The $16 Billion Dollar Dump

Seemingly unnoticed in the new budget, is the incredibly giant leap in state spending on Public Welfare from $8.8B to $11.2B. This budget has obligated Pennsylvania taxpayers to permanently sustain a standard of living for welfare recipients that had been made 'temporarily' possible by one-time Federal stimulus dollars, and no one is batting an eye. It's a $2.4B increase in state spending, overnight. Just like that.

Last year, and the year before last, Pennsylvania received $2B per year in Federal stimulus grants for welfare, and $1.5B each year for K-12 Education. This year, with the Federal Government tightening its belt, Pennsylvania was not issued those previously enjoyed stimulus funds.

Governor Corbett's proposed budget created quite a stir when he allowed state spending on Education to return to pre-stimulus levels--even though he had executed exactly what was necessary and he encouraged school districts to do the same: operate within available means. Unfortunately, however, Governor Corbett did not apply the same principle he'd preached to the Education community when he laid out his proposal for spending on Public Welfare.

Last year, $25.2B was spent on Public Welfare in Pennsylvania, but most of that amount was funded by the Feds who gave roughly $16.4B. Pennsylvania taxpayers were obligated for the other $8.8 Billion. This year, however, rather than $16.4B from the Feds, Pennsylvania received only $14.4B because the Feds did not include the $2 Billion in stimulus funds as they had the previous two years. The lack of stimulus funds would have reduced spending on Public Welfare in Pennsylvania from $25.2B to $23.2B--that is if Governor Corbett had allowed spending to return to pre-stimulus levels as he did with Education, but he didn't. Instead, Governor Corbett made up for the lack of Federal stimulus dollars by allowing the PA taxpayer obligation to leap from $8.8B to $11.2B. That's a $2.4B spike. It's $2.4B added to the General Fund Budget. Without it, the General Fund budget would have come in at $24.7B rather than the $27.1 that passed on June 30.

To put the gravity of this $2.4B increase in perspective, it took former Governor Ed Rendell eight years to boost the taxpayer burden for Public Welfare by $2.4B. When Rendell took office, the taxpayer obligation to Public Welfare was $6.4 Billion. Eight years later, when he left, the taxpayer’s obligation had risen to $8.8 Billion. Governor Corbett and this Legislature have accomplished an increase of the same amount in less than one half of one year, of Corbett's first term. It's simply amazing.

Rather than return spending to the level that existed before the federal government’s one-time enticement, as he did with Education, when confronted with the choice, the Governor proposed to obligate the taxpayers to a gargantuan increase, for years and administrations to come--and the legislature voted to allow it.

With this budget now passed, as presented by the Governor, the taxpayers of the Commonwealth are now obligated to $2.4B in additional spending this year, next year, the year after and the year after that. Spread over Governor Corbett's four-year term, that's increased spending that adds up to more than $8B--and if Corbett secures a second term, the increase adds up to $16B assuming there is no increase. That’ll be $16 Billion not available for meeting known state debt. It's $16B Governor Corbett might have allowed us to keep in our pocket or put back into our businesses. It's $16B literally dumped on Pennsylvania taxpayers. Astounding.

Corbett nominates Eileen Behr for Montgomery County Sheriff

The first female police chief in Montgomery County history could soon make more history as the county's first female Sheriff.

Gov. Tom Corbett has nominated Eileen Whalon Behr, retired Whitemarsh Police Chief, to serve as Montgomery County Sheriff for the remainder of 2011.

If confirmed by the Pennsylvania Senate, Behr will fill the office of the late Sheriff John P. Durante, who passed away in February of 2010.

Behr will also receive a tremendous boost toward a full four-year term as Sheriff. She is one of two Republicans seeking the party's nomination to run for Sheriff in November.

The other GOP candidate is Robert J. Durante, who is no relation to the late Sheriff Durante, but should receive a lot of support because of confusion of the name. The Democratic candidate, William A. Holt Jr., is running unopposed in the primary.

Behr is the endorsed candidate of the Montgomery County Republican Committee.

"Chief Behr has dedicated her life to public service. During her tenure as Chief of Police in the Whitemarsh Police Department, she has made it one of the premiere departments in the County," Montgomery County Republican Committee Chairman Bob Kerns said. "She has distinguished herself in the field of law enforcement, as well as in the community."

Behr has spent her entire career in law enforcement, starting as a police dispatcher with the Whitemarsh Police Department at age 19, and has held several positions within the department over the past 35 years – patrol, traffic safety and accident investigation, juvenile detective, detective sergeant, and chief of police, the first female chief in Montgomery County.

Democrats try to spin special election results

Caution! You are about to enter the "No Spin Zone." With apologies to Bill O'Reilly, welcome to The Phyrillas Factor.

The Pennsylvania Democratic Party along with its allies in the blogosphere and an ultra-liberal newspaper in Berks County have been working feverishly this past week to persuade anyone who will listen that a special election for a vacant state Senate seat has statewide, and even national, significance.

The spin put out by the Democrats and their allies goes something like this: The election of Democrat Judy Schwank to complete the final two years of the term held by the late Sen. Mike O'Pake is a message to Gov. Tom Corbett to raise taxes and not cut state spending, and to governors across the nation to leave unions alone.

"This election has marked a change in momentum, and one that we will carry through the 2012 elections," said state Sen. Daylin Leach, chairman of the Senate Democratic Campaign Committee.

Oh, please!

Anyone who believes the election of a Democratic candidate in a district where Democrats outnumber Republicans by a 2-1 margin is a seismic shift in the political landscape needs to put down the Kool-Aid.

Schwank won the seat O'Pake held for 38 years by a comfortable margin (58 percent to 42 percent) but the six-week campaign was hardly a referendum on state or national issues. (O'Pake won 71 percent of the vote when he last ran in 2008.)

Schwank and her Republican opponent, Larry Medaglia, agreed on most key issues, including lowering property taxes, creating a more business-friendly climate in Pennsylvania, fiscal responsibility and reforming the state Legislature.

If anything, the special election was seen by many Berks County residents as a way to pay a final tribute to the popular O'Pake, the only state Senator most Berks voters knew. Schwank shrewdly positioned herself as the heir to O'Pake's legacy. She invoked his name at every public appearance and in campaign literature. She also made a point to publicly announce she would keep most of O'Pake's staffers if she was elected.

Schwank won a heavily--Democratic district because labor unions in Berks County, and especially in the city of Reading, managed to get their supporters to the polls. Labor unions also accounted for most of Schwank's campaign contributions.

So before Democrats pop the champagne bottles thinking they've stopped the hemorrhaging from last year's disastrous midterm elections, let's step back and take in a dose of reality.

Turnout for the March 15 election was higher than anticipated at 22 percent, but still pitiful when you consider that eight out of 10 voters in the 11th Senate District did not bother to show up.

What is the significance of Schwank getting the opportunity to finish the remaining two years of O'Pake's term? Absolutely nothing.

Republicans held 30 of the 50 seats in the state Senate before the March 15 election. Republicans hold 30 of the 50 seats after the election.

Schwank winning the 11th District is akin to a Kennedy winning in Massachusetts. It's what you expect. Had Medaglia won, it would have been one of the biggest political upsets in Pennsylvania political history. Something similar to Republican Scott Brown winning Ted Kennedy's U.S. Senate seat in the 2010 special election.

You could even make the argument that residents of the 11th Senate District are worse off today than they were before Schwank won the election. After nearly 40 years in the Senate, O'Pake was the No. 2 leader among Senate Democrats. He built strong relationships on both sides of the aisle and had clout to get legislation passed. Schwank is now the Democrat with the least seniority in the Senate and ranks 50 in terms of clout. She will never get a bill passed and the Republican leadership in the Senate will make sure she doesn't get any money for projects back home.

Had Medaglia won, the Republican governor and legislative leaders would have steered state funding into the 11th District to bolster his chances of winning a full four-year term in 2012.

So why all the hoopla? Pennsylvania Democrats suffered a string of embarrassing defeats in 2010 and were desperate to win something — anything. The special election was the closest thing to a high-profile race anywhere in the state this year. Demoralized Democrats needed a win. Even table scraps are a banquet to a starving man.

How bad was 2010 for Pennsylvania Democrats? The party lost a U.S. Senate seat, five U.S. House seats, the governor's mansion and the majority it held in the state House for four years. Democrats failed to pick up a single state Senate seat last November despite pouring hundreds of thousands of dollars into races across the state.

So keeping a state Senate seat that has been in Democratic hands since the district was created in 1961 — one that was never in danger of going over to the Republican column — is the glimmer of hope some Dems need to step away from the ledge.

That speaks volumes about the challenges Pennsylvania Democrats face in 2011 and 2012 to prevent becoming a permanent minority party.

Sen.-elect Schwank will be sworn in sometime in April, but nothing has changed in Harrisburg.

Tony Phyrillas, who writes about politics for The Mercury in Pottstown, Pa., won a first place award for column writing in 2010 from the Pennsylvania Associated Press Managing Editors.

Democrat wins special election for O'Pake Senate seat

There's a reason Pennsylvania's 11th State Senate District has been represented by a Democrat since it was created in 1961.

It's one of the most heavily Democratic legislative districts in Pennsylvania.

Democratic Sen. Mike O'Pake first won the Senate seat in 1972 and had two more years left in his current term when he died Dec. 27 at age 70 from complications following heart surgery.

Democrat Judy Schwank, a former two-term Berks County commissioner, won the special election Tuesday to finish O'Pake's term, with 20,124 votes to Republican challenger Larry Medaglia's 14,794.

The 11th District includes the City of Reading, where Democrats outnumber Republicans by a 5-1 margin. The most recent voter registration numbers show 82,727 registered Democrats to 48,674 Republicans in the 11th District.

Even with Schwank's victory, Republicans hold a 30-20 majority in the state Senate. Republicans also control the state House and the governor's mansion.

Somebody should tell David Kessler he lost the election

I was driving along Memorial Highway (Route 662) in Oley earlier today when I noticed an odd sign in front of an office building. It read "State Representative David Kessler."

The problem with the sign is that Kessler lost his bid for re-election last November and is no longer representing the 130th State House District.

The new state rep for the 130th is Republican David Maloney, who has district offices in Douglassville and Boyertown, the two most populous parts of his district.

Democrat Kessler moved his offices to Oley, where he lives, for his convenience, while he served four years in the Legislature.

I've heard Kessler took the defeat pretty hard, but it's time to move on. There's no need to confuse residents of the 130th District about who their state rep is.

Citizen Kessler should take down his office signs.

It's not like the signs are etched in marble. A screwdriver is all that's needed to remove Kessler's signs.

Maybe Rep. Maloney, who was a contractor before winning a seat in the Legislature, could help Kessler take down the signs.

'Judy Schwank raised our property taxes 52%'

If you watched "Journalists Roundtable" on the Pennsylvania Cable Network Thursday night, I predicted Republican Larry Medaglia would hammer Democrat Judy Schwank on her record of raising taxes while she served as a Berks County commissioner.

And guess what shows up in mailboxes all over Berks County on Friday? A mailing on behalf of Medaglia with big bold letters stating: "Judy Schwank Raised Our Property Taxes 52%"

Schwank voted for an 18% property tax hike in 2001 and followed it up with a 34% property tax hike in 2004.

The flier reminds voters: "She Raised Our Taxes Before. She'll Do It Again."

The special election to fill the unexpired term in the 11th State Senate District is scheduled for Tuesday, March 15.

"Journalists Roundtable" will be shown again Sunday at 5 p.m. and 11 p.m. and Monday at 10 a.m. on the Pennsylvania Cable Network. Check the PCN website for the cable channel in your area.

For more about the Medaglia campaign, visit his websiste at www.larrymedagliaforsenate.com

GOP has solid chance to win O'Pake Senate seat

Republican Larry Medaglia Jr. has launched a website in support of his campaign for Pennsylvania's 11th state Senate District, which covers most of Berks County.

The special election to fill the unexpired term of the late Sen. Mike O'Pake is scheduled for Tuesday, March 15.

Medaglia's campaign theme is: "The People's Choice for State Senate."

The current Berks County Register of Wills and former Berks Republican Party chairman, Medaglia is pushing four major issues: 1) Property Tax Elimination 2) Economic Growth and Job Creation 3) Reforming State Government and 4) Improving Basic Education

"This campaign is about the future of our community - a future where government leaders must be willing to make difficult choices and truly serve the community by lowering the tax burden and focusing resources on creating economic opportunities for everyone," Medaglia states on the website.

Medaglia's opponent is former Berks County Commissioner Judy Schwank, who voted to raise property taxes by 34% before leaving office four years ago.

Although Democrats enjoy a voter-registration advantage because the City of Reading is part of the 11th Senatorial District, Medaglia has a good chance of winning the election because he has waged successful countywide campaigns and the Democratic Party is split in its support of Schwank.

Many party loyalists wanted state Rep. Dante Santoni Jr., an 18-year veteran of Harrisburg, to be the candidate. Santoni's 126th House District is part of the 11th Senate District and Santoni is used to running campaigns and winning.

Schwank hasn't run for political office in more than eight years.

A party insider tells me Santoni and his supporters are very bitter at the way the party leaders picked a candidate and support for Schwank among active party workers is weak.

Visit Medaglia's website here.

Schwank Vs. Medaglia in special election for PA Senate seat

What I know about Larry Medaglia Jr., the Republican candidate in the special election for the 11th state Senate seat in Berks County: The Berks County Register of Wills office is more efficient thanks to reforms Medaglia has instituted, saving taxpayers money.

What I know about Judy Schwank, the Democratic candidate: When she was chairwoman of the Berks County Commissioners four years ago, she was the deciding vote for a 34% property tax hike for Berks County homeowners and businesses.

The race is basically a fiscal conservative vs. a tax-and-spend liberal.

The election to fill the unexpired term of the late Sen. Mike O'Pake will be held Tuesday, March 15.

Schwank Vs. Medaglia in special election - Boyertown Area Times - Berks-Mont News

Pennsylvania: The newest red state

Pennsylvania no longer has the blues.

After trending Democratic in the 2006 and 2008 election cycles, Republicans stormed back in a big way on Election Day 2010.

The Republican tide that swept across the nation Tuesday included Pennsylvania, where Republicans made significant gains at all levels of government.

Let's take a look at how the political landscape changed overnight in Pennsylvania: A Republican replaces Ed Rendell as governor; a Republican replaces Democrat Arlen Specter in the U.S. Senate; Republicans ousted five Congressional Democrats and held all current Congressional seats; Republicans held control of the Pennsylvania Senate by a 30-20 margin and Republicans regained control of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives with a solid majority of at least 110 seats in the 203-seat body.

A Republican will move into governor's mansion with Attorney General Tom Corbett defeating Ed Rendell-clone Dan Onorato. Republican Pat Toomey defeated liberal Joe Sestak for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by Arlen Specter.

Pennsylvania voters tossed out five incumbent Democratic members of Congress from Pennsylvania, helping the GOP retake control of the House in Washington, D.C. Republicans will hold 12 of Pennsylvania's 19 Congressional seats come January.

Among Election Night highlights from Pennsylvania: Hazleton Mayor Lou Barletta defeated 26-year career politician Paul Kanjorski and Republican Pat Meehan beat Democrat Bryan Lentz in the race for the Congressional seat being vacated by Sestak.

All of this took place in Ed Rendell's back yard in a state where Obama and his minions campaigned heavily for incumbent Democrats.

The message sent by Pennsylvania voters Tuesday was loud and clear: The Democrats agenda of deficit spending and higher taxes has to stop.

Spend, Spend, Spend: PA Budget Passed in the House

Written by Roberta Biros

Governor Rendell is in a hurry to pass a budget before the June 30th deadline (for the first time in his career as Governor I might add). That is a GOOD THING.

Unfortunately, the piece of garbage that passed the House today is a mess. I don’t usually allow legislators to put words in my mouth, but in this case I’ll make an exception. I’d like to quote Representative Michele Brooks (R-17th District), whose official email announcement stated that “this spending plan is a fiscal train wreck”.

Wow! I wish I had written it myself! In a way, I guess I just did. It was absolute plagiarism . . . plain and simple but I digress. Regardless of WHO said it first . . .

Calling the budget a "fiscal train wreck" is some strikingly straight talk from a Harrisburg insider. In response, I say “It’s about time”.

I received numerous email messages from Pennsylvania legislators today. Each one explained that the idea of passing a budget quickly (and well before the deadline) is a great idea. Every legislator hopes to have a budget passed before the end of June this year . . . especially those legislators that have opponents in the General Election. However, the obvious fiscal irresponsibility of House Bill 2279 is poor policy. We can all tiptoe around the fiscal quagmire that IS the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, but all of the icing in the world can’t sweeten this poison pill that they call a State budget.

Here are a few excerpts from the legislator email messages that were received in my “In Box”:

Representative Dick Stevenson (R-8th)

“At a time when state revenues have not yet rebounded, Pennsylvania needs to look to other states and follow their lead to reduce spending, not increase the state budget by $1.2 billion or 4 percent,” said Stevenson, a member of the House Appropriations Committee. “Neighboring states like Maryland, New Jersey and New York have all taken steps to decrease expenses. They face the same financial obstacles we do, but they realize their taxpayers cannot afford a penny more in increased taxes and fees.”

Representative Brad Roae (R-6th)

“I voted ‘no’ because there is too much spending in the budget bill. Spending has increased by more than $8 billion since Governor Ed Rendell took office. We cannot afford to spend more than a billion dollars more than last year’s budget.

Representative Karen Boback (R-117th)

“I am greatly concerned about the overall spending number of this budget. The 2009-10 budget used all of Pennsylvania’s reserve accounts, and we are facing another deficit at the end of the year. To increase spending by $1.2 billion, which is 4 percent growth, is not wise. We should continue to look for ways to allocate our resources prudently, and we should remain cognizant that federal stimulus funds we have received for the past two years will soon run out. This is just not the time to increase state spending. “

Representative Sam Rohrer (R-128th)

“The current administration has led Pennsylvania down the path to fiscal insolvency,” Rohrer said. “The budget approved today by the House is simply a continuation of the fiscally irresponsible practices of the last eight years. It spends too much, disregards financial reality and ignores the wishes of Pennsylvanians.”

Representative William Adolf (R-165th)

“While I am pleased to see us debating the budget this early in the process, I believe the spending plan that was passed today is taking us in the wrong direction,” Adolph said. “This budget spends far more than we can afford, and it sets us up for some major financial problems in the near future.”

Representative Michele Brooks (R-17th)

“I agree that government should be listening to the people it serves and address the numerous calls to live within its means. This spending plan is a fiscal train wreck that does not reflect the priorities of the people who are paying the bills and who have told us government must operate more efficiently and effectively.

In Closing . . .

HERE is a link to the budget document, and HERE is a link to the House Vote (which ended at 107 to 89 . . . pretty much along party lines).

My father used a saying when I was a kid. I never had a purpose for it until today. He would say “You can’t make a silk purse out of a sows ear”. I find that analogy to be perfect in this situation. House Bill 2279 is a sows ear. It will be the job of the State Senate to transform it into a silk purse before June 30th.

Unfortunately, my faith in the ability of the Senate to bend and twist this sows ear into something attractive is limited. Our State Senators are concerned about having their names tethered to another delayed budget. That concern will make them hold their nose and vote FOR this “train wreck” with hopes of not drawing attention to themselves. They are crossing their fingers, closing their eyes, and praying for this election year to blow over without incident.

Time will soon tell.

Uncontested Races Troubling

Guest Column By Denny Bonavita

So, the Tea Party folks are going to force the national government to change its ways, are they? Hot air. Ditto for screamers in Internet chat rooms, for strident espousers of Second Amendment gun rights, for the people who claim our government is spending us into bankruptcy.

We yak about that, but it's simply lip-flapping. Nobody will change the current system of government, despite all the jaw-jabber. Why do we say that?

Look at who is running for election this year: Mostly, it's incumbents, or former incumbents. In area races for the state House of Representatives, there is not one contested race in the May 18 primary election, according to the filings with the Department of State. Matt Gabler (R), Kathy Rapp (R), Sam Smith (R), Martin Causer (R), Donna Oberlander (R), Bud George (D) are all assured of renomination.

Rapp, Causer and Oberlander are all but assured of re-election. No Democrats filed against them, so there probably won't be any major contests in November, either.
On the federal level, first-term incumbent Glenn Thompson, a Republican, is unopposed in both the primary and in the general election. So is Altoona-area Rep. Bill Shuster.

Sure, incumbent U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter is opposed - but by a current member of the federal Congress in the primary, and by a former member of Congress in the general election. More incumbents.

To hear the critics of government tell it, the state and federal governments are poorly run. But the critics are lip-flappers, only. Otherwise, some would have joined in the campaigns.

It doesn't take a lot of money, either. Gabler won the Republican nomination two years ago on a write-in basis. In our system of government, it is impossible to vote "No," or "None of the above," except in judicial retention elections. We can't vote people out of office if there is no opponent to vote in. Don't blame the incumbents. It isn't their fault if they do not have opponents. That is our fault.

Even the best incumbents benefit from having opponents - for the same reason that we learn something best when we know we have to teach about it. When an incumbent knows that he or she will be called to account on an issue, the incumbent rethinks the issue. Sometimes, the incumbent even changes positions, because the circumstances surrounding the issue have changed.

But that won't happen this year. We just don't care enough about our system of government to help to lead it. So the incumbents can just keep on doing what they have been doing.

2010 Petitions are IN: A Political Summary

Written by Roberta Biros

Tuesday, March 9th was the last day to file nomination petitions in Pennsylvania. Individuals wishing to run as a major party candidate needed to gather a pre-determined number of signatures in order for their names to appear on the Primary Ballot in May for their respective parties. There are several state-wide and regional races of note, and the candidates in those races are numerous. All of the petitions that were filed are listed HERE for your review.

U.S. Senator

In the race for US Senator, three Democrats will fight for Arlen Specter’s seat.

SPECTER, ARLEN
SESTAK, JOE
VODVARKA, JOSEPH

In the Republican race for US Senator, two Republicans will battle it out for the opportunity to take Arlen Specter’s seat.

TOOMEY, PAT
LUKSIK, PEG

Details:

The candidates in the race for US Senator were required to gather 2000 signatures on their petitions, and they needed to submit a $200.00 filing fee for the privilege of running for office.

My Comments:

We are all looking forward to seeing Arlen Specter lose. At this point it is a matter of whether he loses in the Primary or in the General Election. I wish I had a preference, but I do not. Anytime will be a good time to see Arlen Specter retire.

Pennsylvania Governor

In the race for Governor, four Democrats are taking on the challenge to fill Ed Rendell’s very capable shoes (that was a joke, of course).

WAGNER, JACK
ONORATO, DAN
HOEFFEL, JOSEPH
WILLIAMS, ANTHONY HARDY

On the Republican side, there are two options for the Republican Gubernatorial candidate.

CORBETT, TOM
ROHRER, SAMUEL

Details:

The candidates that wished to run for the office of Governor of Pennsylvania were required to gather 2000 signatures and pay a $200.00 filing fee. The 2000 signatures needed to include at least 100 signatures from each of at least 10 counties.

My Comments:

I have favorites from both the Republican and Democrat tickets in this race. For the Democrats, I have a special respect and admiration for Jack Wagner. I like Jack and I feel that he would make a fine Governor. In the Republican column, I am a fan of Sam Rohrer. In 2009, I published my own “Directory of Fiscally Conservative PA Legislators”. The list was based on the participation of the legislators in specific fiscally conservative events. Representative Rohrer faired very well in my unscientific poll, and, therefore, tops my list of preferred candidates.

Representative in Congress, 3rd District

To focus more closely on the Northwest Region of Pennsylvania, I’d like to discuss the race for Representative in Congress in the 3rd District.

On the Democrat ticket, current incumbent, Congresswoman Kathy Dahlkemper has an opponent.

DAHLKEMPER, KATHY
MARIN, MEL

On the Republican ticket, six candidates have stepped up to send Mrs. Dahlkemper back home to Erie.

FRANZ, ED
KELLY, MIKE
HUBER, PAUL
GRABB, CLAYTON
FISHER, STEVEN
MOORE, MARTHA

Details:

Candidates running for the much coveted position of Representative in Congress needed to collect 1000 signatures and pay a $150.00 filing fee.

My Comments:

First, I’m very excited to see that Mrs. Dahlkemper has a Democrat opponent. I wish Mel Marin the best of luck.

The field of six Republicans is interesting. I’m impressed by two of the Republican candidates. Steven Fisher seems very intelligent and hard-working. I had a brief email conversation with him last week regarding the recent problems within Mrs. Dahlkemper’s office (read the full story HERE, and I will publish details regarding Mr. Fisher’s comments within the next week). Mr. Fisher was quick to personally respond to my query, and I respect that in any one that is seeking a position in public service. I’ve also had the pleasure of meeting with candidate Ed Franz. Mr. Franz was kind enough to devote time to a personal discussion with me at a meet and greet earlier this week. Mr. Franz is also a hard worker, and he seems to have the best interests of the people of the 3rd District in the correct perspective. Candidates Kelly, Huber, Grabb, and Moore have not responded to my personal queries. I, therefore, cannot offer a positive testimonial regarding their ability to serve the people of my congressional district.

2010 Election in Mercer County decided by Petitions

As a resident and concerned citizen of Mercer County, I always attempt to focus on the races that directly impact our local area. Unfortunately, it appears that ALL of the races for Senator and Representatives in the General Assembly have already been determined.

Senator in the General Assembly, 50th

Incumbent Senator Bob Robbins (R) was simply required to receive 500 signatures and pay a $100 filing fee to guarantee is re-election. At this point it appears that he will have NO opponent. The Mercer County Incumbent Party wins this election by a landslide (based on 500 signatures and $100).

Representative in the General Assembly, 7th

Incumbent Representative Mark Longietti (D) was simply required to receive 300 signatures and pay a $100 filing fee to guarantee re-election. At this point it appears that he will have NO opponent. The Mercer County Incumbent Party wins this election by a landslide (based on 300 signatures and $100).

Representative in the General Assembly, 8th

Incumbent Representative Dick Stevenson (R) was simply required to receive 300 signatures and pay a $100 filing fee to guarantee re-election. At this point it appears that he will have NO opponent. The Mercer County Incumbent Party wins this election by a landslide (based on 300 signatures and $100).

Are you seeing the trend here? Well, it wouldn’t be complete unless . . . yes . . .

Representative in the General Assembly, 17th

Incumbent Representative Michele Brooks (R) was simply required to receive 300 signatures and pay a $100 filing fee to guarantee re-election. At this point it appears that he will have NO opponent. The Mercer County Incumbent Party wins this election by a landslide (based on 300 signatures and $100).

But does it stop there? Oh Gosh NO.

Member of the Democrat State Committee (43rd)

Mark Longietti (State Rep.) and Liz Fair (Mercer County Prothonotary) will again both run against no other candidates for the two seats. 100 signatures each and a $25 filing fee allows the two of them to walk into the positions unopposed. The Mercer County Incumbent Party wins this election by a landslide.

Member of the Republican State Committee (43rd)

Cindy Robbins (wife of State Senator, and chairwoman of the Mercer County Incumbent Party), Walter Richardson (husband of Mercer County Treasurer, and husband of the co-chairwoman of the Mercer County Incumbent Party), and Scott Boyd (newcomer and Tea Party organizer) will all run together with no other challengers for the three seats. 100 signatures each and a $25 filing fee allows the three of them to walk into the positions unopposed. The Mercer County Incumbent Party wins two seats and will do everything that they can to discourage all activity by Scott Boyd.

My Comments:

Once again, no one in Mercer County (with the exception of Scott Boyd) wants to step up to challenge the Mercer County Incumbent Party. Democrats are watching the backs of Republicans, and Republicans are watching the backs of Democrats. In the end, the incumbents run unopposed and everything remains business as usual in Mercer County.

I would be remiss if I did not point out that it is NOT TOO LATE to challenge the incumbents. If you have the nerve, it is possible to run against Senator Bob Robbins and Representatives Stevenson, Longietti, and Brooks. “How?”, you ask.

Third party, minority party candidates, and non-affiliated candidates can run for ANY of these offices. To do so, interested parties need to file nomination papers by early August. Until that time, interested candidates would need to begin gathering signatures in the quantities required by the State. That number is calculated by determining “2% of the largest entire vote cast for an elected candidate at the last election within the district”. Those numbers are computed below:

To run against State Senator Bob Robbins, third party candidates must gather 826 signatures in 6 months (41,302 x .02).

To run against Representative Mark Longietti, third party candidates must gather 519 signatures in 6 months (25,941 x .02).

To run against Representative Dick Stevenson, third party candidates must gather 488 signatures in 6 months (24,389 x .02).

To run against Representative Michele Brooks, third party candidates must gather 337 signatures in 6 months (16,844 x .02).

Races of Note from a Conservative Perspective

As I referenced earlier in this article, in 2009 I published my own “Directory of Fiscally Conservative PA Legislators”. The list was based on the participation of the legislators in specific fiscally conservative events. The full list can be viewed HERE.

I decided to take a look at the list to see how our conservative legislators are doing in their respective races this year. Of the legislators that are on the list, the following are considered the MOST FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE by my rankings. I’ve also noted the status of their political races this year:

Bradley Roae (6th) – running unopposed in November

Daryl Metcalfe (12th)* -- will have a Democrat opponent in November, but Rep. Metcalfe is also running for the office of Lt. Governor

Michele Brooks (17th)* -- running unopposed in November

Mike Turzai (28th)* -- will have a Democrat opponent in November.

Thomas Creighton (37th)* -- will have a Republican opponent in the Primary.

Scott Hutchinson (64th)* -- running unopposed in November

Kathy Rapp (65th)* -- running unopposed in November

Jerry Stern (80th)* -- running unopposed in November

Rob Kauffman (89th) – running unopposed in November

Todd Rock (90th) ) – running unopposed in November

Dan Moul (91st)* )* -- will have a Democrat opponent in November.

Stanley Saylor (94th)* -- will have a Democrat opponent in November.

Rosemarie Swanger (102nd) -- will have a Republican opponent in the Primary.

Karen Boback (117th) -- will have a Democrat opponent in November.

Samuel Rohrer (128th) – running for the office of Governor of Pennsylvania.

Jim Cox (129th) – running unopposed in November

Paul Clymer (145th) -- will have a Democrat opponent in November.

Bob Mensch (147th) – running for the office of State Senator.

Curt Schroder (155th)* -- will have a Democrat opponent in November.

* - an asterisk designates that the individual received my highest rating for fiscal conservative legislators in 2009.

In Closing

So, there you have it . . . a summary of the interesting races in 2010 as of today, Wednesday, March 10, 2010. As we all know, however, the dynamics of these races could change on a dime in the coming days, weeks, and months.

I’ve always made it clear that I support fiscally conservative candidates. The list above is a summary of “who needs your help” this year. I intend on offering my assistance to any fiscally conservative candidate that is willing to accept my help (regardless of the location of their voting district).

I’ve also made my thoughts regarding the importance of running for public office very clear. Competition and opposition during an election is healthy. It draws attention to the importance of elected office, and it forces our elected officials to defend their territory. I give credit to all of the candidates that have taken the step to run in 2010, and I encourage concerned citizens to get involved in the process. If ANYONE in Mercer County is interested in running as a third party candidate for any of the legislative positions outlined above, feel free to contact me at roberta.in.mercer@gmail.com. I am willing to offer assistance, guidance, and support in your endeavor.


.

Pennsylvania Lawmakers Don't Want 'Real' Reform

In today's editorial the Harrisburg Patriot-News asks whether or not state lawmakers have the "courage" to push for real reform by cutting state spending. I had to chuckle after reading the editorial. I couldn't help but think to myself just how much legislative leaders in Harrisburg actually hate reform.

For years state lawmakers were allowed to pass expensive legislation and increase state spending without much oversight or accountability. They voted themselves lavish pension increases, illegal pay raises, and bloated budgets that has put us in our current fiscal mess. And the lack of accountability by the voters has resulted in Pennsylvania having one of the largest, most expensive, and most corrupt state legislature's in the country.

How large is our state government? The following is a passage from the article that pretty much sums up the situation.

With 253 seats, our Legislature is the second largest in the United States, but that doesn’t tell the real story. The largest is New Hampshire; its 424 citizen-legislators are paid $200 for a two-year term.

One can only dream.

By contrast, Keystone lawmakers are the second-highest paid in the nation, according to the Pennsylvania Economy League. And California, with the highest salaries, has 120 seats for nearly three times our population.

Click Here To Read More

Pennsylvania voters and good government advocacy groups continue to put tremendous pressure on state lawmakers to reform state government and stop the wasteful spending. A great example of this occurred in July 2005 when state lawmakers got too greedy and passed a middle of the night pay raise that would have raise some legislators salaries by 30%. The outrage by voters ended up forcing legislative leaders to repeal the pay raise four months later.

Although the pay raise repeal was a success, I think Pennsylvania voters need to ask themselves this election year what really has changed since the repeal of the pay raise in Harrisburg? Most efforts to reform state government have been basically ignored by legislative leaders.

The state budget has continued to increase more than the rate of inflation at a time when working Pennsylvanians are struggling to keep their jobs and pay household bills. The current "bonusgate" corruption trial has brought to the forefront how legislative leader's in both parties used the power of their offices for personal and political gain.

The real truth is that most state lawmakers don't want reform in Harrisburg. State lawmakers love things just the way they are. They like the per diems and perks paid for on public dime. They like the lavish pensions they will receive when they retire. They like that Pennsylvania taxpayers pay for their health care plans with no personal out of pocket cost to them.

It's funny that most state lawmakers even after the repeal of the pay raise still believed they deserved it. So I asked this question to the Patriot-News Editorial Board, do you really think our current state lawmakers want "real reform"? It's not a question of courage when the entire legislative process is controlled by greed.

Rendell Leaves Behind A Fiscal Mess

Look up the word "chutzpah" in the dictionary and you’ll find a picture of Gov. Ed Rendell next to it. Chutzpah, which means "unmitigated gall, audacity or nerve," is the perfect description of Rendell, who has run up massive deficits during his two terms as governor and now is warning his fellow Pennsylvanians that we have to deal with the fiscal crisis.

In this case, "we" means you and I — the beleaguered taxpayers of Pennsylvania — not Rendell, who will leave the governor's mansion after eight years of fiscal mismanagement to collect a huge taxpayer pension as his reward for screwing up the state’s finances.

It was classic Ed Rendell Tuesday as the governor delivered his eighth — and thank God, his final — budget to the Pennsylvania Legislature. Having run out of things to tax, Rendell proposed expanding the state sales tax to cover more items. Rendell and his lockstep Democrats in the Legislature have repeatedly opposed expansion of the sales tax to cover services when it was attached to a plan to eliminate property taxes. That's what Republican state Rep. Sam Rohrer has been pushing for years.

But now that Rendell has run out of opportunities to raise other taxes, he needs the expanded sales tax to fund his proposed $29 billion spending plan — and pay for years of deficit spending.

Despite running up huge deficits in the past two budgets, Rendell wants to increase state spending by another $1.1 billion for the 2010-11 fiscal year, which begins July 1. The first rule of holes is when you're in one, stop digging. Rendell plans to dig so deep that the next governor will never get out from the fiscal abyss "Fast Eddie" has created.

Rendell wants to pay for the new spending by using $1.1 billion in federal stimulus funds, which may or may not be approved by Congress. (Just imagine what will happen to "stimulus" handouts when Republicans take back control of Congress in November.)

And Rendell is leaving with a final "up yours" to the taxpayers of Pennsylvania. Having presided over a massive expansion of state spending over the past eight years — $9 billion and counting — Rendell warned lawmakers that Pennsylvania is facing a "fiscal tsunami" — a potential $5.6 billion deficit from the 2011 expiration of federal stimulus money and the ticking time bomb of public pension obligations.

For eight years, Rendell has ignored the growing pension crisis, which will result in massive property tax increases for Pennsylvania residents in 2012. That wallop will come after the 2011 deregulation of electricity rates, which will raise most residential bills by at least 30 percent.

You can't spend what you don't have, but Rendell and most legislators flunked Economics 101. Rendell, with the Legislature in tow, has been spending money the state doesn't have for years. The chickens will come home to roost. Unfortunately for Pennsylvania taxpayers, Rendell will have flown the coop.

Rendell wants to reduce the state sales tax rate from 6 percent to 4 percent, but expand it to more than 70 services currently exempt (lawyer and accountant fees, dry cleaning, for example) and items such as firewood, candy, gum, bottled water, magazines and personal hygiene products. (Groceries, clothing and prescription drugs would remain exempt from the sales tax under Rendell's plan).

Rep. Rohrer has proposed a similar plan, but it would lead to the elimination of the state's onerous school property taxes. Most taxpayers, especially senior citizens on fixed incomes, would come out ahead under Rohrer's plan. Rendell simply wants more money from taxpayers to cover his deficit spending.

The state finished with a $3.25 billion deficit for the 2008-09 fiscal year, which led to a 101-day budget impasse over Rendell's 2009-10 spending plan. And what did Rendell and the most expensive legislature in the country come up with for the current fiscal year? A budget that was in the red from Day 1. The state is looking at a minimum $500 million deficit for the 2009-10 fiscal year.

In addition to expanding the sales tax, Rendell wants to extend the tobacco tax to include cigars and smokeless tobacco products and enact a new severance tax on natural gas extraction. Both proposals were rejected by the Legislature last year.

Will any of these taxes pass? Rendell is prohibited by the state constitution from seeking a third term as governor. He's a lame duck. He can propose all the tax hikes he wants, but the Legislature will have the final say. All 203 members of the state House and half of the 50 members in the state Senate face the voters in 2010. How many of them are going to vote for one of the largest tax increases in Pennsylvania history?

Pennsylvania voters are already in a foul mood. A recent Franklin & Marshall College poll found only 16 percent of registered voters say the Legislature is doing a good job. How much lower will that number go if the Legislature goes along with Rendell's tax hikes? How many lawmakers will sacrifice their careers for Ed Rendell?

Tony Phyrillas writes about politics for The Mercury in Pottstown, Pa. Check out his daily blog here. You can also e-mail him at tphyrillas@gmail.com