Last edited Mon Aug 17, 2015, 04:02 AM - Edit history (2)
I would like to provide you and other PA. Democrats sufficient information to show you that Katie McGinty, as well as her campaign chair, Rendell, are not impartial when it comes to Big Energy, Fracking, and the like in Pennsylvania.
And that means that there IS a critical, substantive difference between McGinty & Sestak. Sestak has commented on that himself. This is how he reacted on Twitter to the news that Rendell was lining up behind McGinty: “If party leaders in DC & the machine in Philly want an establishment candidate, I’m not their guy. I’m for people, above party or type. ” http://www.delcotimes.com/opinion/20150812/editorial-get-ready-for-a-barn-burner-in-dem-senate-primary#disqus_thread
Sestak does and will put people above party. And aside from the issue of fracking, the Democratic party is at a fork in the road right now - it can go more corporate or it can go progressive.
Perhaps the average Pennsylvanian does not know what an oligarch is, or what the acronyms DLC, DSCC or DNC stand for, let alone what role those entities play in the political world. But most people who read DU do know.
One last thought - you mentioned that Rendell tried to get a gas extraction tax passed before he left office. The fact is he did NOT get it passed. Shortly after that, he left office and began lobbying for the very parties who continue to vehemently oppose the extraction tax.
More Than a Matter of Opinion: Ed Rendell’s Plea for Fracking Fails to Disclose Industry Ties
http://www.propublica.org/article/ed-rendell-new-york-fracking-op-ed-disclosure
That matches the pattern I observed in 10 years of working as an executive director and legal counsel for the Democratic caucus in the PA. House of Representatives. The pattern was that the same pieces of legislation would be introduced every 2 years, in session after session (Bills which have been introduced, but not passed, die at the end of each 2 year session, and are often re-introduced at the next session.) This was back in the period before the religious right took over the Republican party, and Rs & Ds were quite congenial. So one session, a bill would be introduced by a Democrat, but never get to the stage of final passage, and would die; and the next session the Rs would introduce it. But here's the kicker, and the big payoff. These bills had one thing in common - whatever deep pocket industry or profession was involved, the proposed legislation threatened the profits of said special interest - either by new or increased taxes/fees/fines, or by regulations which would cut into bottom line profits. Everyone (the legislators, the staff, the lobbyists & the special interest groups) knew that the bills were introduced to trigger/justify major payoffs from lobbyists for said special interests. In Rendell's case, since he was precluded by the state constitution for running for re-election, the payoff for not actually passing the fracking tax appears to be employment as a lobbyist.
Lobbyist: "Say, Representative (or Senator), the impact of this bill would CRIPPLE my special interest employer; it would DRIVE US OUT OF PENNSYLVANIA; it would end civilization as we now know it, etc., etc.
State Representative: Well, say, Mr. Luxury Home Builders' Association Lobbyist (Or Mr. Pharmaceutical Manufacturers' Lobbyist, or Mr. Big Health Insurance Lobbyist), I'm under a lot of. . . I repeat, A LOT OF PRESSURE from the good folks back home to support this bill. And if I don't vote for this bill, well they may stop contributing to my campaign, and they may not re-elect me, and THEN what would happen to ME?!?!?
Lobbyist: Well, Mr. Representative, that would be terrible. Tell you what, let me take you out for dinner and a lot of booze at the most expensive restaurant in town and I'll give you a nice fat check to assuage your worries. And there's always more where that came from. Wink, wink! How does that sound?"
State Representative: "That sounds great! Oh, and can I bring my girl friend along?"
Two years later, lather, rinse, repeat.
= new reply since forum marked as read
