This afternoon the Pennsylvania State Senate voted to reconfirm Kathleen McGinty and Michael DiBerardinis to their respective cabinet positions in Governor Ed Rendell's administration. Credit should be given to those who actively joined the drive to keep McGinty and DiBerardinis, including environmental organization PennFuture and State Representative Greg Vitali, to name just two examples. As I've written ad nauseum over the last week, these appointments were threatened by a disingenuous smear attempt by legislators hostile to progressive environmental interests. The laughable last-minute attempt by a House GOP press flak to influence the debate makes that reality all the more clearer. More after the jump.
McGinty was reconfirmed by a 42-6 margin; in a mild surprise, she received one more vote than she did during her initial confirmation in 2003 (41-8). DiBerardinis was reconfirmed by a 44-4 margin. Two senators did not vote. LeAnna Washington was the only Democrat to vote against both nominees. Democrat Connie Williams voted against McGinty. All other Democrats voted for both. Republicans Mike Folmer, Jeff Piccola, and John Eichelberger voted against both. Republican Mary Jo White, the Environmental Resources and Energy Committee chair and presumed "blood enemy" of McGinty, voted agaisnt her, but for DiBerardinis. I'd certainly like to hear Connie Williams' reasoning for her "no" vote on McGinty.
Earlier today Allentown Morning-Call reporter Brett Lieberman referred to "some deal-making to resolve qualms" about the grossly exaggerated ethical issues surrounding McGinty's and DiBerardinis' approval of agency grants to companies with which their spouses were affiliated. One can speculate whether terms of such a deal directly related to the ethics issue, or whether wrist-slaps beyond the public attacks McGinty and DiBerardinis suffered are in the cards. (Also, it's unclear whether any deal-making was necessary to address some Democrats' concerns about criticism of Public Utility Chairman Wendell Holland, to which Amy Worden of The Philadelphia Inquirer became the latest to point out in today's paper.) Whatever happened, it's at least ironed out now, and McGinty and DiBerardinis can focus on their continued service to Pennsylvania citizens.
But let's not forget that this wasn't about conflicts of interest. It was about Republicans hostile to innovative, progressive environmental policy - particularly that which was promoted by McGinty - using anything and anybody except a legitimate, substantive argument to get rid of these secretaries.
Case in point: As the initial outcry over the ethical issues died down, and reconfirmation appeared likely, Stephen Miskin, press secretary for State House Minority Leader Sam Smith, yesterday nominally addressed a memo with supporting documents and damaging quotes to House Republican members. Naturally, he also sent it to the press and heaven knows who else. And it was dutifully posted, documents and all, by right wing blogger Chris Lilik at GrassrootsPA.
And what a doozy of a case Miskin makes. He uses the Ethics Commission ruling as an abrupt segueway into a rant on how McGinty is generally dishonest in her official conduct. The only instances he used to back this up pertained to DEP efforts to get tougher mercury emission regulations enacted in Pennsylvania. His big reveal? While, in McGinty's testimony under oath and in the regulations themselves, reference is made to 300,000 people per year being subject to unsafe mercury levels, the DEP press office issued several releases before and after the enactment of the regulations that cited a 600,000 annual figure for people affected. This, according to Miskin, represented a nefarious plan "to deliberately misrepresent the position of the United States EPA and CDC in order to create alarm and to generate support for their position."
You read that correctly. In the midst of his crazed crusade against McGinty, the official mouthpiece for the highest ranking GOP member of the House (yes, I realize that they weren't voting on reconfirmation) sends the signal that the need for tougher mercury controls is overblown. And it's overblown because the EPA says only 300,000 people are exposed per year, instead of 600,000. And as the EPA doc (page 5) makes clear, we're talking about newborns and increased risk of learning disabilities here. Gee, wonder why the GOP went with a bogus line of argument on ethics?
Miskin's attempt to expand the attack on McGinty's integrity, of course, has some serious holes. The main one is that McGinty didn't write the press releases - a DEP press office worker did. Furthermore, the alleged "deceptive" language was in fact a boiler plate paragraph that was repeatedly copied into the lower half of the press releases in question - not exactly a "hard sell" tactic. Never mind the potential innocent explanations for the DEP press office error - such as a 2005 hopital study referencing CDC data that used a 600,000 newborn figure, or a PennFuture release that referred to fed government research holding that 600,000 women of childbearing age being exposed to mercury per year (not contradicted by the EPA doc), or even a simple typo.
But that's not the best part. Miskin writes in his memo that - and I quote:
EPA's official position is that 300,000 women nationwide may have an elevated level of risk - a formidable number, but far different than more than 600,000.
However, in the EPA document cited by Miskin as support for his assertion, it says:
It is estimated that more than 300,000 newborns each year may have increased risk of learning disabilities associated with in utero exposure to methylmercury.
So, in making the case that McGinty misrepresented the EPA position, Miskin - by his defined standard - misrepresented the EPA position. Whoops!
And the quote sheet has more desperate guttersniping - with headings like "Extreme Activist" and stuff dating back to 1995. I guess he's primed to redo the battles over her initial confirmation, her Clinton Administration work... um, I'm not sure how far back he wants to go. Is John Muir the cutoff?
So we see once again that the GOP is going to fight viciously and dishonestly. The media, by and large, will not forcefully call them on it. Enough of the "good guys" stepped up to the plate in this instance, and it may have made a real difference in keeping McGinty and DiBerardinis. But I can't help but think that more should be done by the Democratic party organization when sneak attacks like this one pop up. Why isn't there someone working for the PA Dems who is eviscerating the BS McGinty dossier that Miskin floated out there? This is dirty work, and not what government should be about. But I'm afraid it's necessary for the furtherance of good progressive policy.