OK, now THAT was one weird-ass election. Not that anyone was paying attention: In Allegheny County, turnout was below 20 percent, according to unofficial numbers form the county’s elections department.
But here in Pittsburgh, some political pillars were toppled. Raja, a political newcomer who ran a failed bid for Allegheny County Executive last year, beat out an established Republican, Mark Mustio, in a state Senate race. Jason Altmire, forced by redistricting into a battle with fellow Dem Mark Critz, also lost — despite having been a good football player at one point!
But in Pittsburgh, the most important races were two state rep contests won by a younger generation of political progressives. Challenger Ed Gainey steamrolled Joe Preston, who almost qualified for legislator-for-life status in state House District 24. In House District 22, meanwhile, Erin Molchany trounced Martin Schmotzer, the endorsed Democrat. In doing so, she also bested another political pillar: Pete Wagner, the brother of former state Auditor General Jack Wagner, and the chair of the city’s sprawling, vote-rich 19th ward.
And these races weren’t squeakers, either. Gainey, who chairs the city Democratic committee, won by a 65-35 margin. Molchany beat Schmotzer 51-38. (A third candidate, Shawn Lunny, was deemed ineligible by the state Supreme Court, but his name remained on the ballot and got most of the other votes.)
Arguably, though, the biggest winners last night were Matt Merriman-Preston — who managed both the Gainey and Molchany campaigns — and the politician for whom Merriman-Preston acts as field marshal: city councilor Bill Peduto. Last night’s results showed that voters across the city are ready for new faces and a progressive message — the same message Peduto will no doubt campaign on during his likely run against Mayor Luke Ravenstahl next year. The outcomes also suggested that the old guard’s grip on power is increasingly arthritic.
Want proof? Take a closer look at Molchany’s win. Not long ago, some no-talent hack contended that Schmotzer had the edge in this race, because he had the Democratic Party endorsement and Wagner’s backing. The 19th makes up a large chunk of the district: When combined with Schmotzer’s own clout — he was a longtime school board member in the Baldwin-Whitehall district, which overlaps some of the 22nd — Schomtzer looked tough to beat.
And yet Wagner couldn’t deliver his own backyard. The 19th ward, in fact, is where Molchany had her best numbers.
Molchany won this race with 52 percent of the vote. But the margin would have been higher had it not been for Schmotzer’s strength in the suburbs. In city neighborhoods, Molchany drew 58 percent of the vote … and in Ward 19? She outpolled Schmotzer by a two-to-one margin of 60 to 30 percent.
Having overstated Schmotzer’s advantage going into this thing, I don’t want to overstate the significance of the outcome. But as I said before, “If Molchany did pull this off, it would be a sign that the political geography is shifting under Wagner’s feet.”
And this isn’t the first sign of that upheaval. City councilor Natalia Rudiak, another young progressive, won her seat representing the South Hills in 2009, thanks in large part to a split between Wagner and a former ally, Tony Coghill. Coghill lost to Rudiak in 2009, but joined with her in supporting Molchany. That’s just the kind of soap opera that makes the South Hills so much fun … but this spring’s drama has implications for progressives all around the city.
Conventional wisdom is that to win a citywide race in Pittsburgh, you have to triumph in two of its three regions: north of the rivers, south of the rivers, and between the rivers. The knock on Peduto in particular, and progressives in general, is that they only really appealed to the East End neighborhoods wedged between the Allegheny and the Mon. We’ve now seen that the progressive message can resonate in the South Hills, and that under Merriman-Preston’s generalship, it has a pretty good ground game out there. Last night Rudiak herself wasted little time trumpeting the area as the birthplace of a coming progressive revolution.
Another longstanding concern for progressives has been how well they go over with black voters. But Gainey’s success in the majority-black 24th district, with Merriman-Preston at his side, also bodes well.
What’s more, City Paper‘s Chris Young reports that when Peduto showed up at the Gainey victory party, he did so alongside none other than Tonya Payne, a former council colleague. Payne was a frequent ally of Mayor Luke Ravenstahl, and she and Peduto were often at odds. Peduto, in fact, helped campaign for Daniel Lavelle, who ended up replacing her. And yet there the two of them were last night, joined in a common cause. (At least for now.)
What’s it all mean? When you consider that last year’s municipal elections were also also very good for progressives, well … a pattern of increasing progressive strength, over an increasingly wide swath of the city, begins to emerge. The mayor can probably still count on his North Side fiefdom — his brother, Adam, had a fairly easy victory in his own state Rep race last night — but beyond that? Much of the city is in play.
And last night’s results put Peduto in the best position to make a game of it. He is building a reservoir of goodwill with a growing roster of new leaders, and assembling a coalition forged on the ground. That too could have ramifications for the mayor’s race. The 2013 primary is a year away, but last night helped shape the silent primary that leads up to it: the behind-the-scenes process of cobbling together support from campaign contributors, unions, and other groups.
In his bid to be the contender taking on Ravenstahl next year, Peduto has at least two rivals: city controller Michael Lamb, and former state Auditor General Jack Wagner. Both have their roots in the South Hills, and on paper, both look like viable challengers. Wagner has a magic name, statewide cred, and a ward chair brother. Lamb has won a citywide race, can lay claim to reformist credentials, and doesn’t have the baggage of an abortive mayoral run, which Peduto still carries from 2007. I’ve previously suggested that Lamb might actually be more dangerous to Ravenstahl than Peduto is.
But that was a year ago. And while Peduto’s presence looms large over last night’s results, Lamb played no significant role I’m aware of. As for Wagner, Molchany’s win makes his clam on the South Hills looks a little shakier.
I don’t want to overstate the implications for Peduto in all this. Gainey and Molchany are strong candidates in their own right, after all. Gainey came within 100 votes of beating Preston in a previous match-up, for one thing, and Molchany ran an aggressive campaign, blasting Schmotzer for an ethical lapse early in hie career. Each race has its own dynamic, and there’s no guarantee Peduto could replicate their success.
But it sure won’t hurt to have them in his corner.
This article appears in Apr 25 – May 1, 2012.
Steady there big feller. Don’t outrun your coverage. A few points: Schmotzer and Preston were weak, wounded candidates. Gainey works for the mayor, for goodness sake, so why would he back Peduto? Where was Chelsa Wagner in all of this? Supporting Molchaney, I do believe. And last year’s races? Progressives lost their strongest voice on council, Shields, replaced by someone who, while young, appears to have little interest in staking a progressive claim. And of the three incumbents who won, only Kraus clearly falls in the progressive camp. So … the chickens have not quite hatched.
Really interesting piece. I’m cheered by this seeming turn of events, and I will do my part to see it continues!
Over the past batch of cycles, local progressives have frequently outdone themselves on Election Night. It’s Inauguration Day that tends to trip them up.
“In his bid to be the contender taking on Ravenstahl next year, Peduto has at least two rivals…”
I’m sorry, will there be a pre-primary? Maybe a caucus?
“Over the past batch of cycles, local progressives have frequently outdone themselves on Election Night. It’s Inauguration Day that tends to trip them up.”
>>> All too true, and it speaks to some points raised by Anonymous as well. There is, of course, always a chance that Peduto gets Lavelled again. But at least some of the dynamics involved there have had to do with who the mayor is, and the favors his office has to dispense. (I mean, after last night, Gainey ain’t gonna be working in city government much longer.) If a challenger went into next spring with a strong coalition behind him, and a chance of outdoing himself on just one more election night … my guess is that some of those dynamics could change in a hurry.
Also, anonymous? I’m gonna ask you to pick an online alias and stick with it.
Unfortunately, progressives in the nearby suburbs didn’t fare nearly so well. Look at the PA 56th, where Allegheny County blue dog Marc Gergely forrayed over the border to push an unknown new blue dog on the Westmoreland County Democrats. Despite Gergely’s candidate having no political experience and the fact that he spends most of his time guiding tours in Florida, he managed to beat Westmoreland County’s endorsed Democratic candidate Marybeth Kuznik. A progressive, Kuznik had not only the endorsement of her county party but also the PA AFL-CIO and many other organizations and individuals. She worked hard and ran a great campaign. But with the Westmoreland County Democratic Party in total disarray these days, Kuznik did not receive the necessary support from the party that endorsed her. That left the door wide open for Gergely and his blue dog minions to move in. It’s time for Gergely and others like him who have gone unchallenged for years to be primaried in 2014!
After being at a Gainey rally and seeing the likes of Merriman-Preston, Payne, Udin, and McKrell all in attendance, any notion I had that individuals could be neatly divided into pro- and anti-mayor camps went completely out the window. On another point you made, I would argue that Lamb and Peduto have considerably overlapping bases of support and that for both of them to run would result in a sure victory for the incumbent. So, if you guys are reading this, please get together and draw straws, for the good of the City.
“@ After being at a Gainey rally and seeing the likes of Merriman-Preston, Payne, Udin, and McKrell all in attendance, any notion I had that individuals could be neatly divided into pro- and anti-mayor camps went completely out the window”
I hear that; it’s very easy to write and talk about this stuff as if the lines are always clear, and I’m probably guilty of doing just that. But to me, what’s significant here is not just the question of “who supports the mayor” but “are progressives building networks and learning how to win elections in places outside their traditional base of support”? Based on results this Tuesday and in previous years, the answer to that question is pretty obviously “yes.”
Let’s not miss the big picture here, okay?
A few years ago, areas south of the rivers were represented by Jeff Koch and Jim Motznik. Now they are represented by Bruce Kraus and Natalia Rudiak. Tell me that’s not a significant change.
A couple years ago, Tonya Payne and Bill Peduto were mortal enemies on council. And while I doubt she’ll ever by on the host committee for his next fundraiser, the very fact that you DO see them together is an interesting development. Back in 2005, Peduto was tromping the South Hills on his own, getting the door slammed in his face. Now he’s got friendly faces in those neighborhoods who can help introduce him at community gatherings.
Tuesday’s events don’t prove Bill Peduto can win next year. They do suggest, however, that whole swaths of the city are in play … which is something you couldn’t say a few years ago.
Randall Taylor
The question always is”What is a progessive in Pittsburgh”?
Let look at some issues in which progressives have been silent about: (1)Pittsburgh has one of the highest rates of poverty for african-americans in the country. (2) The city has repeatedly graduated all white male police and fire classes. Mark Roosevelt, who was applauded by white progressives, closed 98% black majority schools and shoved poor black children into failing 6-12 grade schools, (3)Tom Murphy begin the gentrification of the Hill District, East Liberty, Garfield, and soon Homewood driving untold numbers of the poor to places even further from jobs and transportation. (4) the continued tax increment financing giveaways to big corporations, and not to the low income and blighted areas in which it was intended. I ask again just what is a Pittsburgh progressive?
Randall Taylor
@Randall Taylor —
First off, if this is THE Randall Taylor — former school board member and longtime champion of the cause — I welcome you to the discussion. Good to have you here.
Second, you raise really excellent questions. They’re outside the scope of the original post, which is admittedly focused on inside-baseball stuff. But they’re critical, and while they deserve much more consideration than we can give in this comments thread, this is a good place to start. So I’d say three things:
1) Progressives have tried to come up with SOME remedies for a few of the problems you address. Consider the prevailing-wage bill, for example, which ties those tax subsidies to some basic wage floors for certain service-sector jobs. Progressive groups, meanwhile, have also supported the Hill District’s Community Benefits Agreement.
These measures have been plagued by delays, failures of implementation, etc. Even if they hadn’t been, I think they’re totally insufficient for solving the problems you raise. Which brings me to …
2) If Peduto (or any other progressive candidate) is going to run for mayor, he’ll HAVE to put forward a more cohesive platform to address these issues. Helping Ed Gainey may help him find an audience he might not otherwise get. But he’ll have to have something to tell them. If he doesn’t, he won’t win. Or at least he shouldn’t.
3) The very fact that you’re raising these issues suggests that the current administration hasn’t sufficiently addressed the problem either, despite having had a full term to do so. So your argument cuts both ways.
In fact, if you’re THE Randall Taylor, you and I have both supported the living wage bill. Peduto hasn’t done that cause any favors, having stymied an effort by city councilor Ricky Burgess to breathe new life into it back in 2009. But Burgess is part of a council majority more friendly to the mayor now. And yet …
wow, no comment on the Matt Hogue affair. too progressive?
“wow, no comment on the Matt Hogue affair. too progressive?”
>>> Haha. No, I just don’t have anything particularly interesting to say about it yet. I also won’t be blogging on the story of the former city police officer accused of filing false tax returns, or the ex-firefighter who admitted to laundering drug money — two other stories in the paper today.
I commit plenty of sins of omission in this space, but it’d be pretty hard to argue that’s a result of me picking favorites. For example, you’ll search in vain here for any commentary on the allegations that Daniel Lavelle forged signatures on Jake Wheatley’s election petitions.