Those legislators are willing to communicate with ALL OF THEIR CONSTITUENTS regardless of ‘Party’ and without the promise of ‘front page billing’. Those legislators are Representatives Michele Brooks and Mark Longietti.

The bad news for Mercer Countians is that we have an equal number of legislators who aren’t willing to communicate . . . aren’t willing to answer questions . . . and, apparently, don’t feel that the opinions of voters and taxpayers are important. Those legislators are unwilling to take the time to discuss policy unless they have a promise of publication on the front page above the fold. Those legislators are Senator Bob Robbins and Representative Dick Stevenson.

What’s Next, Roberta?

Gosh. I sure am glad you asked!

That was the story about COLAs. It was a short story, but an interesting one nonetheless. It is also a wonderful start to a New Year. It sets the stage for some interesting debate and some entertaining analyses. It is, however, just the beginning. In the next few weeks I will be publishing a number of stories regarding Mercer County’s legislators (and other elected officials). As a Mercer County EXCLUSIVE, I will be publishing the First Annual Edition of the Mercer Conservatives Index. The Mercer Conservatives Index will grade each of our elected officials on their accomplishments, service, and their ability to represent Mercer Countians. You might be surprised to see how Mercer County’s politicians stack up against each other . . . apples to apples.
As always, just my opinion.

~Mercer County Conservatives

.

Email Roberta Biros, Start the discussion or Share This...

Looks like Congressman Murtha’s earmarks don’t live up to their promised job-producing ability.

Washington Post:

In 2005, Rep. John P. Murtha announced here that a technology firm was moving into an abandoned plate glass factory. Best of all, he promised, the new firm would generate 140 jobs.

The Pennsylvania Democrat steered $150 million in defense money to Caracal Inc., along with a $3 million grant for factory renovations. “Today’s ribbon-cutting ceremony is yet another indication that our investment in this region’s economic revitalization is paying off,” he said that day. But Caracal never created the jobs the congressman touted. The firm peaked at 10 employees and then folded in early 2008. Once its Murtha-engineered Navy contracts ended, the company could not survive.

…

The Post analysis illustrates the fleeting success of some of the companies backed by earmarks. Some of the jobs generated by Murtha’s earmarks cost about $2 million each, and scores disappeared as soon as projects were completed.

WaPo gives several similar examples. It’s really an eye-opening piece, and everybody should read the whole thing.

Who’da thunk it? Oh wait, I did. And I said how it should be used politically.

I quote myself from November, bold added:

Murtha’s number may finally be up, provided that our candidate (whether Burns or Russell) goes beyond the ethical stuff that’s been dogging Murtha for over two decades with no ill effects.

Murtha’s supposed to be the rainmaker, but it’s awfully dry in much of the district. Hit him with the jobs thing. Make his strength into his weakness. Eliminate his raison d’être.

Yeah, it’s an uphill climb. Here’s a breakdown of Russell’s performance in 2008. (2006 refers to Irey. %Effort refers to a county’s contribution to the vote total.) Keep in mind that the district narrowly voted for McCain in 2008.

Murtha owns Cambria county. Others, less so.

$2 Million a job sounds a little steep to me. I’m guessing 12th district residents outside of Cambria county might feel the same way, particularly if they themselves are looking for jobs.

(See also RedState, GrassrootsPA)

Email Joe Collins, Start the discussion or Share This...

NYTimes Blog DealBook reports:

The top executives at the mortgage lending giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could get paid as much as $6 million for 2009, despite the companies’ dismal performance this year, The Associated Press reported.

The chief executive of Fannie Mae, Michael J. Williams, and of Freddie Mac, Charles E. Haldeman Jr., will each receive $900,000 in salary, $3.1 million in deferred payments next year and another $2 million if they meet certain performance goals, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Thursday.

The pay packages were approved by the Treasury Department and the Federal Housing Finance Agency, which regulates Fannie and Freddie.

Fannie and Freddie, which were seized by regulators in September 2008, have needed $111 billion in taxpayer money to stay afloat. The news of the chief executives’ pay could spark new criticism about the government’s numerous bailouts.

$6 Million in bonuses? What did they do to earn that, you ask:

The Bush Treasury first estimated the government-sponsored enterprises’ (GSEs) losses at $100 billion each. The Obama administration, which has been using the GSEs to stabilize the housing market by reducing their underwriting standards, upped the ante to $200 billion each. Now the administration has thrown in the towel completely, and dropped a large lump of coal in each taxpayer’s stocking—it won’t even try to estimate the total losses of Fannie and Freddie.

This is the culmination of an unprecedented policy disaster, inflicted on the American taxpayer by congressional supporters of Fannie and Freddie who refused over many years to approve new and tougher regulations for the two GSEs.

H/T The Enterprise Blog via Jonah Goldberg on The Corner

Email LisaMossie, Start the discussion or Share This...

(1) By Jim Geraghty’s reckoning, the Allentown slice of the porkulus spent over $11 million on various projects with no identifiable jobs created. “Hey, I think I spotted the problem with the economy! All of this money is being thrown around, but nobody’s created any jobs with it!”

(2) The CEO of Emerson Electric Company is not liking what he’s seeing coming out of Washington (emphasis added):

The federal government is “doing everything in [its] manpower [and] capability to destroy U.S. manufacturing,” says David Farr, chairman and CEO of Emerson Electric Co., in a presentation at the Baird 2009 Industrial Conference in Chicago Ill., on Nov. 11. In comments reported by Bloomberg, Farr added that companies will continue adding jobs in China and India because they are “places where people want the products and where the governments welcome you to actually do something. I am not going to hire anybody in the United States. I’m moving. They are doing everything possible to destroy jobs.“

Farr cites Cap-&-Trade, the expensive but non-targeted stimulus, the debt, the deficit, inflationary monetary policy, Obamacare, and general taxation and regulation.

Emerson is an S&P-500 component and has a market capitalization of over $30-bn.

(h/t to Eddie at Doubleplusundead)

(3) Maybe that’s why a majority of Americans want to cut their losses on the stimulus.  Calls for a second stimulus (or third, depending on your count) will fall on deaf ears.  (I seem to recall a certain Senate candidate who feels the same way.)

(4) Even youngsters are souring on Obama’s policies, though they have yet to bail out on Obama himself.  It’s a start.  (Translation for candidates: attack the policies, not Obama.)

(5) The return of the Misery Index does not bode well for Democrats, especially now that deflation has been transitioning into inflation.

Email Joe Collins, Start the discussion or Share This...

Written by Roberta Biros

BLOG POST UPDATE–CORRECTION:

After contacting my local legislators I received a phone call from Representative Mark Longietti. Rep. Longietti first clarified that there will be NO COLA this year for legislators. The final calculation was made in mid-November, and that calculation determined that there would be NO increase this year. This information was contrary to the details that I had received in mid-November. PLEASE TAKE THIS INFORMATION INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN READING THIS BLOG POST. The issue still remains, however, regarding the pay raise that was automatically applied last year and how to handle possible pay increases in the future. [END NOTE]

Today is December 1, 2009. Today is also the day that Pennsylvania Legislators, Judges, and the Governor receive an automatic increase in their salary. Nice huh?

Background

In 1995, Pennsylvania legislators passed a law (ACT 51) that established cost of living increases (referred to as COLAs) for themselves and other state officials, including the governor and judges. On December 1st of every year since 1995, lawmakers and other officials in Pennsylvania have received the benefit of an automatic pay raise based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI).

It is my understanding that some “upstanding” legislators have voluntarily given back their pay raises back in previous years because they felt it was “the right thing to do”, but the topic of “COLA givebacks” was never so publicized as it was last year at this time. I first wrote about the issue in mid-December in 2008 in my blog post titled “Michele Brooks Gives Back Legislative Pay Raise, but Can More Be Done To Really Save Money in Harrisburg?“, I then wrote about the topic multiple times throughout the spring and summer in an effort to generate support for a repeal of the COLA legislation. All of my posts regarding COLAs can be read HERE.

Where Did Mercer County Legislators Stand on COLAs in 2008?

I corresponded with all of the Legislators that represent Mercer County numerous times last year. Here is where they stood on the issues of Legislative COLAs.

Senator Bob Robbins (R-50)

Did he give his 2008-2009 COLA back to the State?

Yes.

Did he support the repeal of the COLAs?

I received a letter from Senator Robbins last January. In it he explained the issues that he would be concentrating on in 2009, but the repeal of legislative COLAs was not on the list. It should be pointed out that he never states that he is AGAINST the COLAs (or against their repeal) . . . he simply never stated that he would support their repeal.

Representative Mark Longietti (D-7)

Did he give his 2008-2009 COLA back to the State?

No. Instead, he had donated his raise for that period to the Joshua’s Haven City Mission in Sharon.

Did he support the repeal of the COLAs?

No. I spoke to Rep. Longietti regarding the issue of COLAs and COLA repeal by phone and we communicated by email. As per Mr. Longietti’s email response from January of 2008,
“I respect your view regarding the COLA, but I do not think that repealing it is good public policy. ”

Mr. Longietti further stated,

“If the COLA is repealed, you will eventually see bills introduced to provide for a large pay increase. That is the wrong approach. Further, you will subject the whole process to deal making.”

Mr. Longietti went on to state numerous examples where cost of living increases are implemented and he closed with,

“I work hard as a legislator, and I know that I earn my keep, and an increase to keep pace with inflation is as justified for this position as it is for other workers and for Social Security recipients. So, we may part company on this issue, but we respect each other’s point of view.”

[I will refer to Representative Longietti’s comments again later in this post]

Rep. Dick Stevenson (R-8)

Did he give his 2008-2009 COLA back to the State?

Yes.

Did he support the repeal of the COLAs?

Yes.

Although I never discussed the issue with Rep. Stevenson personally, I followed his record on the issue. Representative Stevenson signed on to House Bill 62 in January of 2009. House Bill 62 (read the full text of the Bill HERE) was a bill that was intended to offer a long term plan for the handling of legislative COLAs. Unfortunately, it wasn’t a very good bill. I wrote a blog outlining the details of all COLA repeal Bills HERE (if you are interested).

Rep. Michele Brooks (R-17)

Did she give her 2008-2009 COLA back to the State?

Yes.

Did she support the repeal of the COLAs?

Yes.

I discussed the issues of COLAs and COLA repeal with Rep. Brooks on numerous occasions both by phone and by email. Rep. Brooks signed on to House Bill 633 in February of 2008. House Bill 633 (read the full text of the Bill HERE) rewrote the handling of legislator raises. I wrote about the details of HB 633 (and others) at length HERE (if you are interested).

Were Legislative COLAs Repealed in 2009?

Heck No!

It is true that there were numerous Bills offered by Legislators in an attempt to repeal COLAs, but NONE of those Bills ever made it out of committee. This is a VERY COMMON PROBLEM with Bills authored in the PA legislature. In my blog posted titled “So Much Legislation, So Little Time”, I explained that roughly 95% of all Bills that are presented in Harrisburg “die” in Committee. COLA Repeal Bills all fell into the 95% group in 2009. That hasn’t prevented legislators from continuing to try. As recently as mid-November, new legislation was being authored in Harrisburg. On November 16, Rep. Marguerite Quinn (R-Bucks) introduced House Bill 2097 which attempted to suspend the December 1 pay raises. In her official press release (read HERE), Rep. Quinn states:

“We have an unemployment rate approaching 9 percent in Pennsylvania, and many people who still have jobs have taken pay cuts,” said Quinn. “It is common sense to suspend the COLA for legislators during these tough economic times. How can we accept a pay increase during a year when we have cut so much from the budget and so many others must do with less or with nothing at all?”

Even more interesting, though, Rep. Quinn makes a great point when she states:

“If Pennsylvania’s elderly citizens are expected to go without a Social Security COLA this year, then lawmakers should be expected to do the same”

The statement regarding Social Security COLAs is an important one. According to the Social Security Administration website (read the full press release HERE):

With consumer prices down over the past year, monthly Social Security and supplemental Security Income benefits for more than 57 million Americans will not automatically increase in 2010. This will be the first year without an automatic Cost-of-Living Adjustment (COLA) since they went into effect in 1975.

Why is this so important? Well, individuals who have defended the continued use of COLAs for legislators have specifically pointed out that the raises are “deserved” just like the COLAs that are applied to Social Security. Remember . . . According to Representative Mark Longietti,

“I work hard as a legislator, and I know that I earn my keep, and an increase to keep pace with inflation is as justified for this position as it is for other workers and for Social Security recipients.”

As the economy gets worse, the term “automatic raises” or “raises” (in general) are going to become obsolete. Legislators may feel that their raises are still “well deserved”, but the truth is that many of their constituents are lucky to just have a job or steady income at this point. Businesses are cutting back, individuals are cutting back, and it’s time for our legislators to feel the pain too.

Where Do We Go From Here?

So here we are again . . . back at the beginning. As of today Legislators, the Governor, and Judges will receive an automatic pay raise. It seemed inappropriate last year, but this year “inappropriate” just doesn’t seem harsh enough. Maybe the term WRONG or even CRIMINAL would better describe the situation?

Last year I took an enormous amount of time and effort to contact those legislators that represent Mercer County in an effort to urge all of them to not only give back their COLAs, but to urge them to support legislation that would end the COLAs once and for all. I will begin my efforts again. This morning I sent email messages to Senator Bob Robbins, Representative Dick Stevenson, Representative Mark Longietti, and Representative Michele Brooks. In it I’ve asked if each of them will again “give back” their annual pay raise. I have also asked that all of them support efforts to repeal COLAs through legislative action. My full messages is outlined below:

Senator Bob Robbins
Representative Mark Longietti
Representative Michele Brooks
Representative Dick Stevenson

Good Morning,

Today is December 1st. Today, cost of living adjustments (COLAs) were applied to your annual salaries automatically. Last year I spent a great amount of time and effort in following up with each of you regarding your “give back” of last year’s raises as well as urging each of you to support a repeal of Act 51 to prevent the continuation of the COLAs again this year. Some of you voluntarily gave your raises back to the state through a direct payment to the Treasury, and others donated your raises to a
local charity. I thanked each of you directly for those actions. I also asked each of you to support a repeal of Act 51 through numerous legislative efforts. Some of you signed on to legislation that attempted to repeal or alter Act 51, others chose to concentrate on other projects, and yet others felt that Act 51 was fine “as is” because annual pay raises are deserved “as it is for other workers and for Social Security recipients”.

I urge each of you to review the issue of legislative COLAs once again. Are
automatic pay raises for legislators, judges, and the governor fair when so many Pennsylvanians are taking pay cuts, struggling to make ends meet, or even worse . . . out of work? Are pay increases for “public servants” really fair when the majority of those you “serve” (including senior citizens) are forced to do without? Is it really right for lawmakers to put themselves above the people that they were elected to serve?

I am sure that you are all aware that each and every one of you is up for re-election in 2010. I am sure that you also understand that everything that you do this year will be under a microscope. Some of you may see this as a problem or an inconvenience, but I would hope that some of you see this as an opportunity to shine and to showcase your commitment to the people of the area. Show your constituents in Mercer County that you are committed to “serving” rather than “being served”. Put aside partisan politics and make this an issue of good government and concern for fiscal responsibility.

My Questions For You:

I would like to know your personal plan for doing away with “automatic pay raises for some while others are forced to live with less”.

Do you intend on refusing your COLA this year (as well as the carry-over raise from last year)?

Are you willing to work to see to it that this is not an issue again next year?

What are you willing to do . . . specifically?

I, personally, cannot and will not support any candidate that puts themselves above the people that they serve, and I sincerely believe that most voters would agree. So where exactly do you stand?

Roberta Biros
Taxpayer in Mercer County
Taxpayer in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
Concerned Citizen

I urge each and every one of you to write your legislators, call your legislators, email your legislators and ask them to give back their December 1 pay raise and ask them to support the permanent repeal of future automatic pay raises.

If we yell loud enough and long enough, maybe someone will finally stop and listen.

BLOG POST UPDATE–FEEDBACK:

December 1, 2009, 10:30am:

The first legislator to contact me was Representative Mark Longietti (D-7). As I stated earlier, Reprsentative Longietti clarified that there is NO COLA this year for legislators. Rep. Longietti and I then discussed the issue of COLAs at great length. First, Representative Longietti has already decided that he will donate his LAST YEAR’s pay raise (which will be received automatically again this year) to his local church (with a specific earmark regarding its usage). In regards to a repeal or rework of Act 51 and COLAs in general, Representative Longietti and I still disagree on how raises should be applied to lawmakers. We, again, agree to disagree. I thank Representative Longietti for his time and quick response.

As always, just my opinion.

Roberta Biros, Mercer County Conservatives

Email Roberta Biros, Start the discussion or Share This...

Attack the employees, drive them to a union.

(click image to enlarge)

Thanks, Jim.

Email BillShaw, Start the discussion or Share This...

So I was thinking…

Given that the recovery.gov website is a fictional mess featuring ridiculous amounts of money per job created, wouldn’t it be great if our state’s Auditor would look at the numbers & spending?

Especially if said Auditor is running for Governor?

You know, prove that he’s independent of party or something…. hell, just even doing the right thing would be nice.

Or will he hide behind “that’s the fed’s business, not mine.” ????

Email AlexC, Join the discussion or Share This...

More fun with Excel & Recovery.gov

The numbers by Congressional District:

Red & Blue colors denote party affiliation. What’s funny are the Congressional districts in black. The 00th, the 65th & the 96th districts have never existed. Did anyone even do a cursory look at the figures? There’s only 50 states, so it’s not like 50 different bureaucrats would have been overworked.

I will still declare the Stimulus Package a success. It has led to the creation of a time machine. The 21st and 23rd districts haven’t existed since the 1990 and 2000 Census…

… ahh to long for the days of the Reagan administration and the wall falling.

Heady days.

Lisa Mossie sends along a link to Marc Steyn at the Corner. He writes about his own New Hampshire:

I like to think of it as somewhere up around the Fourth Connecticut Lake or the Indian Stream by the old bootlegging routes in from Quebec. I drive around in the forlorn hope that one day on a rutted Class VI road deep in the woods, just over the washed out culvert, I’ll round the bend and see the sign saying “Now Entering The 00 Congressional District. This $47,000 sign brought to you by the America Recovery & Reinvestment Act,” and the Emerald City of Oo will rise before me, its streets paved with Stimulus green and lined with dancing fountains of sparkling H1N1 vaccine and Obamatronic statues that bow as you pass by as if you’re the Japanese Emperor and they sing “Be Our Guest” in a faintly metallic voice. And I’ll be greeted by 2,873.9 gnarled old stump-toothed loggers with an average of 2.7 fingers between them, now federally retrained as green-jobs czars, NEA performance artists, end-of-life counseling coordinators, and Joe Biden speechwriters . . .

Obamatronic.

Email AlexC, Join the other 5 commenters or Share This...

CONGRATULATIONS TO THE NEW MEMBERS OF THE WEST CHESTER AREA SCHOOL BOARD!

Adsett, Carpenter, Pimley, Wingerter: Great for West Chester Area Schools

“We are concerned parents and taxpayers just like you. As your School Board members, we will use our professional experience and understanding of your concerns to make West Chester Area School District the best it can be for our children and the taxpayers.”

Vote4GreatSchools

Thanks to the voters in West Chester that chose substance over smears.

Email TaniaGail, Start the discussion or Share This...

Friends,

I am pleased to inform you that Philadelphia has been selected to host a monthly Center-Right Coalition meeting, following the hugely-successful model of Grover Norquist, President of Americans for Tax Reform (ATR). We will be one of the few non-state capital cities to have such a gathering.

The kick-off meeting, which I will be hosting, will be Thursday, November 12 at the Union League in Philadelphia, with Mr. Norquist in attendance. Light refreshments will be served at 7:00 AM, with the program going from 7:30 to 9:00. The Union League is located at 140 S. Broad Street, just two blocks south of City Hall.

In Grover’s words, the objective is “to get everybody who is center-right to tell each other what they are doing, to share technology and tactics, and to tell stories” regarding issues facing Pennsylvania and the nation.

One key function, according to ATR, is to facilitate collaborative activities of coalition members, many of whom may have not previously known one another, and foster the potential for mutual cooperation.

The rules are simple: Anyone who so desires may speak for three minutes on current initiatives, answer questions, and pass the microphone to the next speaker.

The only prohibition is whining. It is a positive meeting, one that will unify southeastern Pennsylvania.

Attendees will typically include influential political, business, policy and grassroots leaders.

If anyone who would like several minutes on the agenda, please let me know.

You are encouraged to bring any literature for distribution.

I hope to see you next Thursday.

For future reference, the monthly meetings will be held on the FIRST THURSDAY of each month at the Union League, with the same time format as above.

Feel free to invite colleagues and associates. All meetings are off the record.

Steadfast,

Christopher Freind
“Freindly Fire”
Audaces fortuna iuvat
610-659-0098
christopherfreind@hotmail.com (E before I in Freind)
CF@FreindlyFireZone.com

Email Chris Freind, Start the discussion or Share This...

Day 100! woo-hoo!

Senate concurs in HB 1416 (general appropriation aka budget bill) by a vote of 42-7 #pabudget

… cementing Governor Rendell’s legacy of late budgets.

Email AlexC, Start the discussion or Share This...

PA Business Leaders Sell Out Orie In Supreme Court Race

BY CHRIS FREIND

If there’s one word to describe the Pennsylvania business community, it’s consistent, as in consistently pathetic.

The state’s business leaders — and that description is a stretch— once again dropped the political ball and, in all likelihood, will be the biggest losers after next month’s state Supreme Court election —
one of the most important in decades. With the court deadlocked 3-3, the winner will shape the court’s direction for years to come. Republican Joan Orie Melvin and Democrat Jack Panella, both judges on the Superior Court, are duking it out.

Panella has outraised Orie Melvin by a wide margin, thanks to huge financial support from labor unions and trial lawyers. While Orie Melvin is certainly still a viable candidate, it’s no secret that whoever touts the largest warchest has a distinct advantage.

Why the large gap between the two? Enter the business community, or, more accurately, lack thereof.

Pennsylvania’s business leaders, for the most part, have sat on their hands, preferring the view from the sidelines, as is virtually always the case.

While Orie Melvin struggles to keep pace, Panella enjoys the nonstop support of the archenemies of business. Why?

Because when it comes to politics, the business community is lazy, incompetent, and clueless. That is a broad stroke, to be sure, for there are executives who innately understand what’s at stake (check out those in Luzerne County in northeastern PA) but courageous and politically savvy business folk are definitely the exception.

Pennsylvania business leaders make many excuses for their failures, but most common among their inane babble is that they “just want to run their companies, and don’t have time for politics.”

Two points:

1)That’s a cop-out. Make time. Organized labor and the trial lawyers do.
2)Business is governed by politics. Period. Every aspect of business is conducted in accordance with the political environment: regulations, health care, liability, taxes, etc. The list never ends.

What part of this can’t these guys understand?

Let’s make this simple.

If one candidate is strongly backed by labor and lawyers, then a business leader should support the other person, financially and otherwise. And no, it’s not beneath you to host a coffee klatch, put up a yard sign, form a political action committee, or, God forbid, stuff an envelope. Those “pedestrian” things win elections.

But despite business’ complete disregard for the political process, they are always the first to complain when something doesn’t go their way.

Which, this being Pennsylvania – home of the worst business climate in the nation – is an everyday occurrence.

Newsflash: if you bang your head against a wall nine times, you will get the same result on the tenth try.

But this incomprehensible behavior should come as no surprise.

The Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce, chaired by David Cohen, one of Ed Rendell’s biggest fundraisers and closest advisers, actually thought the recent 100 per cent increase in the Philadelphia sales tax was a good thing. So much for the Chamber’s stated goal of sensible tax policy.

Where was the business community when the Fair Share Act came up for a vote not long ago (a bill that would have limited a defendant’s liability to only his share of responsibility)? Nonexistent, because they naively believed Gov. Rendell’s campaign pledge that he would sign it. Instead, he vetoed it.

Unlike business leaders, the trial lawyers didn’t need a proctologist to find their head. And guess what? They won.

We own the second highest corporate net income tax in the country. Onerous and often unnecessary regulations placed on our companies by unaccountable bureaucrats with no real-world experience stifle job growth, innovation and productivity. And instead of being phased out, our capital stock and franchise tax has found new life.

But where is the outcry regarding the state’s ever increasing taxes, which, by the way, result in companies and jobs fleeing Pennsylvania in droves? Nowhere to be heard.

And there is barely a whimper at the prospect of taxing to death those companies drilling for natural gas in the Marcellus Shale, a blossoming industry which, if not destroyed by our politicians, will create thousands upon thousands of good-paying, long-term jobs.

The manufacturing economy is little more than a distant memory, and our hostile legal climate has increased the cost of doing business in Pennsylvania to the point that we are virtually dead last in America for job creation.

The message should be absolutely clear — elected officials will act only when these issues become ones they cannot escape, whether at debates between candidates as they run for re-election, at meetings with community leaders in their districts, visiting a coffee shop, or giving a speech to a service club.

But that won’t happen unless the attitude of business changes. And since attitude reflects leadership, don’t hold your breath.

So if Mr. Panella happens to win, watch for the business community to emerge yelling and screaming after the court upholds its first ludicrous jackpot jury award or company-killing regulation.

And when they do, I have a message for those hypocrites: Look in the mirror, and don’t let the door hit you in the derrière as you fade into oblivion.

Chris Freind, author of “Freindly Fire,” is an independent columnist and investigative reporter whose readers hail from six continents, thirty countries, and all fifty states. He can be reached at CF@FreindlyFireZone.com

Email Chris Freind, Join the other 8 commenters or Share This...

…. and the elderly Democrat statesmen stepped out of their chambers, document in hand.

A member of the media ran up to the State Rep said, “What do you have for the Senate, Sir?”

A statesman blinked slowly, and replied, “A budget. If they can keep it.”

The state House of Representatives has just passed a $27.8 billion state budget bill on a 107-to-93 vote.

The House vote came after about one hour of debate this evening, and sets the plan up for possible final consideration in the state Senate as early as Thursday.

Earlier in the day, the House Democratic leaders reached what they described as an understanding with Senate leaders on their remaining differences over the budget, a breakthrough that suddenly put the plan on a fast-track after 99 days of delay.

Senate Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi, R-Delaware County, confirmed an agreement in principle on the plan, but said his caucus would need to complete a thorough review of the actual bill on Thursday before moving it to Gov. Ed Rendell.

100 days. I think they were just shooting for the record.

Email AlexC, Start the discussion or Share This...

The problem in Washington (or Harrisburg or government in general) is that politicians always say, “Do Something” and never ask “What have we done?!”

PittNews:

TPN: With health care being such a controversial issue, what are your views on universal health care? You said before that you’re all for competition among schools. Are you for competition between insurance companies?

Sestak: Yes, that’s why I’m a big believer in the public option. I believe in a mandate that everyone should be covered. Without the public option, we don’t get the price reform that we need. In Pennsylvania, 70 percent of all private health care plans are controlled by two companies. It’s like the OPEC [oil] cartel. They dictate the price. By having another option out there that is funded by those who choose to join it, by their co-pays, by their deductibles, they don’t pay $23 million for salary for the CEO. The Department of Justice has criteria for what’s called non-competitive pricing markets. Ninety-two percent of all health insurance markets in Pennsylvania meet that criteria. That’s why we have to have a competition to discipline our costs.

Why can’t be buy health insurance from anywhere in the country (or world) for that matter?

Why is that?

Oh, arbitrary laws to protect the insurance lobbies prevent that.

Thanks government.

(tip to GrassrootsPa)

Email AlexC, Start the discussion or Share This...

Here I thought the only thing that Democrats wouldn’t tax was abortion.

In case you’ve missed it, Democratic backbenchers have been pretty much in open rebellion over just about every revenue-raising proposal that their leaders signed off on in the $27.9 billion compromise plan.

A coalition of 30 Democrats has effectively threatened to blow up the deal if Democratic bosses don’t back off from a plan to expand oil and natural gas drilling in state forest land. Southeastern Democrats are in an uproar over a planned tax on theater and museum tickets. And Western Democrats have a serious bee in their collective bonnets over the proposal to tax small games of chance.

Apart from that, everything’s going just fine.

It’s going to month four sans budget.

Are we really any worse off?

(yes, i know some schools are waiting for books)

Email AlexC, Start the discussion or Share This...

Twelve weeks overdue? Maybe thirteen?

Jason High (Sen Eichelberger staffer) on Facebook:

Jason High Stuck in Harrisburg hoping to get a budget done. News tonight is that the House D’s don’t have the votes to get the deal done. If that’s true…we’re back to square one.

Way to go Dems.

Email AlexC, Start the discussion or Share This...

Freindly Fire’s Analysis of the Democratic Governor Candidates

BY CHRIS FREIND

The 2010 election cycle in Pennsylvania will be one of the most important in decades, highlighted by the gubernatorial contest. History favors the Republicans, since the governor’s office has switched hands every eight years since 1968, when governors were first permitted to serve two terms.

That said, the Democrats are not going quietly into the night. Conversely, the field continues to grow as more see promise that the eight-year trend may finally break due to the Democrats’ 1.2 million voter edge.

It is far too early to state that 2010 will be a watershed year for Republicans, as many in the GOP believe. While popular Attorney General Tom Corbett looms as the expected Republican nominee (he won a stunning victory in last year’s election, posting a 400,000 vote margin in an otherwise horrific year for Republicans), he must still get past Congressman Jim Gerlach’s insurgent candidacy.

No matter the GOP opponent, the Democrats will post a formidable challenger. Following is an analysis of the five most likely candidates, and their chances for victory:

Philadelphia Businessman Tom Knox

Many political observers believe that the next governor of Pennsylvania will be named “Tom,” and there is credible evidence behind this theory. While Tom Corbett is in the GOP’s driver seat, Tom Knox brings a plethora of assets to the race, and will present substantial obstacles for his opponents.

First and foremost, Knox can and will self-fund a large portion of his campaign warchest. He spent $12 million in his bid for Mayor of Philadelphia in 2007, narrowly losing to Michael Nutter. In doing so, he became a household name in southeastern Pennsylvania, which just happens to be home to 45% of the state’s electorate – a huge benefit to Knox.

Most political observers believe that $10 million is the minimum needed for the primary. Since Knox will easily pass this threshold, he immediately gains a huge advantage over his opponents. While they will spend their time fundraising, Knox will be traveling the state meeting, greeting – and raising even more money.

Knox’s positions on the issues also make him attractive to many of the state’s moderate Democrats, especially those in the northeastern and southwestern sections of Pennsylvania. He has been an outspoken leader in opposing electric deregulation and the Philadelphia-Pittsburgh Blues merger, and supports school choice and tort reform, all issues of significant interest to the business community.

At this point, color Knox the frontrunner.

Allegheny County Executive Dan Onorato

Watch for Onorato to emerge as the Ed Rendell legacy candidate. While Rendell has not officially endorsed anyone – yet – it is clear to many that his close relationship with Onorato will be exploited to maximum effect during the campaign.

Onorato already has $5 million in his campaign fund. That gives him a solid start, and may be enough to weed out the rest of the field, with the exception of Knox. And while Rendell’s approval rating is dismal, he is still a popular figure in Philadelphia and its suburbs. Ed Rendell’s touting of Onorato, along with the use of the Rendell political machine, is certainly good for a significant boost, especially important because Onorato is barely known in the state’s most expensive media market.

But years as Allegheny County Executive comes with baggage. While Onorato pushed through a hugely unpopular drink tax, his biggest liability may be what many consider conflicts of interest with campaign donors. This could be a substantial negative factor, particularly since the current governor has been roundly criticized for his widespread conflicts, with some even suggesting rampant pay-to-play activity.

In an era where voters are increasingly concerned about the appearance of impropriety and corruption in state government, Dan Onorato may be in the wrong race at the wrong time.

Scranton Mayor Chris Doherty

While a nice town, Scranton is home to only 70,000 people, hardly the major metropolis in which an unknown mayor can launch a credible statewide campaign. The Keystone State has two major media markets, including the nation’s fourth largest, and they are not cheap. Going from a zero name ID to even 30 per cent will be extremely expensive, and Doherty will simply not be able to raise the campaign cash necessary to achieve this minimum level of effectiveness.

Since there are townships with more people than Scranton, it is clear that Doherty’s candidacy for governor is a joke, amounting to nothing more than a ploy to raise name ID for a Lt. Gov. run. No more ink is necessary for a non-starter like Doherty.

Auditor General Jack Wagner

Jack Wagner has proven to be an effective, independent Auditor General, one who has shown political courage by taking on Gov. Rendell and his Administration on various fiscal issues.

A former state senator, Wagner is a proven vote-getter in statewide elections, an endeavor none of his opponents has undertaken. Hailing from the same southwest base as Onorato, Wagner could pose huge problems for the Allegheny County Executive. While not being able to raise the same level of money as Onorato, Wagner’s possible motivation could prove more troublesome. It’s no secret that the Wagner-Onorato feud is viewed as akin to the Hatfields and McCoys; many observers think Wagner may jump into the race to play the spoiler.

An unheard of tactic? Try again. Just look at last spring’s district attorney race in Philadelphia. Dan McCaffery was one of only two viable candidates in the Democratic primary, yet two of his four opponents (like him, both white Irish Americans) stayed in the race to the end. Their disdain for McCaffery was palpable, and they clearly affected the dynamic of the race. McCaffery came in second.

Many Republicans have praised Wagner, which will not help him in a Democratic primary, but the biggest obstacle facing the Auditor General is his lack of fundraising prowess. If he can find a way to solve that problem, he will be an extremely viable candidate. Look for a Wagner candidacy soon, with a possible drop-out announcement a few months later, but not before Onorato’s image is seriously tarnished.

Montgomery County Commissioner Joe Hoeffel

The recent announcement of a Hoeffel candidacy has the political observers buzzing, because on paper, it changes the dynamics of the race. A second candidate from the vote-rich southeast now dilutes the once-solid Knox base, especially since Hoeffel is a well-known figure who has represented Montgomery County for two decades.

While a Hoeffel candidacy is intriguing, it remains to be seen if he can raise the money to compete. If Onorato becomes the de facto candidate of Gov. Rendell, watch for the fundraising spigot to close from Rendell’s large-dollar contributors, many of whom hail from Montgomery County.

Interestingly, the Hoeffel candidacy places Rendell in an awkward position. A second candidate from the southeast would help Onorato, but if Hoeffel’s star falls quickly due to a lack of support, Tom Knox and his imposing warchest would again take center stage. Yet if Rendell tacitly helps Hoeffel to hurt Knox, there exists the possibility that Hoeffel would catapult to the head of the pack and end up hurting Onorato.

Conspiracy theory aside, Hoeffel is aided by the fact that he controls millions in county and federal stimulus money, and many recipients of such largesse would no doubt show their appreciation by supporting a Hoeffel gubernatorial campaign. If that becomes the case, however, Hoeffel will have to contend with charges of conflicts of interest, likely to be one of the hot-button issues in the campaign.

Hoeffel is no stranger to that. In a 1993 Philadelphia Inquirer editorial, he was criticized for coming close to selling his office after sending a letter to supporters that “managed to tout both his key policy-making position as a county commissioner (’I have found myself ‘in the loop’ of policy and personnel decisions’) and his continued availability as a Norristown lawyer ‘to consult with you on any legal matters you might have,’” according to the editorial.

The newspaper stated that it would “feel more forgiving about the whole business, if Mr. Hoeffel himself conceded the perception problem – heck, it sounded like unabashed influence-peddling – instead of pawning it off as the creation of partisan mischief.”

If Hoeffel makes it to the spring, watch for that editorial to become part of your everyday television and radio lineup.

Hoeffel also has to contend with the perception that he cannot win a statewide race. His highly-touted announcement for U.S. Senate in 2004 was the highpoint of the Hoeffel campaign. He proved to be a non-entity against Arlen Specter, getting trounced by an 11 point margin.

Chris Freind, author of “Freindly Fire,” is an independent newspaper columnist and investigative reporter whose readers hail from six continents, thirty countries, and all fifty states. He can be reached at CF@FreindlyFireZone.com

Email Chris Freind, Join the discussion or Share This...

The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review has some photos from last night’s “Green” Jobs Rally/Concert/Propaganda Event at Point State Park in Pittsburgh. Fast Eddie was there, but here’s my favorite photo:

I don’t know what he’s saying there, but it’s probably something like, Only YOU can destroy save the American economy via Cap ‘n’ Tax and the EFCA!

Here’s a photo of the crowd of college students listening to one of the speakers:

They look very interested, don’t they? Some of them look like they’re about to say, Hey man, like, start the music. I’m starting to get wee-wee’d up here.

But, no, that’s not right. These kids are the future of America! They are the best and the brightest:

Or, not.

The good news is that at least there were some reasonable people at the rally:

Thanks for keeping our city safe, officer!

Email John Lewandowski, Start the discussion or Share This...