Six term Republican Todd Platts has walked his talk with regard to term limits, announcing his retirement after 6 terms. He seems to have caught some off guard and even aggravated his own party. It is an open seat. Why isn’t there more interest from the Democrats in contesting this district?
Sure, it is traditionally a reliably Republican seat, but there are a few circumstances I think deserve a closer look:
The Republican primary (pending successful submission of signatures) is already looking crowded and possibly contentious. Pat Toomey (R-Club for Growth) has already endorsed Chris Reilly, but it isn’t clear that either the local Republican establishment money or the local tea party groups (still making noise in this neck of the woods) have any intention of following Toomey’s lead. The tea partiers were already planning to primary Platts, whom they regard as positively Alinski-esque. Arm wrestling enthusiast Ted Waga seems to be most aggressively ringing the bell for that crowd, but there are several others declared and offering up the same boilerplate on the usual issues.
Republican governor Tom Corbett has a few problems in central Pennsylvania that further exacerbate tensions between the governor, the state house, the establishment, the republican grassroots and the tea party fringe. Marcellus shale development has been a bright spot in the economy, but also brought boomtown problems that are registering with folks on the ground. Rural police blotters crowded with the names of workers from out of state. And there is a growing sense that Corbett’s actions while running and since taking office decidedly placed extraction company interests over those of Pennsylvanians. Central Pennsylvanians are growing weary of being told they should be more like Texans, and Corbett is poster boy for those out of state voices (bought and paid for).
Then there is his recent efforts to big-foot Republican party endorsements in several statewide races. This has cause further tensions with statehouse members of his own party and with voters, especially central and western PA.
And finally with Corbett, there are his links to the Sandusky scandal at Penn State University. It really doesn’t matter what fault may lie with Corbett. I don’t think folks outside the state realize how many big this story is in central PA. It is not going away, and Corbett is in up to his earlobes. At this point, it really isn’t a matter of what he did or did not do during his time as Attorney General. It is simply that this entire affair is throwing off conspiratorial sparks and Corbett is one of the prominent figures on ‘the grassy knoll’. That leaves some reliably red voters in a very sour mood for the foreseeable future.
And finally, Platts was popular and (mock me if you will) a moderate republican by our current standards. If he doesn’t make an enthusiastic endorsement, that will be noted by the voters who have supported him.
Circumstances in November may align for a dynamic Democratic candidate to make a race of it.
So, why have the Democrats thus far only offered up two candidates who can be described charitably as little more than a dutiful party placeholder and a civic-minded hopeless neophyte?