Casey, Toomey toe party lines as presidential election looms in Pennsylvania — a critical swing state

Pennsylvania’s U.S. senators Bob Casey, a Democrat from Scranton, and Pat Toomey, the Lehigh Valley Republican, were among the more muted voices throughout acrimonious impeachment proceedings against President Trump.

But with no political races of their own this year, their voices are growing as they line up along party positions as surrogates in the upcoming presidential election in Pennsylvania — a must-win swing state.

The two separately discussed with the Tribune-Review the impact of impeachment, their take on Trump’s tariffs, taxes and recent attempts to rein in what some see as a rogue exercise of presidential power.

Neither senator was happy with the outcome of the impeachment proceedings.

“If you’re sitting there and watching the president’s conduct, you’ve got to make a determination whether his conduct should be checked,” Casey said. “If you believed it was an abuse of power, as I do, you have to act. There was only one option.”

He said he worries the enduring impact of Trump’s acquittal will be the continuing drip of information that could have been addressed had Senate Republicans agreed to call witnesses and documents at the trial.

Toomey said he never believed Trump’s conduct rose to the level of impeachment. The case the House managers brought failed to change his stance. Like Casey, he fears the lasting impact it will have on American politics.

“The danger of what the House did is the House has lowered the bar for what deserves impeachment,” Toomey said. “It has increased the polarization that was a significant factor in American politics. We’re more polarized than we’ve been in a long time, and that makes it harder for the federal government to operate well.”

Although he has voiced support for a new wars powers act regarding hostilities in the Middle East, Toomey did not break ranks to line up with Democrats in a recent 55-45 vote on a post-impeachment effort to rein in the president’s ability to take military action against Iran.

“It would have created a problem,” Toomey said. “The problem would have been to limit the president’s ability to deal with an inherently dynamic situation. It would have tied his hands and made it very difficult for him to protect Americans and American interests.”

Casey supported the resolution that set the stage for a veto battle with the White House.

“It didn’t take away any of the president’s power. It just limited the war-making power the president has, which in my judgment has been a bipartisan failure not just for years but one generation,” he said. “The president can take action if there is an imminent attack. That is preserved, but there has to be either authorization that’s specific or a declaration. I think if you have a good argument for why you want to go to war with Iran or any other country, you ought to be able to get the Congress to declare war.”

The senators came close to agreeing on Trump’s use of tariffs to negotiate with China. They cited China’s increasing threats as an emerging military power as well as continuing concerns about the theft of intellectual property.

“I think it was necessary to confront China,” Toomey said. “In my view, a good outcome would be a change in Chinese behavior and the elimination of the tariffs that were used to get them to change their behavior.”

Casey said his concerns center on the need to use tariffs in a strategic fashion and as part of an international coalition to confront China. The president’s actions, he said, seem to lack such considerations.

The two diverge dramatically on taxes.

Casey would like to reduce the breaks corporate taxpayers received in 2017 and use increased revenues to fund programs to ensure children have access to health care, quality day care and early education and economic security.

Toomey wants to preserve tax breaks that are scheduled to expire soon.

“The biggest priority for me is to keep the strong economy strong and grow it stronger,” Toomey said.