John Dougherty's Priorities
As most know, John Dougherty is suing the Ethics Board in Federal Court, trying to shield them from seeing how he spends the cash of COPE, the IBEW’s PAC. So, with data pulled from OpenSecrets.org, I decided to take a look at how Doc spends his cash. The way I figure, maybe this will let us learn more about a guy without a huge record of public service.
The first thing you notice when looking at the reports is that Doc spends a ton of cash. No surprise there, right? He donates to almost every politician in the City. But, then I decided to compile his spending from the last three election cycles, and see if Doc’s campaign rhetoric matches the actions he has taken over the last three years campaign cycles.
For example, last week, the Inquirer noted that Doc was wooing the LGBT vote. While the LGBT community certainly has complex set of political desires, I bet the ability to marry each other, to not be targets of bigotry, and to be able adopt children with their spouses has to be sort of high on their general list, right?
Meet Philadelphia’s Mike Stack, Doc's future colleague in the Senate, and a supporter of enshrining bigotry into the Constitution. In the last three cycles, Dougherty has given him over $54,000. Just a few days ago, in fact, Stack again said yes! he! can! to Bigotry.
Meet Mario Civera, a GOP State Representative from Upper Darby. In 2006, Mario Civera answered a campaign questionnaire and took the following positions:
- If Roe v Wade were overturned, he would vote to ban abortions.
- He opposes embryonic stem cell research
- He opposes the State funding contraceptive services.
- He opposes the State mandating that insurers provide contraceptive services.
- He opposes a moratorium on the death penalty.
- He supports putting bigotry into the Constitution, with an amendment to ban same sex marriage.
- He supports banning gay couples from adopting children.
- He supports school vouchers.
- He opposes state funded, public school pre-schooling.
- He supports letting healthcare providers refuse to administer services to patients if they are morally opposed- like writing a prescription for birth control, for example.
In short, Mario Civera is a bad dude. But he is also likely beatable. The face of Upper Darby is dramatically changing, and neanderthal leadership such as his will not be successful too much longer. In fact, in 2004, on a shoestring campaign, Philly for Change’s Josh Richard almost beat him- taking 46% of the vote.
Beating Civera would be a great thing for those concerned with LGBT rights, with the separation of Church and State, and with many other progressive issues. And given the changing face of Upper Darby, this is the type of seat that Democrats must have if they want to build any sort of lasting majority.
But, John Dougherty, that erstwhile champion of LGBT rights, seems to love Civera’s innovative style of bigotry. He loves it so much, that over the last three election cycles, Doc has funneled at least $26,000 to Civera, and another $66,400 to the Upper Darby Republican Party. In other words, Doc has spent a grand total of at least $92,400 to try and keep the House in the GOP’s hands, and this guy in office.
Luckily, Dougherty is not just a champion of LGBT rights. He also has told us that he will stare down the NRA and get us gun laws. Apparently, the only reason we haven’t gotten better gun laws in the State is because our legislators are big old wimps.
But besides the general threat of the NRA, there have been some concrete obstacles over recent years to getting good gun laws. In fact, there probably are some real wimps in the gun department, even among people who should be on our side. You know them, right? Those Philly Democrats who don’t generally stand up to the NRA. Like, for example, Bill Keller. Keller has a pretty solid record from the NRA (and until recently, seemed pretty anti-LGBT).
Want to take a guess at the minimum Doc has funneled to Keller in the same last three cycles? If you said $345,000, you win a wimpy stuffed gun.
Oh, and progressive stalwart, and worst person ever, John Perzel? Doc gave him $165,000. Or how about the GOP Senate Majority Leader, Dominic Pillegi? He should be pissed, he got only a pitiful 17 grand.
John Dougherty can talk about his long record of public service. But if running a union and accumulating power are the main points of reference we have for him, and he has supported politicians with explicit anti-Gay and anti-gun control agendas, why should be believe what he says now? And considering that Doc has said he will not give up control of his union and its piggybank, it is time for everyone to start asking him some tough questions.
Nice work
I received a campaign mailer yesterday that asks on the front page, "Isn't it time for a change?" (or something that to effect) I said to myself: "Why yes it is! Who wants to know?" And then I turned it over and saw it was John Dougherty!
Ain't that a pip?! John Dougherty. Change. I was laughing through the tears.
A powerful, well-connected, straight, Christian, white male in the first district? I can't possibly think of anyone more opposite of Fumo. And the best part is that we don't have to say goodbye to the ridiculous Fumo-Dougherty turf wars, for it'll only be a changing of the guard. Because that sort of politics only helps us.
Here's a piece of information to add: How many women are currently in the Pennsylvania Senate? 10. That's a big ole 20%. Now, how many straight, Christian, white males are there?
It really is time for a change.
I sense a tinge of sarcasm
in your comments.
and unfortunately
not a tinge of irony from the Dougherty campaign
Yay! I won the wimpy stuffed gun!
Remember the "Rendell/Santorum" signs along Roosevelt Boulevard on Election Day 2006? That was also courtesy of IBEW Local 98.
In summary...
Johnny Doc is Philadelphia's Vladimir Putin: just like Putin does whatever's good for Putin, Johnny Doc does whatever's good for Johnny Doc.
About right?
-Z
Mario Civera not alone on school vouchers
John Dougherty is a pretty outspoken supporter of school vouchers, for what its worth. He wrote an op-ed in the Inky and this piece in the Philadelphia Business Journal.
-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.
It's absolutely a social justice issue, Johnny Doc...
... which is why the best way help local public schools is to get them *more* money and support, not to divert money and support into Constitutionally-questionable initiatives like vouchers for parochial schools.
-Z
But it sure is good for
But it sure is good for getting Catholic priests to come out to your campaign announcement.
-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.
Of course
It's well-understood by public education's true advocates that the reasons for vouchers are as follows (in no particular order, and this is not an exclusive list):
* to remove funding from public education altogether, as the GOP likes the idea of a permanent, easily-exploitable underclass
* to redirect public money from the state to churches, since the amount of money available from vouchers can only pay for religious schooling, and almost never for non-sectarian private schools
* to get votes from otherwise liberal religious forces like the Catholic Church by, in effect, bribing them w/tax dollars
* to encourage the poor to vote against their own economic self-interest by holding out the promise of 'school choice,' when the money available from vouchers probably won't help them anyhow
Any other nominations?
Standard disclaimers,
-Z
School vouchers
Everyone knows that the public school system needs more money...not just more, but a lot more. It is the most short-sighted policy in America. But I also have a tough time telling a kid that he can't go to a better school because of my principles.
Self-fulfilling prophecies
Let's look at this as a choice, though.
Option #1: Take money out of the public schools to help a small number of students go to parochial schools, in an un-Constitutional transfer of public money to religious institutions.
Option #2: Make sure that the public schools get all the money that they're entitled to get, and thereby help more students than in Option #1
Odd, but I don't see how #2 is worse for the kid in your example.
-Z
False Assumption
You are assuming that both options are equally likely to occur. I would say this is incorrect. The government has been very close to passing school vouchers and no where near close to appropriating all the money needed to fix every school. So if vouchers were possible but fixing every school were not, then your stance would be much worse for the kid in my example.
Another angle
Hey guys,
My name is Nathan, I'm with Dougherty for Senate. I just wanted to draw your attention to this blog entry on our home page.
I've copied the full text below for your convenience. Enjoy!
Nathan Foley
Dougherty for Senate
Too much
Team Doc does not get criticize Anne Dicker on Guzzardi. That's just silly.
YOU GUYS DIRECTLY SUPPORTED RICK SANTORUM.
Guzzardi's donations to Anne is based on Anne's leadership on the casinos, on opposition to the illegal pay raise and other "good government" issues that drive at least some Republicans as crazy as it does many progressives. Guzzardi gives limited "good government" support for Anne Dicker for exactly the same reason that Russ Diamond does - because Harrisburg itself needs non-partisan institutional reforms and this at least they can agree on - even as her stands on the minimum wage and gun control run completely 180 degrees from them.
-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.
That's why they call them "priorities"
I think this is the whole story, right here:
And this is the concern that many progressives and party people and people who care about a number of issues have. In the end, John Dougherty's record suggests that he will support and give money to anyone, regardless of what they believe, in order to bring jobs for Local 98 and other labor unions into the city. Maybe that is a reasonable position for the head of a union to take, but it's more difficult to rationalize when you're talking about 1) a local party leader and 2) a state Senator.
The easy way out of this would have been to say that in the past, that was money from the union, and John Dougherty was doing his job as a union leader to bring jobs to his constituents. As a state senator, he'll be responsible to both his district and his party and will have to make a different set of choices. But that doesn't seem to be what Mr Hickey is saying at all. He seems to be saying that this is a pattern of things to come, and that Dougherty will trade money or support or even votes to reach higher objectives, whether they're for labor or political fundraising or anything else.
You could make the case that the potential of jobs from dredging trump all of those other issues -- who gets elected to the U.S. Senate, or whether PA gets a defense of marriage amendment, or, yes, retaining the ability to pass our own laws without preemption from the state. But you can't run from those priorities, or from people who want to question them. Because this kind of thing is troubling to many of us.
Paging Brian Hickey
Give. Me. A. Break.
I just wanted to say that first, before Dan replied.
I know you Brian, and I know Doc. I spoke with both of you in different ways about Philadelphians Against Santorum. There is no doubt that Doc did not support that effort, or any effort to defeat Santorum. And there is no doubt that both Dicker and Farnese did. In fact, both Dicker and Farenese gave money and time to Philadelphians Against Santorum
Is this my litmus test issue in the race, were I voting there? Maybe not, but to deny the reality of this is ridiculous:
Without offering any opinion
Without offering any opinion on the matter, I wanted to refer everyone to this post and comments wherein we discussed Dougherty's support of Santorum. Let's make no mistake, Dougherty wholeheartedly support Rick Santorum.
I am working to elect Larry Farnese to the General Assembly. Unless otherwise expressly stated, this and every comment or blog I post on YPP and any action I take hereon is solely attributable to me and not Farnese or Friends of Farnese