Tomorrow is Election Day. It should be a quiet off year election but we have races galore and even dirty tricks and negative campaign tactics. One must wonder if a good government backlash will ride Jerry Joseph, Brian Dietrich, Tom Creighton and Glenn Eckhart to victory in a way of saying “enough is enough with local partisan politics.”
Let’s address a few:
North Whitehall: The establishment is still trying to influence the election by denying access to property otherwise open to the public and to other candidates for Jerry Joseph signs. Joseph beat the incumbent in a decisive win and accumulated a massive number of write-in votes to win the Democratic nod. Not content to work with the candidate chosen by both parties, they have put up a write-in candidate who has a single issue—midget track racing—on which Joseph has not taken an opposing view. It is America and candidates are free to run but I do question supervisors elected as Republicans campaigning against their party nominee and I do question why Jerry Joseph signs keep disappearing. This vote is very much becoming a referendum on Ron Stahley and Ron Heintzelman as much as on Jerry Joseph and Brian Brinker. Will it be more of the same or change?
Lynn: A very close primary—13 votes—gave Brian Dietrich the win over Mike Dietrich. Mike is a far bigger supporter of Chairman Kermit DeLong’s development plans, so DeLong, another Republican (though nominated in 2007 on both sides) is visibly supporting the Dietrich write-in. Mel Charles is mostly forgotten as the Democratic candidate. This should be another Republican stronghold where GOP vote straight party and Dems split their ticket to vote for Brian Dietrich and just maybe add favorite son Tom Creighton. Now, we have the Republicans eating their own again and people opening the ticket to write-in Mike Dietrich may not consider something other than a straight vote. Although third supervisor, David Najarian, who does not oppose development but opposes it without proper planning and study, has stayed out of the fray (his endorsement could help any candidate—if he endorsed the other), the result will determine which man effectively controls the township for the next two years.
Lehigh County (see yesterday for the full summaries): This is quickly becoming an ugly race. The County Executive race turned south last week as the Cunningham camp tried to enlist the IRS to take on Scott Ott and his former employer and current landlord. In addition, charges and counter charges about campaign finance reports (that only journalists and candidates read) have gone around and around. We know at this point that Don Cunningham has bankrolled the campaigns of Jeanne McNeill and Hillary Kwiatek in the 1st and 5th Districts and we know that just at the time that Cunningham was telling us he had not contributed $72,000 to their campaigns (and it was about half that figure) that he knew he had more money coming after the Oct. 19 cut-off for reporting. Go to the Bernie O’Hare link to the right to read more on this.
Cunningham has poured massive amounts into this campaign. It has been astonishing. He can do so because (1) he knows he s fairly safe for county executive and (2) he has a massive war chest that he built up for a possible state run.
To be fair, Dean Browning, former chair of the Lehigh County Republican party, Vice-Chairman of the Board of Commissioners and the leading Republican on the panel (since Percy Dougherty has achieved RINO status in my book), has been the leader of the campaigns for the 5 Republican candidates (or at least the 4 other than Dougherty who does his own thing).
There is a big difference, however, between what Browning is doing and what is taking place in Lynn and North Whitehall and what Browning is doing and what Cunningham is doing. Browning is supporting his party’s nominee for commissioner. He is doing the right thing there. Unlike DeLong or Stahley/Heintzelman, he is not bucking the party nominee. Dean would be very happy if you voted straight GOP. That is what a good politician should want.
But, even more stark is the contrast with Cunningham. Browning is trying to influence the make-up of his governmental body. In that sense, he is the same as the guys in Lynn and North Whitehall. He is not trying to influence the body which is a check and balance on him.
The Lehigh County Board of Commissioners serves one main purpose—to advise and consent on the actions of the county executive. It cannot produce legislation, only non-binding resolutions. It cannot produce anything without the OK of the executive. The executive proposes all legislation which the 8 committee heads then dutifully sponsor even if they will vote against it. They cannot amend legislation, simply pass it or reject it. They can reject and suggest an amendment but the executive must determine if he will propose it. They are simply not that powerful other than to watch over the county executive.
Even in the budget process where they have a little power, they start with the executive’s budget and can make amendments but it takes 5 votes and he has a line item veto that will take 6 votes to overcome a veto. If they can’t agree on a budget alternative the executive’s budget takes effect.
They are the watchdogs of the taxpayers overlooking the executive. Is Don Cunningham’s massive financial support to Kwiatek and McNeill (which could swing a 5-4 Republican majority to 5-4 Democrat or even 6-3) similar to having a burglar purchase and feed your watchdog? Dean Browning would say yes and I would agree.
In District 1, the two candidates claim to be fiscal conservatives and frankly, Tom Creighton has been less than enthusiastic in his run. However, he would be another Republican vote on the commission and he clearly would not aspire to leadership in the early days. Jeanne McNeill is making her first run for office but her husband has held public office but therein lies the rub. He had a bit of an ethics issue in his appointment to his last Whitehall post and so he landed the same place as Glenn Solt---the county government—working indirectly for Don Cunningham. Creighton has raised the conflict issue: can McNeill properly address staffing and budget matters when her husband works for Cunningham and could Cunningham effectively consider eliminating McNeill’s post (Mr. McNeill) with his wife on the Board of Commissioners?
Good government and open government and the need for checks and balances might favor Creighton simply for that reason.
In the 5th, we don’t have the spouse issue and we have a clear Democrat v. Republican, liberal v. conservative, tax v. cut spending race. Issues should decide. Both candidates are capable. So, let’s assume Don Cunningham wins re-election as county executive. It looks like he will and some may conclude Scott Ott’s message about reduced government is better suited to Harrisburg than the county level because state laws must be changed.
Let’s also assume that Percy Dougherty wins in District 2 (a race between experience and fresh ideas) and the two Democratic incumbents (McCarthy and Jones) win. With the history of District 1, the edge should favor Creighton.
That leaves District 5 to decide control of the Board of Commissioners and decide whether a Democratic board or a Republican board will oversee Cunningham’s budgets and oversee the approval of the large union contracts that will make or break those budgets. Do you want it to be a Democratic board approving a Democratic executive or would a Republican board be better? Recall it has little legislative power so it will not make policy but simply advise and consent on the Cunningham policy.
As much as I differ with some of Percy Dougherty’s views in District 2 and as much as I enjoy Marc Basist’s outsiders view and as much as I have not decided who I will vote for, the good government side of me says that a Dougherty re-election will not be a bad thing due to the check and balance aspect and the fact that the retired Dougherty is the best bulldog the GOP have to watch over Cunningham because he has the time to do it.
Likewise, as much as I respect Hillary Kwiatek and think she has the courage of her convictions in her views, I can see the good government argument for Eckhart.
I do have one issue that if I was in District 5 would swung my vote. Two issues, really. The first is the massive bankroll for Cunningham. Sorry, but that has to be a red flag to at least consider if you are voting in district 1 or 5. Do you expect Creighton and Eckhart to be better watchdogs over Cunningham than McNeill and Kwiatek? Would you prefer commissioners “bought” by another commissioner of their party or bought by the man they are overseeing?
But, a bigger red flag in District 5 is the misleading robocall that Kwiatek sent out (apparently from an out-of-state firm—so much for local jobs) that says Glenn Eckhart voted to take 10 county policemen off of the streets. That is like saying Eckhart voted to oppose the county sending troops to Iraq. Not a single member of the Lehigh County Army is serving. Eckhart also voted to end county aid to Africa. There is not a single Lehigh County Peace Corps officer serving. Not to mention, Eckhart failed to enact gay marriage in Lehigh County, enact gun control in Lehigh County or any other similar cause.
Why? Well, Lehigh County does not have an army or a peace corps. By law, the state defines marriage and the gun laws. We all know that. Well, guess what. Counties don’t have police forces in this state. The Sheriff’s Department is not a police force. Municipalities have officers or they use the Pennsylvania State Police.
The issue in the Safe Streets Initiative was whether Lehigh County would take its surplus funds (remember when we had surplus funds to pass around) and give some of them to Allentown, Bethlehem and other urban areas for community policing. It was not whether police should be on the street but who should pay for them. It was a nice political gift from Don Cunningham who learned from the master, Ed Rendell, about passing out favors to win support from lower levels of government.
It was never the role of the county and guess what, we know longer have surplus funds to do this in the future. It was the responsibility of Allentown and Bethlehem, whose mayors Cunningham was propping up, and other localities to give the funds. Heck, the latest grant came AFTER the operation was done and it was simply a question of whether Whitehall or Lehigh County should pay.
Glenn Eckhart did not vote against police. He has a long history of supporting the police in Salisbury Township paid for by Salisbury Township. He voted against a shell game of taking “surplus” funds from one Democratic county executive to help cover fiscal shortfalls by other Democratic municipal executives. Pure and simple. It was the right vote from a good government perspective. Pay for government at the proper level and end the shell games.
So, simply because of this Cunningham-funded, out-of-state robocall that misstates the meaning of Eckhart’s vote, I can see the good government backlash coming to his aid. It saddened me to learn of the call because other than the financing dust-up, this was an honest issue v. issue campaign. I think the call was intended to mislead and that takes away from the issues.
Comments