| This weekend, the 12th Congressional Recommendation Committee will meet in Delmont, PA Westmoreland County to weigh in on their recommendation to the state Executive Committee board for selecting a candidate to run in the Special Election. While the Executive Committee casts the vote that counts, the local Recommendation Committee is supposed to be a reflection of local politics and somewhat of a "ground" sentiment.
However, clear evidence suggests that it will be quite the opposite in the delegate selection process. For example, PoliticsPA reported over the weekend that Mark Critz proclaimed he already had 50 votes locked up.
Critz, who spoke to PoliticsPA during an interview over the weekend, said by his count he already has 50 votes locked up for Saturday's meeting in Delmont, half the total number of delegates.
http://www.politicspa.com/poli... (Article aired on Sunday/ Monday)
Having 50 votes locked up is all well and good, but Critz crowing about his delegates being locked up reveals a serious ethical problem in my view and certainly illegitimacy of the process. What Mr. Critz did disclose is that the local Recommendation Committee is basically rigged before it even got started. How else can Mr. Critz get to 50 votes when there are not even 50 state committee people between the nine counties? More so, the decision to allow county chairs to select extra votes suggests a strong possibility of "loading the deck" to make sure their candidate wins. Thus, when Mr. Critz disclosed he had 50 votes already, there was one serious, serious problem... the delegates had not even been chosen yet. Obviously this is a far different result than any objective polling and far, far less credible.
No question, Critz is using his former professional relationship with county chairs for his own personal advantage. County chairs should be concerned about picking the candidate with the best chance to win, and I am not so sure that is the case. The biggest farce will be if the Executive Board gives the Recommendation Committee any merit, as it will inaccurately depict who in fact is the most electable candidate for the May 18 gauntlet.
Might I suggest to the Executive Board to look at some polling before taking into consideration who the Democrats should run. I think that would be very telling as to who the best candidate should be, who the voters know and trust, and certainly more accurate than a possibly pre-determined "back room" result from the "Recommendation Committee." The end result of a rigged Recommendation Committee could very well be fielding a much weaker candidate in the special election. However, given the gauntlet that this situation poses, a weaker candidate selected by the Recommendation Committee will likely lose the special and Democratic primary, which will both be held on May 18 aside from being a huge blow to the Executive Board for listening to a possibly rigged Committee.
Update: (From John) Barbara Hafer stated yesterday that the unseemly process discovered by my writer is outrageous. The Pittsburgh Pose-Gazette covers it here. Stay tuned for more information right here at The Pennsylvania Progressive. |
