Freindly Fire: Post-Election Interview With Montgomery County Commissioner, Bruce Castor December 8 2008
(in it’s entirety)
Castor: Bright Future For Pa. GOP
By Chris Freind, The Bulletin
12/08/2008
Montgomery County Commissioner and former District Attorney Bruce Castor, is one of the leaders in the movement to rebuild the Republican Party and restore its brand of fiscal responsibility and ethical governance. Given his reputation as a political pit bull with proven results at the polls, Mr. Castor finds himself being mentioned for statewide office by numerous political observers. Freindly Fire sat down with Mr. Castor to discuss his – and the Party’s – plans for the future.
Freindly Fire: After the Republican Party’s implosion in 2006, when it lost control of both houses of Congress, many GOP leaders spoke of the need to reform the party to get it “back on track.” In light of the 2008 election results, what are your thoughts regarding what happened to the Republicans?
Bruce Castor: We had a terribly unpopular president leading a war that the electorate felt should have been successfully concluded. To compound that problem, you had ethical scandals and runaway deficit spending.
I think John McCain would have been a great president, but the country wanted fundamental change. He never convinced the country that he and the Republican Party could deliver that kind of change. The economic collapse in late September effectively ended his campaign.
FF: What was the catalyst that needed to occur to salvage the 2008 election? Would anything have made a difference in this political climate?
BC: In retrospect, I don’t know that it was possible for any Republican to win the 2008 presidential election. And certainly not after the economic collapse, since the White House sets economic policy for the nation. There were an awful lot of people who voted for George Bush in 2004 as an affirmation of his post-9/11 leadership. That goodwill disappeared in the wake of his handling of Katrina. From that point forward, it became a very rough road for Republicans nationwide, and the president especially.
FF: Were there any bright spots for the Republicans?
BC: Certainly in the statewide election, Attorney General Tom Corbett’s convincing re-election against a good opponent – in the face of the Obama landslide – has to rank as our “brightest spot.” Tom’s showing convinced a lot of people that not only does the public perceive him to be doing an excellent job as attorney general, but that he has a political operation second to none in the Republican Party. Very impressive. Locally, Jim Gerlach won again by his widest margin ever.
Despite Obama’s victory, the state senate Republicans actually gained a seat. Republicans in Montgomery County hold the same number of state House seats as Democrats, and all of our Republican members won by convincing margins while the Democrats had one candidate win by 800 votes and another win by just 400.
This is a two-party county. Voters will differentiate between which candidates they like and believe in, not what party they belong to. And that is a trend throughout southeast Pennsylvania. The voters here vote for the person, not the party. In consequence, the Republicans must put up candidates that people want to vote for. When we do that, as in the example of Tom Corbett, we win.
FF: Was there a difference in GOP efforts at the state and local level versus the national campaign? How did PA Republican Chairman Rob Gleason perform in his role as party leader?
BC: Rob Gleason was McCain’s biggest cheerleader. At the State Committee meeting I attended in September, there was effusive praise for the state GOP, as they made sure we had signs, materials, and manpower, which had been a problem in previous national elections.
But in the end, the McCain campaign nationally directed the campaigns in the states, and neither the state nor the counties had much input into what the message was or how the campaign was run. Rob is an effective leader of the party in Pennsylvania. The McCain operation only relied on the state party for support – not policy. Our victory in the attorney general’s race is more reflective of Rob’s abilities to help get our candidates elected than is the presidential campaign.
Rob Gleason is among thousands of Pennsylvania Republicans who worked tirelessly to elect Republicans across Pennsylvania. An awful lot of people worked extremely hard and the result did not reflect that effort.
FF: The Montgomery County Republican Executive Committee recently censured GOP Commissioner Jim Matthews for his alliance with Democrat Commissioner Joe Hoeffel, a partnership that, in large part, gives control of the county to the Democrats. What is your feeling on this action? How is your working relationship with Mr. Matthews?
BC: It has been my desire to govern with Jim Matthews. I continue to hold out hope that some day that will happen because I think it’s the best thing for Montgomery County and it’s what Montgomery County voted for when they selected Jim and me to be the majority commissioners.
While political spats may get headlines, the truth is that the County Commissioners work together every day on a host of issues critical to our county, but that doesn’t sell newspapers. I stick to the principles and platform that I told the voters I would be for if they elected me. I believe that if you do that, they usually reward you with reelection. In politics, all you really have with the voters is your word. I said what I was for and what I was against, as did the other candidates. The electorate responded by handing our side a victory. Thus, I consider it my duty to live up to the principles on which I was elected. Simple as that.
FF: Moving forward, how do you plan to effectively govern?
BC: I will continue to pursue the legislative goals I laid out to the public when I was a candidate. If that puts me in conflict from time to time with my colleagues, I think that’s ok. Matthews and Hoeffel confuse this sometimes with “partisanship,” but it’s really about sticking to my promises and standing up for what I believe in. But it’s not too late. Jim can come back to the fold anytime, undo what he has done, and he will be welcomed with open arms. I believe that was the meaning of the party’s censure of Matthews.
FF: Mr. Matthews has still not responded to The Bulletin’s invitation to an open forum to discuss inconsistencies involving the two Republican Commissioners. In your opinion, why hasn’t the air been cleared in this matter?
BC: Probably because what Jim has done is indefensible in a contested public forum. He can’t win that fight, so he has chosen not to engage in it. I’ve been approached by dozens of Republican elected officials, party officials, and supporters – who are friends with Jim – and they’ve asked if I’d sit down and work things out with him. I’ve told every one of them if they can get Jim to the table, I’ll be there. But, up to this point, he’s shown no interest in sitting down, or resolving anything. He’d rather work with Hoeffel and the Democrats. There’s really nowhere to go from that point, but I’m willing today, and will remain willing for the duration of our term.
FF: Specifically, what must the Republican Party to do to regain a favorable brand image in the eyes of the voters? Are the 2010 elections too soon for the GOP to see gains?
BC: We need to run candidates that people want to vote for. It’s simple, but it’s what we need to do. 2010 is not too soon to see gains. In fact, I’m optimistic.
We are in a period of transition in the suburban counties. In the past people used to vote for the Republican, despite who the candidate was. Going forward, they will vote for the candidate, despite them being a Democrat or Republican. It’s a new reality, and our party’s leadership will have to do a better job of recruiting candidates and running quality campaigns for them.
FF: There has been talk of you running for Lt. Governor, ostensibly to be paired with AG Tom Corbett. Some political experts see such a ticket as quite formidable, considering that both of you have impressive law enforcement credentials and governing experience, and both hail from the most populous regions of the state. Have you considered such a run? Could you work effectively as a Lt. Governor in a Corbett Administration, since you were primary opponents in the AG race four years ago?
BC: As always, I’m flattered by that talk, and I never rule anything out, but I’m focused on being a Montgomery County Commissioner and plan on running for reelection in 2011 with a running mate who shares my vision for the county’s future.
Every few months somebody approaches me about running for something else. I have had no interest in that. I ran for County Commissioner because I thought I could make a difference and improve the county. I would only run for something else if I thought I could make a bigger difference there.
Tom Corbett has been a superb attorney general. The 2004 primary is old news. I endorsed him after the 2004 primary and campaigned for his re-election in 2008. I also believe Tom would make an outstanding governor.
FF: How does your political philosophy stack up to Tom Corbett’s vision? How would you rate your personal relationship?
BC: Tom and I worked well together when I was DA and he was the Attorney General, and I like Tom a great deal. We’re both committed to safe streets and good schools and locking up the bad guys. We’ve both got a record of doing that and going after public corruption in our respective jobs.
I have always enjoyed working with him and was proud to support him in 2004 and 2008 for attorney general.
Chris Freind can be contacted at cf@thebulletin.us
Possibly Related...
Comments, compliments or complaints?