If you are like me, Paul Wellstone was one of your favorite senators. It wasn’t just Paul’s politics, but much more. I liked his attitude. I liked his eloquence. I liked that he was a professor. I don’t think our government should be run by professors, but I do think we should elect a few more of them.
Chuck Pennacchio is the Director of the History Program at University of the Arts in Philadelphia. He is running for the Democratic nomination to face Rick ‘man on dog’ Santorum in the 2006 election.
He reminds me a lot of a young Paul Wellstone and that is why I am supporting him.
First of all, he looks a bit like Wellstone, only with more hair. But he also has a passion for Democratic principles. Last night, at his fundraiser here in Philadelphia, Chuck spoke about his commitment to a woman’s right to choose, his commitment to universal health care, his support for stem-cell research, and his support for raising the minimum wage.
Some people have questioned why I am willing to support Chuck when we have a better known and financed candidate in Bob Casey Jr. The first answer can be provided by Chuck:
“Democrats have muddled the message nationwide,” Mr. Pennacchio said. “The Republican Party has been hijacked by right-wing religious fellows, Fortune 500 business groups and neo-conservatives. The Democratic Party has been hijacked by inside-the-Beltway consultants. The consultants are paid win or lose, but they tell all the Democratic candidates, ‘Don’t say anything,’”
“It’s a losing formula. Their formula for running away from issues, running away from messages is disastrous. One thing about Santorum, one thing I give him is he’s a person of conviction. The only way to beat him is to match him conviction for conviction and Bob Casey has no convictions as far as I can tell. The only way to win is to get convictions on the table and have a real debate.” Scranton Times-Tribune
Bob Casey may have some convictions, but they are not Democratic convictions. He does not support a woman’s right to choose, he has made no commitment to universal health care, he opposes further stem-cell research, he opposes letting gay couples adopt children, he opposes a withdrawal from Iraq. On too many issues he comes down on the same side as Rick Santorum. Of course, Bob Casey would be an improvement over Santorum and I fervently hope that Santorum, Frist, and DeLay are all out of power by 2007. But, I hope that it is Chuck Pennacchio and not Bob Casey Jr. that replaces Santorum in the Senate.
Joan Vennochi expressed the situation very well in the Boston Globe:
When it comes to abortion, Democrats are embracing the position John Kerry tried to establish during the 2004 presidential campaign: for it and against it. The Democratic presidential nominee said he was personally opposed to abortion, but in favor of the basic right protected by Roe v. Wade.
At the time, Republicans scoffed…
Still, when it comes to taking both sides, it is hard to top the Democrats.
They actively scoped out Casey as their weapon of choice against Santorum; Casey’s antiabortion stance, they believed, would strengthen his chances against the much-despised Santorum. Casey, the current state treasurer of Pennsylvania, was recruited by party leaders, including Senator Charles Schumer of New York — who believes that fealty to the precedent established by Roe is required of any Supreme Court nominee. Prominent prochoice Democrats such as Kerry, DNC chairman Howard Dean, and Senator Hillary Clinton of New York made fund-raising pitches on Casey’s behalf.
To add to the irony, Casey is the son of the late Pennsylvania Governor Robert P. Casey, the defendant in a famous abortion rights case — Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey. The suit challenged a 1989 Pennsylvania law that included a list of restrictions on abortion, including the requirement that a woman notify her husband.
Before the case made it to the Supreme Court, it came before the Third US Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia. Alone on the three-person panel, then-Appeals Court Judge Alito voted in 1991 to let the spousal notification restriction stand. He argued that it did not put an ”undue burden” on the woman. The Supreme Court disagreed.
Today, Alito’s dissent in the case is used by Democrats as an example of Alito’s antiabortion extremism. These are the same Democrats who back an anti-abortion candidate for the US Senate, one who happens to be related to the defendant in this very case and who, so far, declines to say where he stands on Alito. Asked yesterday whether Casey backs the right protected by Roe, a Casey campaign spokesman answered by saying, ”He is prolife.”
Supporting Chuck Pennacchio is about more than Chuck. It’s about making a statement that the Democratic voters should decide who our candidates will be, not the senior Senator from New York. It’s about having a candidate that represents core Democratic values, not merely a pro-labor version of Rick Santorum. Last night Chuck said that if we could raise $200,000 for him he would guarantee victory and also “give us his last pint of blood”. I don’t know if $200,000 will be enough for Chuck to prevail, but I do know that he deserves the chance and we deserve a representative like Chuck Pennacchio. The people of Pennsylvania do not deserve the rat-fucking we have been dealt by power brokers Chuck Schumer and Ed Rendell.
You can contribute to the Pennacchio campaign here. If you believe in the principles of the Democratic Party contributing to Chuck will make you feel better. It’s better than just being an outraged witness.
