Lessons of Yesterday

A few thoughts about yesterday's primary results:

1. The Arlen Specter era is over. In the end, the endorsements from the president and vice president and others were not enough. Going negative against Joe Sestak was probably a tactical mistake. It raised Sestak's name recognition and made him look sympathetic--almost like someone who would like to talk about issues rather than spend millions on sleazy TV ads. Kudos to Rick Thomas and others who called out Specter for going negative against a "fellow" Democrat. At least Specter didn't try to argue that he'd forgotten which side he was on again (as he did after his comments about the Norm Coleman/Al Franken dispute).

2. Fred Smith defeats Maurice Brubaker. It's hard to know how the opinions of voters shift since there is no reliable polling, but the Union County Republicans' decision to censure Brubaker for calling himself a public accountant instead of a senior accountant (and the local newspaper headlines about it) couldn't have helped Brubaker's cause. I guess that neutralized his claim that we could use someone in Harrisburg who could read a balance sheet. And it's good to see that the Union County Republican committee is all about maintaining integrity whatever the cost, not about playing politics (ahem). It will be interesting to see if the Brubaker voters will vote for Smith in the fall.

3. Malcolm Derk won at this end of PA-10, but too many of the voters live at the other end. Tom Marino seems to have the Republicans united (unlike Chris Hackett who split the party in his primary race against Dan Muesser last time around). Still, Chris Carney has made a consistent argument that he represents the district and not party. My sense is that Carney has bonded with this district and with its military families and that it will be very hard to defeat him. Having Sestak on the ticket--another centrist Democrat with a military background--should help Carney's chances in the fall.

4. The most important race we're not talking about is the one for governor. Budget crisis, gas drilling, environmental issues, education issues. . . we have huge problems at the state level, and the intangibles favor the Republicans after two terms of a Democrat (Ed Rendell). Dan Onorato has support in the Pittsburgh area but has to build organization across the state, and especially in Philadelphia. Philadelphia's Jonathan Saidel's weak showing in the lt. governor's race (Conklin of Centre County seems to have a slight lead) suggests that even if Saidel wins there will be a lot of work for the Democrats to do in Philadelphia. And how did Conklin win so many votes without money or establishment support? I know his answer in the LWV guide impressed me, but those short answers can't possibly move enough votes to swing the election, can they?

Responding to DNC email about Specter

I'm guessing that many of us received an email last week from "Barack Obama" (via the DNC) urging support for Arlen Specter, with a link you could follow to Specter's website to donate or volunteer.

Don't get me wrong, I "understand" the administration must have made a quid-pro-quo deal with Arlen Specter to support him when he switched parties. (But, as Nate Silver suggests, we probably have Sestak, not Obama, to thank for Specter's recent voting record.) But I still think the Democratic "National" Committee ought to stay out of the way, let us have our state primaries, and then help support the Democratic candidate. This part of "Obama's" email bugged me in particular:

But now, he needs your help. He's in a tight race for the Democratic nomination for Senate, and the primary is coming up soon on May 18th.

Vice President Biden and I need him in Washington, fighting alongside us....

Really, DNC? Could you be more passive-voice? "He's in a tight race...." Not even a mention of who the other candidate is, or any reasons why we wouldn't want him instead? I know it probably won't do any good, but I thought the DNC needed to hear that this kind of email from them really doesn't inspire me to donate to them or do anything they ask. Maybe if enough people do the same, they might think twice next time (or not). Here's what I sent them:

Dear DNC,
I do not appreciate the DNC getting involved in our Pennsylvania primary in this way. I know Specter has supported the president's agenda. But some of that support was probably because he felt pressured by his primary challenger, Joe Sestak, to do so. Congressman Sestak has also supported the president's agenda and would make a fine senator.

When you send emails like this, you make people like myself LESS likely to support the DNC. You should be supporting all Democrats in elections against Republicans. I wish you would please stay out of our primary.
Sincerely,
J-

What are the top issues for 2010 and beyond?

It's been a couple years since CSCC used a survey to identify top issues both at the national level and at the state/local level. Both lists at that time had HEALTH CARE and ENERGY close to the top. The idea was that the list would help to guide our efforts and define winning issues for progressive candidates. For the full list, see this page:

http://csccnow.com/about.html

Kudos to the Steering Committee for bringing us the Health Care panel last May and the Energy Forum this June. CSCC is playing a part in shaping the focus of the political conversation in the Valley--and using input from all of you to do it.

What are the issues that most need grassroots attention for 2010 and beyond?

My list would include:

Federal level:
Financial reform
Clean energy/Environment
Economy/Jobs

State/local:
Health care
State budget reform
Economic development and planning (including Energy development)

Other priorities: We probably need some kind of campaign reform, especially if the new court ruling plays out as expected. Large corporations are now free to spend at will to influence the outcome of elections. That does not bode well for grassroots democracy. (See Barb Sundin's Campaign Reform Wish List .)


We definitely have a corrupt political culture at the state level. That's clear to anyone who reads the headlines. But is that an issue that can unite a winning progressive coalition? I don't know.

What would be on your list?

Special CSCC Event THURSDAY: Energy And How We Pay For It

Apologies in advance if you get bombarded by multiple emails about this in the next few days, but we are trying to get the word out about this special CSCC event on Thursday:

The Central Susquehanna Citizens Coalition will present a public forum titled “Energy and How We Pay For It in PA: The Next Five Years and Beyond” on Thursday, April 1 at 7:30pm at the Union County Government Center located at 155 N 15th St., Lewisburg. The panel will feature four distinguished energy professionals from across our region and the U.S.

• Stacy Richards is Director of the SEDA-COG Energy Resource Center, and her topic will be "Energizing Our Region."
• Steve Connolley is the owner of Hometown Energy Systems, LLC, a renewable energy startup company, and his topic will be "Renewable Energy Technologies for Homes and Businesses."
• Preston Boop is the owner of Briar Patch Organic Farm where he produces bio-diesel fuel, and his topic will be "Alternative Energy from Recycled Organics."
• William Steinhurst is Senior Consultant for Synapse Energy Economics, an energy consulting firm, and his topic will be "The Future of Electricity Regulation."

The format of the panel discussion will be 15-minute presentations by each of the panelists, followed by 30 minutes of interactive discussion where audience members are encouraged to ask questions.

For more information, please see our full press release here.

You can also download our event flyer here. Please print one out to share or use as a reminder! Hope to see you there.

Final Countdown to HCR

Looks like the House of Representatives is headed toward a final vote on the healthcare reform (reconciliation) bill at 10am on Sunday morning. Carney voted "yes" on the previous House bill, and he has said some very encouraging things in the press lately, but the Daily Item characterized him as an "undecided" vote just yesterday. We know that he (and his staff) are literally counting the number of calls he gets for vs. against reform. So now is the time to make your voices heard. If you've got more than one voter in your household, everyone should call.

Here are his office numbers:
Williamsport: 570-327-1902
Shamokin: 570-644-1682
Clarks Summit: 866-846-8124
Washington DC: 202-225-3731
More contact information can be found at his website here.

If you've never called him before, it's so easy! A friendly staff member will answer your call, listen to your request ("Please tell Mr. Carney to vote for the healthcare reform bill"), take down your name, and you are done! It takes less than a minute.

And for those of you (like me) who are both excited about the prospect of this bill passing, but also dejected about how it falls short of achieving true "universal healthcare," it might make you feel a little better to read this House committee summary of what's actually in the reconciliation bill. It's very far from perfect, but there's some truly good stuff in there. I wish I could say more than "it's a step in the right direction," but... hey, it's a step in the right direction.

Private and Public Tragedy

Organizing for America- the organizing branch of the Obama campiagn that stuck around afterwards, has a great example of using technology to rally people.

I wrote the following to Chris Carney and as I got into it I wanted to give it a broader audience.


Dear Rep. Carney,

I am here for Betsy and Lisa [Names changed]-

We must pass health insurance reform now. Too many people and businesses face warped incentives or grim and miserable health due to the burdens of our perverse and broken system.

Betsyworks full tie in a private child care facility. She is a single mom. She often baby sits infants for many families and is always willing to help people with sick children or other events. Her selflessness allows others to pursue their careers as professors, doctors, and business leaders. Her employer, a day care center subsidized by a local employer, does not provide coverage. She had such severe back problems she could not sleep. Friends pooled $300 to help her see a chiropractor. She limited coverage now, but is still an injury away from financial crisis.

Lisa has leukemia. She works cleaning people’s homes. She cleans and cooks for her husband every day, even when he has been furloughed or been between jobs. She stays married to a disinterested, neglectful and nearly abusive husband because she could never afford individual coverage, or even get it with her leukemia. Where is her freedom to live her life? The combination of patriarchy and our health care system is deeply unfair and sexist. I think only the strength of her personality and her adult son keeps her husband from raising his hand against her.

Millions are uninsured. In 2009, one study found 45,000 Americans died due to lack of coverage. [1] They used a rigorous method used by researchers in 1993 who found around half that number then. Among those 45,000 are more than 2,000 uninsured veterans.[2] On 9/11, 3,000 of our citizens were innocent victims and became iconic heroes. We endure 15 9/11s every year through 45,000 private tragedies of martyrs to a broken healthcare system midwife by a corrupt political system. We have marshaled billions of dollars and 100,000s of soldiers to avenge the fallen of 9/11. Meanwhile, we engage in trivial “death panel” and “reconciliation” food fights at home while our fellow citizens are chewed up and spit out as corpses by the broken health care system. Why should the public tragedy of 9/11 count for so much more all these years than the sum of 45,000 private tragedies year in and year out?

Where is the justice in that? How is that fair?


[1] Heavey, Susan. Sept 2009. “Study Links 45,000 Deaths to Lack of Health Insurance.” Reuters. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE58G6W520090917

[2] Physicians for A National Health Program. Nov 10, 2009. “Over 2,200 veterans died in 2008 due to lack of health insurance.” http://www.pnhp.org/news/2009/november/over_2200_veterans_.php

Campaign Reform Wish List

Many of you have probably heard Barb Sundin talk about ideas for campaign reform. She's been handing a list of ideas to candidates for office and I thought you might like to read them too. (My favorite is #5.)

Campaign Reform Wish List
by Barbara Sundin

In light of the recent Supreme Court decision it becomes clearer that what we need is serious campaign finance reform. Last year alone 2.7 billion dollars were spent on state and local elections and 6.3 billion were spent on federal elections.That’s BILLION. Can you imagine what we could do with that money? Fix our schools, provide healthcare for everyone, fix our roads, invest in green energy are a few I can think of.

Following is a list of the things I would like to see in Campaign reform legislation. I know it’s a stretch, but if only some of these things get passed into law our elections might become sane again and legislators might just be able to legislate for the good of the country, instead of fundraise. Furthermore, they would be responsible to the voters not the big money people and special interest groups. Please carefully consider these suggestions. They would make your life a lot easier and bring government back to the people.

1. Campaigns limited to 2 months before primary and then start up again on Sept 1

2. National Primary day in May

3. No money can be raised until the campaign season starts 2 months before the primary.

4.No contributions from corporations or lobbyists or unions or special interest groups

5. No contributions from anyone who can’t vote for you. (Makes legislators more responsive to their constituents.)

6. All TV time free to candidates for the month of October and until the election in November.

7. All money left in the war chest at the end of the campaign goes into a general fund that can be evenly distributed to candidates who are running the next time.

The idea in all of this is to limit the time and money spent on campaigning. It should never be that the election goes to the highest bidder.Furthermore, legislators shouldn’t have to spend all of their time in office trying to raise money to run the next time. They should be legislating.