send to a friend | print | comment
Dems court the liberal base on social, fiscal issues
HARRISBURG—The four Democratic candidates for governor came together for the first time in a public forum here Friday night, airing their positions on everything from taxes and job creation to abortion rights and same-sex marriage in front of a crowd of about 300 liberal activists.
The two-hour event at the Pennsylvania Progressive Summit saw the candidates mostly agree on many fiscal issues while disagreeing on some social issues. With the liberal wing of the party out in force, it was clearly comfortable turf for Montgomery County Commissioner Joe Hoeffel, who has billed himself as the true progressive in the race. Hoeffel won rounds of applause for his stances in favor of same-sex marriage and expansion of abortion rights, as well as his repeated calls for a graduated income tax.
But the other candidates seemed to find their comfort zones as well. Allegheny County Executive Dan Onorato and Scranton Mayor Chris Doherty spoke comfortably about urban and industrial revitalization, using their current jobs as springboards to espouse their qualifications. And Auditor General Jack Wagner forcefully advocated for reform of how state government works.
In the end, Hoeffel’s status as a favorite of the liberal base was confirmed, while all the candidates seemed to have found at least some footing with the constituency. Billed as a debate, it was more of a policy forum, with all the candidates answering questions by moderated Eileen Connelly, the director of the Service Employees International Union’s state council.
At one point, Hoeffel and Doherty both said they would support legalizing same-sex marriage, while Onorato and Wagner signaling that they’d opt for a law allowing civil unions.
“Everyone has the right to be happy,” Doherty said.
Hoeffel, in saying that “I favor equal civil rights for all,” drew some laughs when he talked about the normalcy of his gay neighbors. “They put their trash out on the days they are supposed to.”
Onorato, for his part, said what matters more than his stance on same-sex marriage is what he’s done to stem discrimination in county government. “I do believe we can accomplish a lot of these issues through civil unions and domestic partnerships,” he said.
The candidates agreed that they would veto any law tightening restrictions on access to abortion, though Hoeffel went the furthest in saying the current law was too restrictive. In a not-so-veiled jab at his more conservative opponents, he said that “consistency on this issue is very important. I have always been pro-choice. I stand with the women of Pennsylvania and will protect your rights.”
The debate also exposed a substantive disagreement between Hoeffel and Onorato on tax policy, with Hoeffel calling for a graduated income tax and Onorato saying the legislative process to accomplish that would take too long, making earned income tax credits a better way to go. The graduated income tax, he said later, “would take four years, if you’re lucky.”
The candidates seemed to mostly agree on the need sustain education funding. Wagner was at his best when insisting that state budget process needs to be more efficient.
“Let’s start by passing a budget on time,” he said. “We have used [state employees] as pawns to pass a budget. That is wrong.”
There were some chuckles in the audience when the candidates were asked about decriminalizing marijuana. Hoeffel said he’d support, but only for medicinal uses. Doherty and Onorato said they wouldn’t, while Wagner said he’d support a “move in that direction,” though he was less specific.
While Onorato remains the primary front-runner thanks largely to his huge campaign war chest and fully-hired staff, the audience meant a night tailor-made for Hoeffel.
Afterward, Onorato played down the challenges of speaking to the party’s base.
“I don’t get into who’s liberal, who’s conservative, who’s moderate,” he told pa2010.com. “I am who I am. I’m talking to everyone. And this election is about jobs.”
Click here for videos from the debate.
January 30, 2010 at 5:05 pm
Tags: Chris Doherty, Dan Onorato, Jack Wagner, Joe Hoeffel













demberger
Jan 30th, 2010
You’re right. Wagner was at his best last night. He talked about the important policy issues and was honest about his differences with the very liberal crowd (on issues that I doubt the next Gov will ever have to deal with). He ended strong with the reality that he’s the only guy who can beat Corbett in the fall. If we want a Democrat as Governor, we gotta back Jack.
Ginzberg
Jan 30th, 2010
The Dem Gov candidates will be doing a similar forum Sunday, 1/31, at 1:00 at Wightman School, Squirrel Hill, Pittsburgh, sponsored by the 14th Ward Independent Dem Club, League of Women Voters, and Pitt College Dems.
Hoeffel: Kind of Screwed for Gov | PAWaterCooler.com
Jan 31st, 2010
[...] Finger in the wind, Montgomery County’s Joe Hoeffel decided this was the year he could run for Governor as an unrepentant liberal progressive. See here & here. [...]
Bob Guzzardi
Feb 1st, 2010
No mention of the $10 billion budget shortfall by 2012 or what to do about it except, perhaps, to hammer The Forgotten Taxpayer with more taxes. No discussion about reducing taxes so that job creating businesses have more capital to produce goods and provide services which raise the standard of living. The Forgotten Taxpayer produces the revenues to run government and contributes to the community by working, saving and investing. No mention of the Pension Bomb. Sam Rohrer will be speaking on behalf of the productive taxpayer.
Sophie Glutz
Feb 1st, 2010
Nice try Bob, Jack Wagner has been talking about both for a very long time. Years infact. He’s been looking out for us (taxpayers) for a long time and I for one appreciate his efforts and the solutions he has recommended.
Bob Guzzardi
Feb 1st, 2010
Were the Budget Deficits and the Pension Bomb referenced at the debate? What did the candidates say?
What is the solution? Raising taxes? Increasing taxes on Marcellus Shale? State revenues are $24 billion and general fund was $27.9 billion. This year shortfall was made by raiding Rainy Day Fund and MCARE fund and Federal Stimulus money. Next year, those monies are not there. Then what?
Or would the candidates cut spending? If so, what programs, if any, would be cut and how much. The Forgotten Taxpayer would like to keep money earned from working or from earning from savings and investments.
What is the solution? It took two hundred years to get to $20 billion and in 7 years increased to $27.9 billion. What is next Governor going to do?