If you don't live in Pennsylvania, the only race you may care about is the Senatorial primary between Arlen and Joe. But you may notice that there are 50 state senate positions and 203 state assembly positions. There may be more or fewer in your state, but there are a bunch in every state. And these folks will be responsible for redistricting in most states in 2011, therefore who wins this year has an absolute influence on our lives. Not to mention all the other state legislation that affects each and every one of us on a daily basis.
But that's not why I bring it up. I looked over the list to see how many of the people I know made their numbers for signed petitions. And that means "know", as in if you mentioned my name to them, they would know who I was. People often ask me how I know politicians, as if there is some magic to it. There isn't. You go to a place where they are, introduce yourself, have a conversation, maybe have coffee or lunch with them, write them notes, engage them in conversation. In this day and age, you can even be a politician's facebook friend: some only have fan pages, but many have regular pages where you can interact with them.
Elected officials at the state level are glad to know their constituents. Sure, there are some who are lazy, smarmy and untrustworthy and they don't want to know you, but most are decent people trying to do the best they can for their constituency within a system that is often byzantine.
I would like to bring your attention to the Democratic candidate for the 41st Assembly district: Jerry Policoff. I've known him a long time, and I've written about him in the past here on DCW because of his great work on Single Payer. Jerry was asked to run just because otherwise the Republican would run unopposed. He has never run for office before: he took on the petition process with gusto. While a lesser man would have let the people who asked him to run spread the petitions, he was out every day meeting people, telling them about himself, asking them for their signatures, and potentially for their support. He's put together a team who will help him with logistics/field planning, finance, and advertising. Jerry won't need help with messaging as his beliefs are sure, and he's a longtime writer, one who is very skilled. And yes, I'll be giving as much tactical support as I can.
Every four years people come out and most treat the presidential election like a sporting event: they care only about polls and percentages. They don't know any of the candidates at any level, they don't work the campaigns, they don't give money: it's all an abstraction. But governing goes on daily, year in year out. You should know who your people are, and maybe you want to try to be one of them!
There are two pieces of legislation winding around the state legislatures of Kansas and Pennsylvania. They could not be more different. They have impacts not only for the state policies, but for all of health care, for economic recovery, and on the issue of morality.
Let's start with the positive. There are 50 State Senators in Pennsylvania. 27 of them have signed on, so far, to agree to an economic impact study for Single Payer health care. And, um, the majority of the members are Republicans. This means a study indicating the costs and benefits of Single Payer to the 6th largest state population in America will be enacted, which will prove the health AND ECONOMIC benefits of the proposal. This is the first step to passage of the full legislation. Imagine living in a place where health care is a right not a privilege. Where some hospitals have already implemented easily copied programs which greatly reduce secondary infections, readmissions, and death rates AT A LOWER COST than the "traditional" method. Where you can start a small business without having to stay with a large employer because it's the only way to get affordable benefits. Where illness cannot bankrupt you. And for businesses: a set amount for health insurance premiums for employees without the uncertainty of unreasonable and unknown annual increases. For the doctors and other medical professionals: the ability to spend more time with patients, and less time arguing with insurance companies. As for jobs? New jobs for the implementation and administration of the program. More jobs in direct health care as more people move to the state, or stay when they are graduated from college. No down side.
And then you have Kansas. A state House committee may vote next week on a state Constitutional amendment:
The amendment would add a provision to the constitution prohibiting the state from requiring any individual or business to buy health insurance. It also would prevent the state from requiring anyone to participate in a particular health care plan.
Where would YOU rather live?
Want to help in Pennsylvania? Join HealthCare4AllPA here. Even if you don't live in the state,you can join the mailing list, make a contribution, and help with other efforts. It only has to pass in ONE PLACE, and then "coming soon to a town near you."
Want to help in Kansas? Call your reps and just say NO!
Yesterday, the Chesco Dems held their nominating convention. Any local Democrat can attend, but only committeepeople, zone, regional and county elected officials can vote. 55% is required to win. The specific numbers differ by position. For example, everyone can vote for the senatorial and gubernatorial endorsements, but only those in CD6 can vote for that race, same with CD7 part of which is also part of Chesco. It was interesting, to say the least.
First off, no gubernatorial nor senatorial candidate received enough votes for an endorsement. For Governor, the votes were:
Onorato - 103
Hoeffel - 95
Wagner - 52
Williams - 1
Remember, the State Committee also failed to endorse due to a lack of majority.
The vote was 126 Sestak - 119 Specter on the Senate side. Interesting, to say the least, given that Specter won the State Committee endorsement, and the Chesco voters went 8 - 3 for Specter. While the votes are sealed, Andy Dinneman is a big Specter backer. Andy is a second term State Senator, holding a seat that was never Democratic before he captured it in a special election due to the death of his predecessor. And we'll get back to him.
The CD-7 vote was straightforward: 39 for Brian Lentz, with two votes for Gail Conner and one for Teresa Touey.
In the 6th District, Manan Trivedi carried 99 votes to Doug Pike's 40 and Brian Gordon's one. 77 were required. All of the people I spoke with voted for Trivedi for some version of "his personal story" "his background" "his ability to present a clear difference to Gerlach" and "his position on health care." It was a blow-out, especially since the Pike campaign was convinced it had 56 solid votes going in, which did not materialize.
As an aside, because of Andy Dinneman, some of the town committees held meetings where Manan spoke, and Doug and Brian were not allowed to speak, even though they, in some cases, showed up. This should not detract from Manan, the man and the candidate, just a little nod to local politics and peccadillos on the part of Andy.
The question becomes whether or not a man like Manan can win against Jim Gerlach. I contended previously that he could not based on organization and money. Predominantly money. But if each of the 99 people who voted for him, and their spouses and a few friends each, give the $2400 that they can for the primary, he could erase the financial deficit in a week.
Further, many people are excited about Manan Trivedi. He is pure Single Payer, he is completely opposed to any build-up in Afghanistan. What won the election for Obama in Pennsylvania was that he overcame the mistakes of the primary, and utilized excited volunteers. In 2008, that was a winning formula. In 2010 it's questionable, but in my eyes, this endorsement means a lot. Or rather, it will mean a lot if the committeepeople actually work for him: the phones, the canvasses, the lit drops, the voter drives, and the rest of GOTV. This is something that, organizationally, they never did before in history. But 2010 is an odd year.
It brings up the question of whether a true progressive can win in a mixed purple district like the PA 6th. I like Manan. I like Doug. There is no question that either would be a much better Congressman than Jim Gerlach. By the way, Steve Welch pulled out yesterday, meaning that Gerlach will not need to spend any money on the primary as the rest of his competitors present little challenge. He'll be primed and ready on 21 May for whichever Democrat challenges him.
The people who came out in Chesco yesterday were primarily progressives. all are activists. That they overrode the state endorsement of Arlen Specter, and rated Joe Hoeffel so highly is telling of that. The question is whether or not that can translate to the voters: the workers for whom 2008 was their first campaign and didn't even vote last year. The people who are so fed-up that they have changed their registration from Democrat to either "Independent" or "unaligned". Can force of personality and a compelling story win? It's possible we'll see....a week ago, I would have said that Pike had this primary sewn up, now I'm thinking it's 50/50.
One other thing to consider in the calculus is that a couple weeks ago, the 6th was the most likely district to be lost to redistricting. With the death of John Murtha, his district is in play for being redistricted out of existence. A consideration, too.
I left my structurally failing house (details after the jump) last night to attend the candidate debate between the three men vying for the Democratic nomination to run against Jim Gerlach. These three men are a study in contrasts: not so much in terms of position as in personal demeanor.
The first to arrive was Manan Trivedi: he is the youngest of the three, very outgoing, whip-smart, and with the beam of a man who is expecting his first child in less than two months. We chatted briefly about his wife's pregnancy. Manan has a compelling back story: he served as a surgeon in Iraq, and was with the first team on the ground after the ground war started. He is still practicing as a doctor part-time while campaigning.
The second to arrive was Brian Gordon. Brian is the only one to hold elective office, he's currently a township commissioner. Of every politician I have ever spoken with in my life, Brian singularly has the most interesting ideas. Ever.
Almost immediately after Brian, Doug Pike arrived. Doug has the most experience of the three: he worked for Paul Tsongas, worked in health care as an administrator, and was a journalist for the bulk of his career. While all three are progressive, Doug's positions are the most closely aligned with President Obama's.
Instead of listening to the debate, I spoke before it started with many of the people who came to hear the candidates: with the exception of their staffs, the overwhelming majority of attendees had never met or heard any of the three candidates. A friend and I positioned ourselves in the lobby, and asked questions of the audience as they were leaving to get a sense of what they thought of the candidates.
Of interest to me were the people who heard something from a candidate, loved what they heard, but understood neither the proposal nor the ramifications. One woman left early: she had only come to hear the positions on health care, heard the candidates, and made her decision. She heard Manan say that he would support a public option, but he stood firmly behind Single Payer. She heard Doug say that he wanted a Public Option. She heard Brian say that the solution to health care involved each hospital joining into small local hospital groups, only providing services from their doctors, and thus cutting costs astronomically. She decided on supporting Brian. If you've been following the health care debate, you know that the idea Brian presented was for small co-ops, which lack buying power, and access to many specialists, and a lack of scale in purchase of drugs and durable medical equipment. It's also not his position: his position is that he likes a system of a National Health Service with an overlay of private insurance, similar to the British system.
Another man made his decision based on HOW THE CANDIDATES LOOKED. This has been a theme I've heard from attendees at other multiple candidate events. I don't understand it, but that's the way some people are: who "looks most" like a Congressman.
I received some emails from people I know who attended the debate asking what I knew about certain positions that weren't fleshed out in the debate. Mostly though, I received calls and emails asking one question: which of these men can actually win in November? It's a question to which I know the answer, and the answer pains me. The answer bothers me because it shows a major problem in American politics: most races are not a fair fight.
The 6th CD has an entrenched Congressman in Jim Gerlach. Although his politics have been truly horrid for the district, he is personable, good looking, s-m-o-o-t-h, answers constituent queries with maniacal speed, has a professional staff, and a ton of money. His votes have hurt the overwhelming majority of people who live in the district in terms of economics, education, and health care. He believes there should be no separation of Church and State, he wants government completely out of health care, doesn't want to spend money on education, is incredible pro-military and pro-gun, pro-business and anti-labour. His positions on "values" positions are for the most part terrible. I know people who keep voting for him, even though they are registered Democrats and normally vote Democratic, and who have had very bad experiences with his constituent services staff. That is, they're quick, but they always say "no". They vote for him because he's charismatic and (here's the part I hate most) "he looks like he belongs in Congress."
Therefore, whichever of Doug, Manan and Brian who wins the nomination will have to take on a political "machine". The positions will matter less than the abilities of staff to flexibly take on Gerlach's army, spend incredible amounts of money, be able to reach out to a very diverse district which skews old and do so in a post-phone bank world, and anticipate the moves of a campaign organization that is well-oiled and practiced.
I hate that the answer to "who can win against Gerlach?" comes down less to a question of the man and his positions, but the ability to fund a professional campaign filled with experienced staff, a strong field plan, and the money in the bank to implement. The ability to do these things will rest with the campaign, as the Democratic organizations in the counties covered by the district are not well-oiled enough to provide support beyond one lit drop for the primary, and one for the general. Any of the three Democratic contenders would be a better Congressman for CD 6 than Gerlach, but to get there, the c-a-m-p-a-i-g-n has to win.
I hesitate to write down the answer. Of the three candidates, two have, at best a 2% chance of winning against Gerlach, and that's being optimistic: they lack the cash and the staff, and it's late in the game to try and get them. I've reviewed the field plans, and they won't be enough. The third candidate has about a 50 - 50 chance of winning based on field plan, staff and money, but it would take a rallying around him of all supporters after the primary to carry that out. I want people to vote on issues and candidates, not campaigns and bank accounts. But I live here, and I want that seat. I know for certain that Doug Pike has the best shot at Gerlach's seat. More on issues to follow.
Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter remains in front of Congressman Joe Sestak, 51-36. The race seems to have stabilized since October, and Sestak has just over 3 months to close the gap.
John Murtha passed away this afternoon at 77. He had represented the 12th CD in Pennsylvania since 1974, and was the first Vietnam veteran elected to Congress. Today we remember the good about the Congressman: his objection to the Iraq war, the projects he brought to his district, the part of his voting record that excluded abortion and gun control. (We also ignore ABSCAM.)
You may read elsewhere that he was a "former" Marine. With great respect for all Marines, I remind you that there are no retired Marines, only Marines not currently on active duty.
The question is why did he die? He had laparoscopic gall bladder surgery a couple weeks ago, went home, and then re-entered the hospital last week due to unnamed complications and a massive infection. He was in ICU. The surgery itself is very common and has a low probability of complications. The likelihood is that the problems were related to his age, weight, and overall physical condition: all of these greatly increase the likelihood of complications from any medical procedure. This would have made it less possible for his body to fight off whatever infection felled him.
Tomorrow, we'll think about what happens to the seat, the special election, the effects on the ultimate redistricting of Pennsylvania: today, John "Jack" Murtha served his country and he will be missed.
Update: While DocJess will have more tomorrow, note that John Murtha's district was the only one in the country, yes, the only one, to vote for Kerry in'04 and McCain in '08.
Southeastern Pennsylvania was hit hard by a major snowstorm yesterday. It was the second highest snowfall total in history, at an official 28.5 inches. 10 hours before the snow ended, Olivia was outside considering her options, as you can see in the photo.
Meanwhile, some 50 miles west of Philadelphia, the State Democratic Committee met in Lancaster to make its endorsements. On the good news side, there was unanimous agreement on one issue. All 301 attending State Committee members voted to endorse a resolution calling for passage of single payer healthcare, Senate Bill 400 and House Bill 1660, also known as the "Family and Business Healthcare Security Act." If you haven't read the bill yet, a synopsis is here, including a link to the full legislation. Note that the legislation is only 27 pages: it doesn't take a lot of words to put forth a great idea.
And then, the votes went downhill. On the issue of governor, there was no endorsement.
Four people competed for the endorsement: state Auditor General Jack Wagner of Pittsburgh, Allegheny County Executive Dan Onorato, former U.S. Rep. Joe Hoeffel and state Sen. Anthony Williams of Philadelphia, who said Friday he has filed papers that allow him to raise money for a prospective campaign. Scranton Mayor Chris Doherty has declared his candidacy, but did not compete for the endorsement Saturday.
Hoeffel was eliminated on the first ballot as the low vote-getter. On the second and final ballot, Wagner received the most votes — more than half of those cast, but far short of a two-thirds majority.
It's interesting that Wagner received the most votes as Onorato has the institutional support of the party, and Ed Rendell, behind him. If the party cannot pull together behind a candidate, it bodes poorly for November, which was all uphill in any event. Will Hoeffel's progressive support evaporate after he loses the primary? Voting for Onorato or Wagner is an incredibly tough thing for a progressive: there is very little daylight between their positions and those of Republican Tom Corbett. Plus, Corbett has more name recognition, is currently prosecuting corrupt state officials from both parties, and is squeaky clean.
On the Senate side, Arlen Specter won the endorsement of more than the required two-thirds, with 229 votes to Joe Sestak's 72. Sestak had this to say:
It showed "I was a little too independent" for the committee members, who hail from all corners of the state, the second-term congressman from the Philadelphia suburbs said as he vowed to stay in the race. "This is going to be a great fight."
The endorsement of Specter is a little surprising given that many of those who voted for the endorsement are the same people who worked very hard against him in all the previous elections. If Specter wins the primary, it's almost certain that Pat Toomey will win the seat. Specter hasn't had a polling lead since October. In the most recent poll, of likely voters, Toomey holds a 14% lead, plus an enthusiasm gap lead when the party registrations are considered.
This morning, the third Democratic candidate for PA CD-6 is coming over to my house for bagels and coffee and to be interviewed. I had interviewed both Doug Pike and Manan Trivedi late last year with the intention of publishing in January. However, on the day I interviewed Manan, it became known that Brian Gordon would be entering the race and so I made the decision to delay. This will allow the voters to see the candidates compared and contrasted in one place. I believe it to be more fair.
Brian called me yesterday to double-check on timing. One of his staffers had asked me to change the time, and he was calling to see if I could push the time back as he was dropping one of his kids to school. That's no problem for me, and it was a good reminder that candidates and elected officials really do have "regular lives." He asked if he could email over his announcement, and I told him that it wouldn't affect my questions, since I was going to ask him the same things I had asked the other candidates. Boy, was I ever wrong about that.
I have posted the announcement after the jump, because you might want to take a look at it. In my entire life, I have never, EVER, seen an announcement speech from a Democrat anything like Brian Gordon's. EVER. NEVER.
It's not just that he's a blue dog (5th line in), or that he quotes a song, or talks about sin, or insinuates that the US would have direct control over the environmental or labour laws of a foreign country. No, it's this line:
Government is nothing more than the things we decide to do together.
If you are a long time reader, and you've been through one of my diatribes on ours being a country founded on the rule of law, the uniqueness of our electoral system, yada yada, you can only imagine what reading a line like that does to me. "Nothing more"????? As in "we decided to rob a bank together?" "We decided to invade a sovereign nation for no other reason than the leader threatened my dad?" Wait, scratch that, it actually happened.
Government can be a tool for good. It can bring out the best in people. It can be dedicated to public service and making America the best it can be. But "government" is also involved in process, and needs to be subservient to the rule of law. Does this mean that all SCOTUS decisions are good? Certainly not. All laws are just? Not so much. But our government: our laws, processes, actions, are evolutionary.
It's why blacks are now "whole people", instead of the 3/5 of a person negotiated as "the best possible outcome" against those Founding Fathers who were racists. It's why men AND women can vote. It's why 18 year olds can vote. Why Miranda exists. Why choice is legal.
Our government was designed so that people could NOT just "do something" - it's why we have three branches of government at the Federal level, and then state and local governments of various compositions, and finally all remaining rights given to the people.
Government is not people just deciding to do something, like throw a cook-out: it's what we work at, correct, improve, and strive for over time. Sometimes, it is what we bleed for. Yesterday was the 50th anniversary of the first lunch counter sit in, in Greensboro, NC. 100,000 students took part over 1960. 3,000 were arrested, many more were spat upon and beaten. Government action often comes from commitment, planning and the implementation of hard action. And then, often glacially, it moves to a better place. By the way, I hope you will take the time and read this article on the sit-ins. I guarantee that you'll learn something you didn't know before, and it's worth remembering what our country used to be, and why it's better now.
There are two pieces out of Pennsylvania this morning.
First, the lawsuit Golden English v. Chester County was filed in Federal Court. This is a racial discrimination suit related to problems with African-American voting in the 2008 general election. You can read the suit here. In summary:
A federal lawsuit was filed today on behalf of African-American residents and Lincoln University students in Chester County, asserting that the County Board of Elections and Department of Voter Services have deprived African-Americans in Lower Oxford East Township of their right to vote by assigning them to inconvenient and inadequate polling facilities. Prior to the November 2008 election, community members had warned county officials that the existing polling place could not handle the anticipated turnout, but county officials refused to move the polling place. As a result, on Election Day 2008, hundreds of Lower Oxford East voters - most of them African-American - waited up to seven hours in the pouring rain to cast their votes. Those who were unable to wait left without voting.
The suit asks the court to order Chester County to return the Lower Oxford East polling place to the Lincoln University campus, authorize federal elections monitors, and award damages to residents who faced extreme difficulties or were prevented from voting in the 2008 general election.
While you won't find it surprising, the County Commission had then two Republican commissioners and one Democrat. The vote was 2 - 1.
The other news relates to the Senate race. A new heavily slanted and biased Rasmussen poll shows Joe Sestak up on point from their last poll, to a spread of eight, and Specter falling further behind Toomey. Specifically:
Toomey leads Specter by 49%-40%, and he leads Sestak by 43%-35%. A month ago Toomey led Specter by 46%-42%, and led Sestak by 44%-38%.
You can see the historical graphs here. The difference between being 8 points behind vs 9 points is not statistically significant, but when you look at the trends, Sestak was last ahead of Toomey in October, and his rate of separation is slowing, along with double digit uncommitted voters. Meanwhile, Specter peaked in August, undecideds are down to 8%, and it looks to be in free fall.
In addition, Sestak has publicly asked Specter to debate early and often one-on-one. For those of us who saw them live, together on the stage at Netroots Nation last summer, that will only increase Sestaks's popularity. It is therefore likely that Specter will hold the number of debates to a minimum. Years ago, even 5 years ago, you'd see Arlen Specter in person and be impressed. You might not have agreed with him, but he knew his facts, spoke with conviction, and truly was an interesting listen. Last summer he was unsure, halting, and "old-old". I cannot remember if he was undergoing chemo at the time. If he was, that certainly would have contributed, so we'll see if the debates come off.
Wealthy businessman Steve Welch (R) said today he won't drop out of the race against Rep. Jim Gerlach (R-PA), forcing the incumbent into a potentially costly, and damaging, primary.
GOPers were excited when Gerlach dropped his longshot GOV bid earlier this month to run for re-election to his swing suburban Philly CD. But they certainly didn't bargain on Welch -- and his $650K war chest -- staying in the contest.
In fact, most of the other serious contenders have dropped out of the race; some, begrudgingly so. Most expected Welch to drop his bid, but he has decided to stay in. "If you were us, why would you stop?" Welch told PoliticsPA today. "We're clearly gaining support."
Update from DocJess: Tom Knox has officially dropped out of the gubernatorial race, and endorsed Dan Onorato.
Last night, current CD-6 Congressman Jim Gerlach announced he was dropping out of the Pennsylvania Governor's race. The race hadn't been polled since October, when Jim was pulling at 10%, and Tom Corbett at over 50%. Corbett, in his position as State AG, has since indicted a swath of Republicans to match the Democratic crowd he indicted last year. It's all corruption, extortion, bribery, misuse of public funds: and they're all guilty and it is highly probable that a court will find them guilty although everyone deserves his day in court and is innocent until proven guilty under the American justice system.
Jim has sat pretty in a district specifically gerrymandered for him in 2001. This time, his reach far extended past his grasp. It won't change the gubernatorial primary on the GOP side, Corbett has always been a lock. The question is whether or not he'll get back into the CD-6 race.
Although WaPo says that he'll be re-entering the race, it's hard to see how that will last. First, he has no money: only $34,000 in the bank as of Q3. Second, there are already six Republicans running, including State House Rep Curt Schroeder, who was a victim of some of the corruption Corbett indicted several Republicans about, as well as Steve Welch, who is running at the behest of the national party. Third, Doug Pike is a much more difficult challenge for Jim than his three previous Democratic challengers. Doug hasn't won the Democratic primary, but he's ahead at this time. Finally, there is the personal issue. No one seemed to know about it when he ran before, but it came to light inadvertently last summer. It hasn't paid to use it, but I'm still holding it just in case he jumps into the CD-6 race. Suffice it to say that he has run on lots and lots of family values, and he seems to lack them. It's all in the divorce papers. For the divorce he's denied having. Sorry, no boys involved. Still, it would hurt him.
On the Democratic side, Doug Pike is the front runner with close to a million as of the end of Q3. Manan Trivedi had about $100k, and Brian Gordon has just announced and doesn't have a full committee yet, much less any money to speak of. We'll see what the Q4 numbers say.
I've met with Doug several times, and I've sat down with Manan for a couple hours. I am working on the formal interviews I accomplished with each. It is so difficult because both are good men, both are strong candidates, and there is little daylight between their positions on all but one issue. One, though, will be a much stronger and more electable candidate in the general. But the interview was undertaken to help Democrats make a primary decision. Holding to journalistic ethics in a race with personal ramifications is tougher then I would have thought it would be.
This will be an interesting year overall in Pennsylvania politics. Will John Murtha pay a price for his long-time ethics issues, or will the fact that he brings big money home consistently trump the problems? It looks like another Kanjorski-Barletta match-up in the 11th. Under the radar, Lois Herr is challenging Joe Pitts in the 16th. It's a quiet race, but she will be the most formidable challenge Joe has had in his seven terms. He is also a co-sponsor of the Stupak amendment (yes, that one)and the 16th is a changing district. With Joe Sestak running for Senate, Brian Lentz, a state rep, is stepping up, running against Pat Meehan. Look for that to be a true horse race. Herewith, my overalls, as always, Democrats in blue, IIE in red.
Democratic Sen. Arlen Specter and Republican challenger Pat Toomey are deadlocked 44 - 44 percent in Pennsylvania's marquee 2010 U.S. Senate race, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today. ... Sen. Specter holds a commanding 53 - 30 percent lead in the Democratic Senate primary over Congressman Joe Sestak, a slight increase from the 44 - 25 percent margin [on] October 1. -Quinnipiac
I think the most interesting thing is that Arlen Specter seems to have halted any momentum Sestak had through the summer or fall. Specter just isn't giving progressive Democrats any ammunition at this point. Look at what happened on Monday at the Senate Democratic caucus:
Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, who switched parties earlier this year to become a Democrat, urged his colleagues not to let obstructionists stand in the way. “I came to this caucus to be your 60th vote,” he said to a round of applause, according to observers.
Would he be acting this way without Sestak's challenge from the left? Probably not. Will he change his colors again if he wins the primary, and then if he wins reelection? Probably so. But for now, at least, he seems to be covering his left flank well. The primary is 5 months from today.
If you don't live in Pennsylvania, you might not be keeping up with the indictments.
By way of background, Tom Corbett is the current Attorney General of the state. He's squeaky clean, to the best of my knowledge. He's also running on the GOP side for governor. As prognostications go, I think he wins both the primary and the general. I'll get into that after the jump, but this is really about something else.
Last summer, Corbett indicted a number of Democratic state reps and staffers. Last week, he also indicted a number of Republicans, including John Perzel, who isn't quite in Vinnie Fumo's class, but pretty close. The charges involve fraud, embezzlement, mismanagement of government funds, offices and personnel, and, in the case of Perzel, using his powers to damage other Republicans to ensure no primary challenges.
In most years, it would not be a problem to run for one office while holding another. U.S. Sen. Bob Casey, the late Lt. Gov. Catherine Baker Knoll and many other prominent Pennsylvanians have done it.
This is different.
This probe has the potential to be a major step toward changing a culture of entitlement that for too long has undone the good works of our legislators. It deserves the attorney general’s full-time attention. Yet running for governor can become a nearly full-time job in itself.
Also, you have indeed followed the evidence where it led. But are the people of Pennsylvania simply to trust that you will continue to do so, even if your probe threatens to engulf a party chairman in some county crucial to your election bid, or some lawmaker whose network you need to get out the vote?
Your personal record might say yes, but remember, this scandal is about campaigning. Its prosecution needs to avoid even the perception of conflict of interest. Earlier, you said that you would consider accepting contributions from sitting lawmakers once the targets of the investigation were clear. Yet last week, you said the probe is ongoing.
You see? The ethical thorns would snag a saint.
Should he resign? Would it make a difference? Could staying in office end up hurting him?
While most of my weekend was the sort of thing you not only don't want to talk about, but you really want to forget, there was one real highlight.
Yesterday afternoon I went out to do my neighborhood lit drop for tomorrow's election. (And not alone.) If you've never done an election lit drop, the deal is that you have a little clear plastic bag filled with information on the candidates, plus information from the local committee, and maybe the county/state committee. Generally, there's also a copy of the ballot or a list of who the party candidates on the ballot.
A lot of times, you run out and do them in the dark of night and leave the information on the doors.
If, however, you're a block captain, you also knock the doors. You do this to say hi to people you know anyway, make sure people who might need a ride to the polls get one, and make sure that if anyone moved into the neighborhood they're registered.
I had the great pleasure yesterday of knocking doors with Doug Pike, candidate for CD-6. Yes, I know he's not on the ballot until next year, but it was a great opportunity for him to meet-and-greet the folks and show support for this year's row officer and judicial candidates.
I'm a supporter of Doug Pike for his stands on the issues, and because I believe he is truly the best choice to represent me (and everyone else in CD-6) in Congress. Yesterday, I had the opportunity to spend a different kind of time with him. He and I had spoken before about issues and demographics, but yesterday I got to see the man. You can tell a lot about a person by the little things: when you go to someone's house, are you offered something to drink? If your arms are filled with packages, does someone offer to help tote?
Yesterday, I saw in Doug not just a pol who holds the same political beliefs that I do, but a true human being I'd want as a friend if we met socially. And based on the questions that independent voters asked him, I think he's also got a real shot at being elected.
Southeastern Pennsylvania was hit hard by a major snowstorm yesterday. It was the second highest snowfall total in history, at an official 28.5 inches. 10 hours before the snow ended, Olivia was outside considering her options, as you can see in the photo. 
