Congratulations Representative Civera

On November 8th I sent a letter to Mr. Civera congratulating him on his victory in the 2006 election for State Representative.
Today I received that letter in the mail as undeliverable. Therefore, I offer my congratulations to him and wish him the best of luck and hope that he represent us well.

Young Voters

On November Seventh, 2006 I spent the entire day at a polling place in Drexel Hill.
Of those who came to vote I counted on one hand those whom I considered between the age of 18 and 30. No wonder their issues are given short shift by the elderly politicians. The issues of youth are decided by politicians who forget what it is to strive and succeed at an age where the toughness of living begins. The bottom line, younger voters don't vote.
It would take a political scientist to reason why that is. I have my own opinion, but why we don't take that serious problem and make it a top priority. Of course it is every persons right to exercise their vote. The right to vote was fought by those who spilt their blood so we could plot the course of America. History is replete with the freedom fighters who died for our right to vote, Martin Luther King, suffragettes, South African apartheid fighters, the purple fingers of Iraqi voters who risked life and limb to vote. So why are the youth and so many others so apathetic. Are we so caught up in our daily lives to undertake what those before us who gave their lives so we could exercise this most important right.
Voting is the ultimate reform. Don't vote and the results are obvious. Apathy and uninvolvement is our Representatives and Legislators best friend. The less you care, the more they can keep you uninvolved, the more their actions are without scrutiny. Voting is the ultimate term limit reform, hold them to the fire and they're out. Look at Bryan Lentz and Joe Sestak. Thus leads me to my proposal to encourage voter participation. Statistics tell us voter participation is at an all time low. We need to reverse this trend, but lifelong career incumbents benefit from smaller turnouts and in many cases thwart turnout for their re-election. My proposal is to educate those who find other reasons not to vote and convince them to do so.
I have five proposals to encourage voting.
1. Allow 17 year olds to vote only in primaries. Thus indoctrinating their civic responsibility
2 .Create a tax credit for casting a ballot.
3. Produce public service announcements extoling the historical value of voting
4. Have the state air appeals to encorade young voters to participate.
5. Address the negatives that occur when uninvolvement and apathy results.

These ideas are not borne of my position as a member of the Democratic Party. They are the realization that apathy is a scourge on our society. To be part of a Community entails an obligation to make it a better place when you are part of it. Most of all the young people who follow who will someday thank you for teaching them the value of citizenship that those who have come before you taught you.

Civera loses power

Now that our State Rep Mario Civera has lost his benefactor and top campaign contributor, Rep John Perzel, what happens now. His claim to fame in the 2006 election was all the state money he gets for the 164th, with Civera's banker Perzel out, who will give him the oversized checks to parade around with. Who will fund his lunches, mailings and legislative TV programs.
With today's action Mr. Civera is weaker as a legislator and we in Delaware County will suffer.

This report on the day comes from Democracy Rising PA
SPECIAL REPORT – THE HITS JUST KEEP ON COMIN’

November 2005
Voters remove Justice Russell Nigro from the Supreme Court.

May 2006
Voters remove Senate President Pro Tempore Bob Jubelirer and Majority Leader Chip Brightbill from the Senate, along with 15 other incumbents.

November 2006
Voters remove House Minority Whip Mike Veon from the House, along with six other incumbents.

January 2007
The voters’ Representatives remove John Perzel, R-Philadelphia, from the Speaker’s chair and prevent former Speaker Bill DeWeese, D-Greene, from replacing him.
As this brief history shows, the voter rebellion for greater integrity in state government took a new turn today. Until today, it was the voters themselves who directly removed political leaders at the ballot box. Today, the people we elected to the House finally acted on our behalf to accomplish the next in a series of victories, all of which were widely thought to be impossible.
Before today, the idea that a third candidate (anyone other than Perzel or DeWeese) could win the Speaker’s election was seen as fantasy. But in today’s Pennsylvania, voters are demanding – and getting – more than the false choices that have been the stock in trade of political leadership in the past.

A Victory for Integrity?
Those whose bottom line was to prevent both Perzel and DeWeese from becoming Speaker can be satisfied with today’s result. But in sadly common legislative fashion, it’s hard to be satisfied with the way our Representatives got there.
Before electing another Philadelphia Republican, Dennis O’Brien, as Speaker by a vote of 105-97 (O’Brien himself did not vote), the House voted twice to overturn rulings by Chief Clerk Roger Nick. The rulings correctly interpreted Mason’s Manual – the official parliamentary authority for the House – to allow Rep. Perzel to speak on his own behalf after being nominated for Speaker.
Perzel had sought to second his own nomination. In fact he had begun to do so, reciting the reforms he was prepared to introduce if elected Speaker. DeWeese interrupted and objected, asking for a ruling as to whether a candidate could second his own nomination.
With two parliamentarians at his side, one who worked for Perzel for years and the other who worked for DeWeese for years, Nick ruled there is nothing in Mason’s Manual to prevent Perzel from speaking on his own behalf.
This was not a partisan ruling by the chief clerk. It was just a ruling that most of the Representatives didn’t want to face. No one cited any provisions to the contrary.
By defeating one procedural motion 98-105 and the other 100-103, the majority of our Representatives telegraphed the final outcome. But they also displayed their apparent conviction that winning is more important than how you play the game and that some speech is not worth protecting.
Some didn’t want to face what Perzel had to say. Some didn’t want to be seen as voting against the substance of his reform agenda. And many, having endured Perzel’s own violations of the rules over many years, decided pay-backs were in order, as if two wrongs really do make a right.
Not that anyone could believe for a moment that Perzel was sincere. His reform agenda for “openness and transparency” was drafted in secret and only at the 11th hour because he smelled defeat. Contrasting that with the previous 18 months following the pay raise, during which time he used his position to stonewall reforms, his speech and a rebuttal by his opponents could have put Representatives on record as supporting true reform. But the debate was not allowed to proceed because the House voted to violate its own rules.
This is not a good sign.
Representatives later adopted temporary rules so that they could study permanent rules to be adopted later. Yet the question of improving House rules has been around for years. Last June, 53 House members proposed 17 changes to the rules. Nothing happened before the election. Nothing happened since the election. Nothing happened today, more than six months later despite an atmosphere charged with the rhetoric of reform.

There’s a new Speaker who is neither DeWeese nor Perzel. But will it make a difference?
Stay tuned. The rules – and our Representatives’ integrity in following the rules – will tell.

Tim Potts, Co-Founder
Democracy Rising PA
www.democracyrisingpa.com
717-243-8570