|
| ||||||||||||||||
|
INSIDER INFO -- JANUARY 2008
Exiting Harrisburg
Exiting Congress
GOP Civil War
What’s the deal, Castille?
|
We
welcome and appreciate any feedback
you may OPT OUT
The views contained in The Insider are those exclusively of its editor, Al Neri, unless an article is specifically authored by another writer. | |||||||||||||||
| Insider's Stories | ||||||||||||||||
|
Exiting Harrisburg
The pace of retirement announcements is slower than in 2006 but 11 state House and four state senators plan to leave in 2008
Thirty-one lawmakers stepped away from the state House or Senate in 2006, with a
handful running for other or higher office. Another 24 lost in the primary
or general elections.
So far in 2007 and 2008, the rate is a little slower: As of Jan. 1, 2008, 10 House
incumbents and four senators declared 2008 will be their last year in
office.
All but two of those 14 are not planning to seek further elected office: Reps. Tom Tangretti, D-Westmoreland, Tom Yewcic and Ed Wojnaroski, D-Cambria, Jerry Nailor, R-Cumberland, Carole Rubley, R-Chester, David Steil, R-Bucks, Steve Nickol, R-York, Art Hershey, R-Chester, and state Sens. Roger Madigan, R-Bradford, Connie Williams, D-Montgomery, Gerald LaValle, D-Beaver, Gib Armstrong, R-Lancaster.
Two current House members, Reps. Daylin Leach, D-Montgomery, and Rep. Steve
Cappelli, R-Lycoming, say they will each try to fill one of the about-to-be-vacant Senate seats. Cappelli plans to run for Madigan’s seat, while Leach is the consensus choice of Democrats to replace Williams.
The Harrisburg-based internet news service Capitolwire reports that more retirements may soon be forthcoming: Capitolwire reported that sources within both House caucuses
say two more veteran lawmakers are seriously considering retirement: Reps.
Ron Raymond, R-Delaware, and Rep. Merle Phillips, R-Northumberland. Neither could be reached for comment.
The seats of Raymond, Steil and Rubley will be major defensive battles for
the Republicans, who may also face a real challenge for Hershey’s seat,
because House Democrats believe they may have a strong candidate in that
district.
Democrats will face spirited challenges for the seats of Leach, Wojnaroski,
Tangretti, Yewcic and LaValle.
Spirited primaries may occur for the seats of Tangretti, Nailor, Nickol,
Madigan, LaValle and Armstrong.
Up to another five or 10 retirements are expected to be announced in the
next month, caucus leaders said.
And remember, in 2006, two incumbents, Reps. Linda Bebko-Jones, D-Erie, and
Mike Diven, R-Allegheny, planned to run for re-election, only to not file
their nominating petitions properly. In Diven's case, staffers signed his
nominating petitions with the names of some dead voters, leading to criminal
charges being filed against some.
All four caucuses are working to ensure that problem does not
recur for their incumbents this year.
More retirements were expected this year, but so far, House members
who survived the 2006 pay raise elections have shown less interest in giving
up that post this year.
Many of the replacement candidates remain yet to be picked, but some are
already in place.
For the LaValle seat, Beaver County farmer Elder Vogel is expected to give
a strong challenge to Beaver County Commissioner Joe Spanik, who played
football for LaValle at Midland High School, but was prepared to run against
his old coach until LaValle retired.
Rep. Tom Petrone, D-Pittsburgh, is thinking abut retirement but has not made a final decision. He has held the seat since 1980. Should he retire, expect a primary fight between Petrone's chief of staff, Ryan Douglass, and Pittsburgh City Councilman Dan Deasy.
U.S. Rep. John Peterson, R-Venango, one of the most outspoken critics of tolling Interstate 80, told his Washington, D.C. staff Wednesday that he would not run for re-election.
The announcement surprised Washington insiders and Republican power brokers alike in the state’s largest congressional district (the 5th) which encompasses all or parts of 17 counties in north-central and northwestern Pennsylvania. It is one of the most rural districts in the nation.
In the last six months, Peterson has become best-known for opposing the I-80
tolling plan passed by the Legislature in July, and briefly inserting a
provision into a federal highway funding bill to thwart that plan.
He has slowly built up support until even the state legislative GOP leaders
who declined to fight the plan vigorously for months, have recently publicly
said they want to replace tolls on I-80 with a different way to fund highways and mass
transit.
Senate President Pro Tem Joe Scarnati, R-Jefferson, and House
Majority Leader Sam Smith, R-Jefferson, both, like Peterson, represent a
swath of the I-80 corridor in north-central Pennsylvania but both voted to toll the east-west highway.
Peterson opposed the plan early and often, and has devoted dozens of press
releases to attempts to sway public opinion and the Federal Highway
Administration against the I-80 tolling plan.
Of the two state senators who represent big chunks of Peterson’s district,
Scarnati is not expected to run but to try and remain in charge of the state Senate.
The only Democrat considered capable of making this race competitive, Rep. Scott
Conklin, D-Centre, told Capitolwire he would not run for Congress. But
if Corman runs for Congress and wins, sources told Capitolwire Conklin may
run for that Senate seat in a special election.
Politically, Peterson has tangled with Scarnati on more than one occasion, most
notably when Peterson backed ally Rep. Kathy Rapp in her successful primary
campaign against Scarnati’s aide, Todd Nyquist, in 2004.
Peterson has also been active in trying to find a Republican primary
opponent to run against Scarnati this spring, telling allies that Scarnati’s votes for the 2005 pay raise and for tolling I-80 make his long-time foe
vulnerable.
GOP Civil War Montgomery County Commissioner Jim Matthews makes deal withDemocrat Joe Hoeffel, freezing out GOP former star DA, Bruce Castor
How bad is the Montgomery County Republican civil war?
Matthews would be chairman of the commissioners. Hoeffel? Vice-chairman. Castor? Left out in the cold.
Why? Because the two men hate each other, and most of their closest allies hate the top allies of the other guy.
Castor continues to deny the Hoeffel-Matthews deal will stand up on Jan. 7, when the three commissioners will be sworn in, saying he and Matthews will undo the Hoeffel deal. But sources close to Matthews say the deal will stick, because Matthews cannot and will not deal with Castor.
Why? Well, the answer starts literally decades ago when two Republican power brokers, ex-county and state GOP committee chairman Bob Asher, now the state’s Republican national committeeman, went to prison as part of the CTA scandal.
Into that breach stepped a group of rivals, eventually led by the next-to-last county GOP chairman, Frank Bartle.
Bartle led an anti-Asher party, which claimed a lot of local offices, but Asher emerged from prison, became a top fund-raiser again, and slowly became the equal, then the more influential county powerbroker than Bartle, because of his ability to raise funds, his energy, and his statewide contacts, especially his close relationships with House and Senate leaders and Republican statewide contacts, including being on board early and strong for Tom Ridge, the Erie congressman for governor in 2004.
Except for Castor and Bartle, Asher is famous for getting over his grudges. He even forgave Sam Katz for running anti-Asher ads against Ridge in the 1994 primary, citing Asher’s prison record. When Katz ran for mayor of Philadelphia five years later, Asher raised him major sums, and Katz now goes out of his way to praise Asher.
Asher even agreed to help Castor run for attorney general in 2004, but that relationship disintegrated when Asher initially backed Barbara Hafer for governor in mid-2001. Castor wanted to endorse Mike Fisher right away at the time, and when he refused to wait as Asher requested, Asher found Tom Corbett, endorsed him, and despite Castor airing anti-Asher ads against Corbett, Corbett won.
That made Castor furious, and led to a number of vigorous battles between the two. Castor’s consistent and oft-spoken view that Asher was destroying the Montgomery County Republican Party made him a critic of the two Asher allies who were then the majority Republican Montgomery County Commissioners: Matthews and Tom Ellis.
So despite advice from friends and mentors and a job he loved and which made him a TV star in the Philadelphia television market, Castor elected to run for commissioner, saying he would reclaim the courthouse for more conservative Republicanism, and asked the county party to not only endorse him, but his hand-picked running mate, his former deputy DA and former state Rep. Melissa Murphy-Weber.
But despite Castor saying repeatedly early this year that he might not run for commissioner if the county party did not endorse him and Murphy-Weber together, dumping Matthews and Ellis, the county committee members did not agree. Just like county voters in the fall, they wanted Castor most, but Matthews second after him among Republicans.
That night at the county endorsement, Castor said: “I have grave reservations about running on a ticket with Jim because of the lobbying contract issue." He was referring to a county-commissioner-granted $7,500-per-month contract with the lobbying firm run by Montgomery County Republican Committee Chairman Ken Davis.
Castor said at that time: “I just think that issue is a killer for Republicans and if I run with Jim, it will rub off on me, even though I opposed it. … It never occurred to me that the committee would give me a partner I told them I didn’t want, that they would arrange this marriage I didn’t want. No, I am not happy. … Arranged marriages sometimes work. Usually they don’t.”
During that same primary campaign, Matthews said Castor’s ego “could float the Titanic.”
A blog, thepennsylvaniaprogressive.com, wrote about Hoeffel’s criticisms of Matthews’ reliance on Asher. Bloggers wrote that the Asher problem would taint Castor.
Castor wrote thepennsylvaniaprogressive.com an e-mail: “Believe me, the outrage is there, just not expressed in public. One correction: Matthews/Castor is NOT accepting Asher money. Jim has his own campaign account (I do not). That is where the money is going . . . I have never taken a dime from Asher or Asher's PAC for this or any other campaign. I simply think it is wrong that a person convicted of political corruption hold a position of such power and influence in the Republican Party.”
Castor campaign spokesman Stephen O’Toole later said Castor regretted sending the e-mail, and was “completely behind” Matthews.
One source close to the Hoeffel-Matthews deal said: “Jim can’t trust Bruce and that is the bottom line. Bruce told Jim he doesn’t do well with these collegial, power-sharing relationships and offices, he is an autocrat. He thought he could dictate to Jim based on what Bruce wanted.”
2007 marks the second time Hoeffel, a former congressman and the 2004 Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate, when he lost to U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., has become a county commissioner. It also marks the second time he has chosen which of his Republican colleagues will be chairman. In 1991, Castor, and Republicans Jon Fox and Mario Mele were all elected. But on the day for the chairmanship election, Fox and Mele each nominated each other and left the deciding vote to Hoeffel. He chose Mele, and kept him as chairman for six years, until Hoeffel left after winning a congressional seat.
Castor wrote an e-mail to Capitolwire, a Harrisburg-based Internet news service, which said that decision made Hoeffel into a county political factor, and that Matthews was letting it happen again.
Castor also wrote: “When we deviated from the tradition that at reorganization after the election the highest vote getter became the chairman with Fox/Mele, a disastrous situation arose that is directly responsible for the rise of Joe Hoeffel and the demise of Montgomery County's Republican party.
“We have never fully recovered from that. To empower him once again would simply ensure that our majority ends in four years. I know I'd never do that and I don't believe Jim would do that. That action sixteen years ago cost us a Congressional seat, state house seats in the eastern end of the county and municipal majorities throughout Montgomery County. I can't imagine any Republican would do that again. I know I will not.”
When Capitolwire, a Harrisburg-based Internet news service, broke the Matthews-Hoeffel deal story, reporters asked Hoeffel “if given his history of being a chairman-maker for Commissioner Mario Mele in 1991, he was surprised to find himself confronted by dissension-ridden Republicans again, Hoeffel said only: “It was pretty apparent from the public comments of my new colleagues that there were was quite a split between them.”
Castor claimed he and Matthews had agreed one would vote for the other and they would prevent Hoeffel and the Democrats from gaining power in the county.
Sources close to Castor say the district attorney responded: “That is too much,” and Matthews then approached Hoeffel for the talks that led to this deal.
These battles have drawn more attention than usual because of the statewide ambitions of all three men. Hoeffel ran for U.S. Senate in 2004, and tried to do run for U.S. Senate and lieutenant governor in 2006 before he was talked out of those campaigns by Gov. Ed Rendell. He told close allies that he would like to run against Specter or for governor in 2010.
Matthews was the GOP candidate for lieutenant governor in 2006, as the running mate of Lynn Swann.
Castor was defeated by Corbett in 2004 for attorney general, and has told eastern county party GOP chairmen that he will be the eastern Republican candidate for governor in 2010.
“We have three commissioners and none of them want to be in this job,” one source close to the negotiations told Capitolwire. “Two, Jim and Bruce, want statewide office, and the third, Joe, wants to be in the Senate, with Harrisburg in second place. The one thing we know is that none of them want to be in the courthouse in Norristown.”
What’s the deal, Castille? Pennsylvania’s newest chief justice cut his teeth in Philly DA’s office and then moved to high court
Ronald Castille, running to be Philadelphia’s district attorney in the mid-1980s, was described by Philadelphia Magazine as a tough prosecutor who “eats nails for breakfast.”
Castille proudly boasted of that description in a 1987 interview with The Philadelphia Inquirer, saying: “What more could you ask for?"
That image of the fearless prosecutor helped Castille win the DA’s office in 1985 and again in 1989, but it wasn’t enough to propel him into the mayor’s office in 1991. He lost the GOP primary that year to former Mayor Frank Rizzo, who died before the general election could be held.
But Castille didn’t do too badly for himself after that loss. He took a break from prosecuting and public office for a brief stint in private practice in Philadelphia, before U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter and other state Republicans came knocking on his door in 1993. They wanted him to run for the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.
Next week he officially takes over as chief justice, when outgoing Chief Justice Ralph Cappy steps down.
In actuality, Castille has been running the court system since the beginning of December, and finding that he enjoys the work, even if it wasn’t really what he thought he was getting himself into when he ran for the court nearly 15 years ago.
“I didn’t run for chief justice,” Castille said in a recent interview with Capitolwire, the Harrisburg-based internet news service.
The job came to him as the longest serving justice on the court, after Cappy. Unlike the U.S. Supreme Court, whose chief justice is appointed, Pennsylvania’s constitution requires that its high court be led by the most senior justice.
As the court’s new chief, Castille has put aside some of the tough talk of his prosecutor days. He says his primary objective is to encourage collegiality among his fellow justices, and lead the court to produce a “coherent body of law.”
But his first job will be overseeing one of the biggest transition periods in the court’s recent history.
Two new justices, Democrats Seamus McCaffery and Debra Todd, will join the court in January, and a third will come on board later in the year. Gov. Ed Rendell still has to nominate a replacement for Cappy, which will require a two-thirds confirmation vote from the state Senate. That person will hold the seat through 2009 when another election will be held.
“I was here when two new justices came on, that was Sandy Newman and Russ Nigro” in 1995, Castille said. “But I’ve never been on the court when three are coming on.”
Long before he started his career as a prosecutor, or even attended a law class, Castille, 63, was an infantry platoon commander with the United States Marine Corps during the Vietnam War.
On March 16, 1967 – his 23rd birthday – Castille was on a search-and-destroy mission in a South Vietnamese rice paddy called Duc Pho when he was hit by machine-gun fire. He was severely injured, so bad that doctors had to amputate his right leg. His service in that battle won Castille a Bronze Star and two Purple Hearts.
Castille recovered at what was then the Philadelphia Naval Hospital and, with help from the G.I. Bill, went on to the University of Virginia’s law school.
Castille went to work in the early 1970s for then-Philadelphia District Attorney Arlen Specter. Castille later rose to the level of a deputy under then-District Attorney Rendell, who also had been hired by Specter.
If Castille has a message for Rendell now, it’s don’t dally in naming the court’s seventh member.
Rendell and state Senate leaders have vowed to move quickly on the vacancy. So far, the governor has met once with Senate GOP leaders to discuss the high court seat and other judicial nominations, but the two sides haven’t yet begun discussing names.
Rendell has said that he is open to replacing Cappy, a Democrat, with a Republican, and that the merits of the candidate would trump party politics. Among the candidates being considered, sources say, is Justice James Fitzgerald III, a Republican and Rendell friend, who just finished up a nearly one-year appointed term on the court.
Castille said urgency was the name of the game: “I don’t care what he does,” in terms of Rendell appointing a Democrat or Republican to the court, “as long as it’s quick.”
When asked if a 4-3 Democratic court would make a difference, given the court’s 4-3 GOP hold over the past seven years, Castille told Capitolwire: “No, not really. I was the only Republican when I got on the court [in 1994], the first one elected in 12 years.
“No, you might be in the euphoria of Democrat or Republican or whatever your first year, but that quickly falls by the wayside. Nobody votes on a case because they’re a Democrat or whatever.”
As chief justice, Castille said he would continue technology projects and a commission to examine racial and gender biases in the state courts, started by Cappy. But unlike some court critics, and the reformer voices of last fall’s Supreme Court campaign, Castille doesn’t believe the Supreme Court needs any significant overhaul in how it conducts business.
There is no need for the court to churn out opinions faster or to take on more appeals, Castille said. Nor is the court too secretive, he added, saying its open records policies are “far ahead” of those of the state Legislature. All three issues have been raised by court critics and at least some of the four candidates for the high court in the November election.
On the issue of the number of appeals the court agrees to hear, Castille asked: “Why would the number count? … If the lower court has decided them correctly, should we take that so we can opine on the same thing?”
Castille also said that the court hears a fair amount of cases each year. In 2005, he said, the court got about 2,600 appeal requests, and heard 239 of them, or about 9 percent. In 2004, the court agreed to hear 178 cases, and in 2003, 172 cases. Each year, it got between 2,500 and 3,000 appeal requests, Castille said.
On some bread-and-butter court issues, Castille said he favors the merit selection of judges but doubts that the public would embrace such a concept, which would require voter approval to amend the state constitution. He said he was undecided on another issue: whether the Supreme Court should allow cameras in its courtroom.
“It’s got its pluses and minuses,” Castille told Capitolwire. “As an educational tool, it might be all right to do a few of the sessions. Does it affect the conduct of the litigants? That’s always up in the air. Does it affect the conduct of the justices? So we’ll be weighing in on that with the new justices when they come on board, probably in March. …
”We had voted against it a couple years ago in our administrative session. But with the new people coming on, with the new outlook, I could be persuaded one way or the other. I know all the arguments. I’m still up in the air. But if there’s four people who want to do it, it will be done.”
Lawyers say Castille is viewed as tough but fair – predictably more conservative on criminal issues while more moderate on civil matters. He is also well known as the justice who penned the September 2006 opinion restoring repealed pay raises for state judges. And earlier last year, he drew some bad press over a public fight with a Duquesne University law professor whom Castille accused of violating ethics rules by criticizing the high court.
But Castille also won the kudos of some reformers recently in a dissenting opinion he wrote, slamming his colleagues for taking what he called an “accommodationist approach to gaming appeals.” That dissent came in a ruling, handed down last fall, which prevented Philadelphia voters from casting a mostly symbolic ballot for or against slots casinos in the city.
Tim Potts of Democracy Rising PA, a frequent critic of Castille and the Supreme Court, said that decision gave him hope that Castille would lead the court to take stricter views in interpreting the state constitution.
At 63, Castille could sit atop the court and the state judiciary through 2014, when he reaches the mandatory retirement age of 70, although he would have to face voters in a retention election in 2013. The new chief justice said he was still “up in the air” over whether he would seek retention one year before having to leave the court.
“To work it for one year, [will that be] too disruptive” to the court? Castille asked. “Will I be tired of this stuff by that time? The chief’s office does a lot of work that our [other] offices don’t do.”
| ||||||||||||||||
