POLS ON THE STREET: Highway Funding? Fuggedabahdit

STATE SEN. Mike Stack, surrounded by tavern owners from across state, talks about the importance of permitting small games of chance at taverns. He is also joined by colleague Sean Logan.

Even though a poll paid by Gov. Ed Rendell from his campaign funds reveals widespread support for transportation funding can go as high as 95% of respondents who believe the quality of transportation infrastructure matters to the state’s economy, odds are dedicated State funding for that purpose will not materialize before the General Election.

Polls understand those who favor fixing up state highways do so as long as they don’t have to pay for it. Three-quarters of those polled said they would support a tax on oil company profits and closing tax loopholes for those companies. A plurality of 48% supported increasing vehicle and driver fees to the rate of inflation. A gas-tax hike, also pegged to the rate of inflation, was generally unpopular and received only 34% support.

With this in mind, few are the members of the State legislature ready to tackle this issue … that is, until they return from their election break. With Rendell leaving office, and some of the legislators losing their seats, it is possible support can be found for a funding package.

4 APPLICANTS VIE FOR LAST CASINO LICENSE

Four applicants are vying for Pennsylvania’s final and highly coveted casino license: a group that wants to convert a Holiday Inn near Harrisburg into “RV World,” one proposing to build near Gettysburg’s historic battlefield, and the backers of a pair of megaresorts in the Poconos and Southwestern Pennsylvania boasting everything from golf to a private airstrip. Much is at stake.

Gambling revenue in the state already has exceeded expectations, topping $2 billion over six years, and the potential for more is considered great.

MONEY TALKS, BULL__ WALKS

Money, money, money is making a difference in the way the public perceives the Joe Sestak and Pat Toomey race for the State’s US Senate seat.

Sestak did well engaging in a bloody primary which gained him national attention and reflected a positive gain for him in the polls that immediately followed.

Toomey had no bloody spring primary, allowing him to stockpile resources and build alliances.

Toomey’s been able to spend some of his campaign money early. No sooner did the primary results fade from the media than Toomey aired his first commercial, which highlighted Sestak’s support for health reform, bailouts and civilian trials for foreign terrorists.

The next week the melodrama of Sestak’s White House job offer garnered national attention and Toomey joined the chorus of public figures calling on Sestak to divulge who offered him what job to bow out of the Senate race against Specter.

Toomey has aired six television commercials during the summer hiatus about Sestak, painting him as an extreme liberal to the left of most members of his political party. The US Chamber of Commerce aired two commercials linking Sestak to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and calling him “anti-business.”

Sestak decried Toomey’s ads as negative, even though they were issue attacks, not character assaults. He made the mistake of blaming Bill Clinton for the job pitch, which Clinton denied.

Toomey’s campaign, during this period, has kept Sestak on the defensive. It refused to let up on Sestak for not fully living up to a personal pledge not to take campaign money from corporations that requested special Federal funding known as earmarks.

It also pushed for Sestak to return campaign contributions from embattled New York Democrat Charlie Rangel. Sestak eventually did, after Rangel was charged with 13 counts of ethics violations.

Toomey, a conservative on fiscal issues, is appealing to moderates and even Democrats more than Sestak is with independents and Republicans, according to recent public-opinion polls.

Democrat consultant Larry Ceisler admitted Toomey has done the better job so far, making Sestak look like an extremist.

Toomey’s early control is reminiscent of Sestak’s run against Specter in the spring. Political pundits all but counted Sestak out because his campaign seemed disjointed and disorganized compared with Specter’s machine.

But don’t count out Sestak. He has his own way of campaigning and it has done well by him in his career so far.

SESTAK ADDRESSES BLACK WOMEEN VETS

Sestak spoke at the installation ceremony for the Delaware Co. chapter of the National Congress of Black Women, congratulation its members on the establishment of the new chapter while encouraging them to take an active role in the upcoming election this fall.

He then came to this city to address the WWII Black Navy Veterans of Great Lakes and the Black Navy Veterans of America Annual Reunion Convention Banquet.

PENNA. LAW MAKES IT TOUGH FOR INDIES

Marakay Rogers, Kat Valleley and Doug Jamison wanted to run for statewide office on the Libertarian Party ticket. They wanted to give Pennsylvania voters more choices in the election.

They collected 25,033 signatures to comply with Pennsylvania’s immense ballot access requirements so their names could appear on the ballot. That’s 23,033 more than are required for Republican and Democratic state candidates.

All were challenged by the major parties. Rogers, Valleley and Jamison traveled to Harrisburg to fight the challenge.

In 2004 and 2006, the courts assessed over $80,000 in fees to a candidate who lost a ballot access challenge. This year, their lawyer estimated these fees would run between $92,000 and $106,000.

Using this leverage, they claim they were offered a deal – drop your efforts to be on the ballot and avoid exorbitant challenge fees, or continue to fight and face the risk of fees that could easily lead to personal bankruptcy. The potential cost of a loss was too great. After deliberation, these candidates withdrew.

Though the challenge provision of the election code has been in place since 1937, it was not used to remove a statewide candidate from the November ballot until 2004. Since then, the challenge has become standard operating procedure for the old parties.

Rogers, candidate for Governor, said, “This type of dealing may signal the end of third-party campaigning in Pennsylvania, except for the rich or the brave. Anyone can file a challenge and then threaten to clobber their opponent with outrageous and unaffordable legal fees that started accumulating long before any actual hearing. Even for someone who does believe they have enough valid signatures after a challenge, the threat of the fees assessed is enough to force you to back out just in case you might not win.”

Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania Chair Michael Robertson concluded, “The unlevel playing field that alternative-party and independent candidates face to be included on the Pennsylvania ballot has turned into a wall. We are calling on the General Assembly to tear down that wall, and allow the voters of the Commonwealth the choices they deserve.”

LPP has strongly endorsed the Voters’ Choice Act, or SB 252, which was introduced by State Sen. Mike Folmer (R-Lebanon). The bill would equalize ballot access across all parties, not just the Democrats and Republicans. Unfortunately, the bill has been sitting in committee for over a year, with little indication that it will be passed before the end of the year.

   Send article as PDF