Lehigh County Commissioner Glenn Eckhart must have had Wheaties for breakfast today. He's decided to take on the heavyweights within his own party, urging Lt. Governor and Senate President Pro Tempore Joe Scarnati to reverse a decision to hold a special election in the 24th Senatorial District on September 29th. The State already faces a $3 billion budget deficit and this special election will cost $400,000. For some reason, Eckhart thinks that payjackers in the land of midnight payraises might listen to common sense and wait a few short weeks for the November general election. Holding two elections within 35 days of one another will confuse voters and reduce turnout, but it's pretty clear that's what Scarnetti wants.
Commissioner No will actually propose a nonbinding resolution at the next Lehigh County Board of Commissioners meeting urging that the special election be delayed for the general election on November 3.
Won't this get Glenn in trouble within his own party? Eckhart acknowledges that, but claims it's still the right thing to do. “The decision on when to hold this election should be based strictly on dollars and cents, and on promoting the greatest possible voter turnout,” says Eckhart. “While taking this stand may not make me a popular guy with some people in my own party, I firmly believe that political considerations have no place in this decision. We need to put taxpayers first.”
I'll let you know when I find out about his funeral arrangements.
Bernie,
ReplyDeleteWhile I agree that the special election should be held on November 3rd, Commissioner Eckhart has a (assumed) method to his suicidal attack on his party leaders. The heavily Republican sections of his district are in this senate district and I am sure having the Senate R's spend thousands of dollars to increase Republican turnout would not hurt the commissioner's feelings. I guess he is scared of Hillary.
I'd be scared of her, too. She immediately signed onto Lisa Pawlowski's 256 person playground with no understanding of the issues. Dhe apparently thinks any idea that is proposed by a Democrat is necessarily good. I prefer people who are willing to buck the party, Democrat or Republican.
ReplyDeleteThis election is a Shuman/Stoffa production.
ReplyDeleteIf this works, Reibman's going to have to think of a new excuse as to why he won't run that isn't the truth... that he doesn't have a chance.
ReplyDeleteReibman will not be a candidate regardless of what happens. The Shuman conspiracy worked. Soon real Republicans, the New Republicans will elect a new chairman who doesn't agree to needless special elections and who does not dissuade Republican candidates from running against a Democrat for County Exeuctive.
ReplyDeleteBernie,
ReplyDelete1) Your attack on Hillary over the playground is unfounded. Just because you don't like the playground doesn't mean it is a bad idea. Nor does it mean Hillary didn't put research into her support. You have an opinion. Hillary might have a broader opinion.
2) I'll praise Glenn for having the courage to stand up to his party on this issue. I'm happy Glenn is standing on his principles and now have more respect for him.
My support on the issue is I like handicap accessible playgrounds and I live near Cedar Beach and don't see it as a problem. The other issues surrounding it are for City Council, the residents in the immediate community, and the Mayor's office to work out.
Jake Oberholtzer
....Taking on his own party???? Come on, he's shilling to get the special senate election on the same day as his own election to increase turnout in the Milfords, Coopersburg and the rest of his Republican district. That Senate District includes all of the Republican municipalities, but not Democratic West Bethlehem.
ReplyDeleteWhat a cheap shill.
He's not standing up for anything other than his own increased turnout.
He's not a bad guy, but come on. Call it for what it is.
Interesting. When a Republican Lt. Governor schedules a special election that will cost taxpayers $400k, he is accused of political expedience, and in my view, rightly so. But when a Republican LC Comm'r agrees with the Dems and stands up to party bosses, he's a shill. Can't have it both ways.
ReplyDelete"Your attack on Hillary over the playground is unfounded."
ReplyDeleteKwiatek signed onto a proposal she knows nothing about. She lives in West Bethlehem and only endorsed this project bc a Pawlwoski asked her to do so.
When asked about webcasting pub;oc meetings, she instead talkeed about making minutes available. The Demsare uniformly opposed to that proposal simply bc it was made by Browning.
What I see is a candidate with no experience or deep community roots doing what she is told, running against an experienced incumbent who demonstrates some independence.
Bernie,
ReplyDeleteHave you ever met Hillary or had a conversation with her or are you just putting words into her mouth.
Last time Hillary and I chatted she said she was pro-webcasting and pro-meeting minutes on-line.
Jake
I am going by her F/B page, where she answers a comment about webcasting with a bait and switch to posting minutes online.
ReplyDeleteBernie,
ReplyDeleteWhat is with you and Facebook. Maybe you should have emailed her and asked her since you have access to her facebook account.
This going off of people's facebook accounts instead of directly asking people questions seems kind of shady to me.
ReplyDeleteJacob,
ReplyDeleteI am not talking about her private F/B account, but her official "I'm running for LC Comm'r" F/B page. Everything there is open to everyone, as it should be.
I expect a candidate seeking election to the largest legislative body in the Lehigh Valley to state her positions on the issues. It's called transparency. I don't give a shit about how many doors she knocked on today, I want to know how she feels about the same issues being considered by the Comm'rs.
Are we only supposed to sign onto these pages to be rah rah cheerleaders? The whole point is to get her message out there, where it can be discussed. If you have some objection to that, then you should advise her to take down her official F/B page and web page.
If she is willing to publicly disagree w/ her colleagues and advocate Browning's proposal, she will have exhibited some of the independence I admire in candidates. But what I saw instead was that she advocated exactly what the Comm'rs did at their next meeting - agree to post minuites online.
I see no independence from her. If she exhibits that, great. But I have not seen it. Like you, she seems to be the trusting type. Not a good quality in someone who seeks to be a check and balance.
Bernie,
ReplyDeleteI think you'd be more credible if you asked candidates questions instead of commenting on what their websites look like.
In my honest opinion, your as guilty of what you accuse me of doing with my support of the park.
The difference is, my support really doesn't matter that much.
I knock on doors and register voters. Your blog is a public document and will come up when someone does a google search of Hillary's name.
If you want to know Hillary's position or need clarification, maybe you should ask her.
Lastly Bernie, when I don't know the exact answer to a voters question. I tell them I don't know, go back to the campaign I'm knocking on doors for than personally go back to the voter or call them.
ReplyDeleteI want people to vote for my candidate for the right reason. They agree with them, however this has one me a few votes for my candidates even when they disagree because I've taken the time to come back with the official answer from the campaign.
"This going off of people's facebook accounts instead of directly asking people questions seems kind of shady to me."
ReplyDeleteJacob, this is her official F/B page, not her private account. It was presumably set up so that people could read it, and not just cheerleaders.
Kwiatek has a private F/B page, too. I signed up for that and she accepted, but alos sent me a condescending email about what is on and off limits. Rather than deal with the BS, I defriended her and rely only on her official page, and there is nothing shady there. Your suggestion to the contrary is insulting.
As far as telling me how to run my blog is concerned, I rely on EVERYTHING. That includes interview, phonecalls and a candidate's own words. Telling me to discount something that the candidate herself posted on her official F/B page is complete and utter bullshit. In fact, what a candidate commits to writing has more authenticity than my recollection of what was said.
You are off base. Your real problem seems to be that you hate seeing a Democrat criticized. That's bc you are, whether you'll admit it or not, a lever puller.
Bernie,
ReplyDeleteI'm off base? Hillary supports webcasting. If you would take the 30 seconds to write an email before you blog you would know that.
I just praised Glenn for bucking his party on principle.
I'm not upset your criticizing a democrat, I'm upset you are practicing bad journalism.
It would be bad journalism to ignore what a candidate writes on his or her PUBLIC F/B page or web page. That is a legitimate source of information, and your suggestion that it is "shady" to do so is insulting. By this reasoning, you should ignore everything that appears on every candidate's web page or official F/B page.
ReplyDeleteYour real objection is that you don't like seeing Kwiatek criticized. Too bad.
On her own very public F/B page, she skirted the issue and instead supported posting minutes online. Now if she actually comes out and supports Browning's proposal, then I will give her credit. But that did not happen when she wrote about it. Amd I have every right to make my readers aware that it did not happen.
This is an interactive forum. There is nothing stopping her from coming on this blog to set the record straight. Candidates do that all the time. I've had comments from numerous elected officials over the last three years, who will correct me if I have something wrong or add some perspective I may have missed.
You claim Kwiatek supports webcasting, but that is not clear at all on her F/B page. She had a perfect opportunity to endorse Browning's very specific proposal but instead talked about posting minutes online. Even ther, she only advocated posting minutes for a limited period. "I think the minutes should be posted and kept up for the record for fiscal year. I think proposed legislation should be removed once it has been acted on."
This is not exactly what I call transparency. Apparently, she only wants those minutes up for a brief period. LC Comm'rs have decided otherwise. The minutes, going all the way back to somewhere near 1980, will soon be available online.
Why on earth would I want to replace Ekhart, who sponsored that idea, with someone who only wants minutes up for one year?