Here comes Rick

If you haven't seen this video of Rick Santorum's comments to the state GOP, it's worth a look. He really does say that President Obama doesn't understand what it means to be an American.

Fivethirtyeight.com now gives Toomey a 53% chance of winning in November. That's down from a 70% chance of winning before the primary. Joe Sestak is looking better every day. I'm hoping that Rick Santorum gets out and campaigns for Toomey. That should be interesting.

Thruway update

The July 3 (2010) Daily Item contains an extended story about more small steps in the Thruway saga. One new piece of information involves the fabled "swap" that would have to take place in order to get the Thruway onto the radar for the Appalachian Regional Commission. The proposed stretch for a swap is not on the 50 year plan, and runs parallel to a now existing stretch of I-99. The argument is that this other proposed corridor is not needed and never will be. At a bare minimum, it isn't needed in anything like the way the CSVT is needed.

Ryan Unger reported in June that it's all or nothing right now. If this breakthrough doesn't happen in the next year, we'll be looking at splitting up the project, leading to another long delay.

Here's my thought: an on-line petition aimed at residents and also at non-residents who pass through. If we don't have enough people power to pass out hand bills to trucks stopped in traffic on the golden strip, how about a billboard and a website? An on-line petition of some sort?

The message should be simple and direct--something that people can deliver clearly to elected (and unelected) officials throughout this whole tangled process: BUILD IT. (The Thruway.)

The Thruway is the weak link in a chain of highway from Canada to Baltimore. Something like 24 traffic lights--stop and go traffic at random times throughout the day. And that doesn't even mention the abuse the Northumberland has to endure with all those trucks--90% of which are just trying to get somewhere else.

Anybody have experience with on-line petitions? It seems like a Facebook Group might work, but a direct e-mail campaign might send the message farther. I like the billboard idea because I think the papers would cover the story, especially if we could put together a few thousand signatures. If I hear some support I'll start looking into what it would cost and what kind of technical know-how is involved.

The one advantage here is that it's hard to find anyone who's against it. It comes down to money. So maybe we also have to propose some ways to pay for it. I would support tolling the new bridge if it comes to that, even though in general I don't like tolls (and Ryan Unger indicated that there are a bunch of legal problems with the idea). If the bridge were tolled, the trucking companies who would be benefiting greatly from the enhanced infrastructure would be helping to pay for it.

Carney votes for the DISCLOSE act

House leadership had to lean on the Blue Dogs to get enough votes to pass the DISCLOSE act, which is a response to the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision. Carney voted for it in the winning effort (219-206, vote count) with 36 Democrats voting against.

It's worth noting when he makes the right call. Good for Chris Carney, and good for us.

Daily Item coverage of CSCC meetup about the Thruway

Thanks to the Daily Item for covering CSCC's session on the Thruway. The Standard-Journal also sent a reporter, so an article will likely appear soon.

Thanks also to Ryan Unger of SEDA-COG, who did an excellent job of explaining where we are in the process and why the process is so messy. There are several different agencies and units of government involved, all of which are dealing with their own challenges.

For at least the rest of 2010, we seem to be in an "all or nothing" phase. Why not split up the project? Because then new impact statements would have to be prepared for each part, and then we're looking at another long delay. If the project can clear two big hurdles--one at the level of the Appalachian Development Highway System, the other at the level of the Federal Highway Reauthorization Act--the whole project could move forward sooner rather than later. Those are two bigs IFs. If those things don't happen this year, then we are probably back to the drawing board.

Before this presentation, I didn't know that 90% of the truck traffic (and 50% of the car traffic) on the Golden Strip is just passing through. There's no question that this project is worth doing--it's "just" a matter of finding about $525 million--and the 20% of that coming from the state is probably going to be the hardest to find. Pennsylvania has maintenance needs that aren't paid for, so it's hard to come up with money for new construction to relieve congestion. Gas tax money isn't paying for all that needs to be done, in part because the tax is per gallon, and fewer gallons are sold when the price is high.

Is it going to get done? I don't know--probably not any time soon. We have one big advantage: everybody seems to agree that this thing ought to be built--it's the last piece of a puzzle that extends from Canada down to Maryland. Given the current budget climate though, it's going to take some creativity to figure out how the financing happens.

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?