|
Reflections from the Fall
Election
Posted 11-22-2005
Well the election is over,
and it appears the only real casualty was Supreme Court Justice Russell
Nigro. But, what also became clear was Republicans are better organized and
more loyal to the people from their party that get elected. How else can it
be explained that in a state with a 400,000 vote Democratic registration
advantage Nigro loses and Supreme Court Justice Sandra Newman gets retained?
I doubt there were many Pennsylvanians that voted yes or no based on the
voting record of either Justice. So other than political affiliation what
could account for Newman's retention and Nigro's defeat?
Neither Supreme Court Justice
had anything to do with the pay raise. So what message was sent? Voters in
Pennsylvania will vote out someone who had nothing to do with an issue they
are angry about? How will voters react next year when legislators are on the
ballot now that they've repented and repealed the pay raise? Will they
discern between the legislators that never supported it and those that did?
Will they be angry regardless of the legislators' stance on the pay raise?
Or will all be forgotten? If the latter is the case, will Russ Nigro be the
only unfortunate person that suffered because of a foolish, ill-timed pay
raise that he had nothing to do with?
Assuming voter anger over the
pay raise is equal among Democrats and Republicans, why would she be
retained and not Nigro, other than that some Republicans ignored their anger
over the pay raise and still cast a yes vote for Newman. I doubt advertising
meant little this time, but somehow the Republicans got the word out because
statewide, she received about six percent more yes votes. Her numbers
certainly were not overwhelming, but they were better than Nigro's, who
received about 49% yes votes.
There was a skewing of votes
between eastern and western Pennsylvania this time as there was in the
Governor's race. In the southeastern corner, where perhaps the pay raise
isn't as combustible of an issue, both Justices received more yes votes. But
just about everywhere else, particularly in the southwest, they lost almost
every county. Here Nigro received about 28% yes, and Newman 33% yes. Can
someone explain why our county is dramatically different than the state
numbers?
Our Common Pleas Court
Judges, Driscoll, Caruso and Blahovec were all retained, though their yes
votes were 10% to 15% lower than what judges normally receive. I am certain
their vote totals had nothing to do with the job they've done, because
they've all done a fine job. The reaction against them is even more
difficult to understand. But it seems in our neighboring county people
reacted even more adversely toward Common Pleas Court Judges. While all the
judges won in Allegheny county, their margins were very thin and the highest
was only around 60% yes.
The contested county row
officer races for prothonotary and clerk of courts ended up staying
Democratic. Both Ron Diehl and Dave Patterson deserved re-election, and
though their opponents had visible sign campaigns, there were no real
issues, and the Republican method of negative campaigning never took hold
with Diehl or Patterson.
But the negative campaigning
worked in the Hempfield supervisors' race again. In a township with four
thousand more Democrats than Republicans, voters elected two Republicans,
including one who when appointed pledged to not seek election. John Skiavo,
who served as a supervisor more than twenty years ago, and who has economic
development expertise and business acumen that dwarfs anyone currently
serving or just elected in Hempfield, was smeared by Republican money coming
from outside of our county. If the outside money doesn't concern Republicans
in Hempfield, it should sure concern Democratic voters. Why is the
Republican State Committee funneling money to influence municipal elections
in our county? We are seeing a growing trend of huge amounts of outside
Republican money influencing elections here and that is not healthy.
It was bad enough last year
in the State Senate race when the close ally of Governor Rendell, Bob
Regola, woke up one day and decided he wasn't a Democrat anymore. Then after
a million dollars of outside Republican money was thrown in to smear Allen
Kukovich, Regola became a state senator. But Hempfield supervisor? C'mon,
they aren't even full-time jobs anymore. Who is bringing this money here,
and why aren't people concerned?
And finally, turnout in our
county was a whopping 23%. Where was the other 77%?
|
