ShareThis Page
Featured Commentary

G. Terry Madonna and Michael Young: Pa. gubernatorial a non-event

| Wednesday, Sept. 19, 2018, 9:03 p.m.
Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf (left) and Republican gubernatorial candidate Scott Wagner.
Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf (left) and Republican gubernatorial candidate Scott Wagner.

Democratic incumbent Tom Wolf is running against Republican challenger Scott Wagner for Pennsylvania governor. We feel we should say something interesting about it. The problem is, there isn’t much interesting to say so far.

There should be. Both candidates are successful businessmen with significant accomplishments and important things to talk about. And Pennsylvania certainly has some urgent policy issues to discuss. The gubernatorial candidates just aren’t talking about them.

Yes, Wolf is leading in the early polls — by double digits, according to the RealClearPolitics average . And, thanks to the state’s notorious gubernatorial lottery, AKA, the lieutenant governor primary, he has ended up with a colorful , if idiosyncratic, running mate, the mayor of Braddock. Otherwise, Wolf hasn’t said or done much to hasten the pulse of would-be voters.

Wagner, on the other hand, does keep raising pulses a little, but mostly by saying or doing inappropriate things that surprise or dismay some of his own supporters. Personality-wise, Wolf could be a lot more exciting, while Wagner might be a little less.

Policy discussions have been all but absent in the campaign so far — while the individual peccadilloes of both candidates have received disproportionate attention. The closest thing to a real policy debate has featured both candidates making maladroit comments that have confused voters about education funding formulas . Consequently, this campaign has mostly centered upon which candidate is richest (or poorest), which is smartest (or dumbest), which is the better businessman (or worse) and which comes from the most (or least) privileged background.

At least one Harrisburg columnist has suggested both candidates could be “positioned,” according to their name or job: Incumbent Wolf becomes “Wolfpack” while challenger Wagner gets the moniker “Garbageman.” Both efforts at political whimsy reflect the level of discourse so far.

So far, Wolf seems determined to keep things at the current fever pitch of excitement by limiting campaign debates to a single one — moderated by game show host Alex Trebek on Oct. 1.

Tapping the host of “Jeopardy” to moderate a solitary campaign debate seems appropriate since both candidates seem in jeopardy of putting the voters of Pennsylvania to sleep — while these same sleepy voters seem in even greater jeopardy of waking up too late to know an election is happening .

Wolf may be running an uninspiring campaign, but Wagner isn’t a great candidate either. (So far, he has threatened gays, angered labor and suggested, albeit jocularly, the Russians will help him.) The polls reflect this performance, as does Wagner’s anemic fundraising.

Wolf is not making things better. His lackluster campaign is the kind incumbents with large leads often run, traveling around Pennsylvania handing out the state’s largesse while counting on a big Democratic turnout in November to insure his victory. His strategy is to ignore that there is a contest, implying there are no great issues to resolve, no great problems to solve.

Alas, the problems are too real, the issues are too clear and the stakes are too high — even if neither candidate raises them.

Basic state education, how to pay for it and how much to pay is a burning issue bound to turn into a raging conflagration during the next four years.

The state’s chronic long-term fiscal crisis continues , with this year as an exception, as each succeeding year’s expenditures exceed revenues amid a state/local tax system arguably the worst in the nation .

Both energy policy and environmental policy questions are rushing to the forefront as the national administration’s actions place more responsibility on the states in these areas.

Reproductive rights are certain to become state issues again as the U.S. Supreme Court moves to the right.

Full and adequate funding for the public pension programs remains unresolved.

The next governor will influence the 2021 redrawing of the state’s congressional maps allocating congressional seats for at least the next 10 years.

The many urgent issues confronting Pennsylvania go on; the candidates unfortunately do not.

At this critical juncture in our state and national politics,

Pennsylvania needs and deserves a full, robust and serious gubernatorial debate on the issues confronting it. Wolf and Wagner are not perfect candidates, nor is our state in perfect shape or our electorate perfectly informed.

That is why we schedule gubernatorial election campaigns.

Right now, we are not getting one.

G. Terry Madonna is professor of public affairs at Franklin & Marshall College. Michael Young is a speaker, pollster, author, and former professor of politics and public affairs at Penn State.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me