This is WESA Politics, a weekly newsletter by Chris Potter providing analysis about Pittsburgh and state politics. Sign up here to get it every Thursday afternoon.
Chances are that if you’re reading this, you know that candidates in local elections were required to report their 2022 financial activities, if any, this week. So you know that when the New Year rang in, Allegheny County Executive candidate John Weinstein had posted more than $400,000 in contributions, buoyed by six-digit sums from a Steamfitters union local and Pitt Ohio trucking magnate Charles Hammel (who has been a leading player in redeveloping the Strip District).
That’s twice what City Controller Michael Lamb had at the end of last year, and more than four times the haul of state Rep. Sara Innamorato, whose top donation was a comparatively modest $15,000 from an SEIU union local.
But it’s worth saying: Campaign finance reports are a way of keeping score, but what’s on a candidate’s fundraising reports isn’t the whole ballgame. Some things to keep in mind:
First: Sometimes the money isn’t about what donors expect you to do. Sometimes it’s about what your rival has already done. Any time you see a big-dollar contribution, it’s natural to assume a quid pro quo is at work. But some donations are about personal or cultural affinity, while others can be a form of payback. Just ask former Democratic House leader Frank Dermody, a longtime reliable vote for labor whose 2020 reelection bid stumbled in part because of years-old resentments and concern about his party’s energy policies.
One consideration for some unions, I’m told, is that while Innamorato has been an ally of labor, she voted against a $2 billion tax credit to create a natural-gas fueled “hydrogen hub.” At the time, Innamorato said the bill was a “giveaway” to the gas industry that lacked transparency and would worsen climate-change problems.
Those concerns were echoed by environmental groups and even by some conservatives. Still, Innamorato was just one of two Allegheny County House Democrats to vote against the credits. (The other Democrat “no” was that of Dan Frankel, whose Squirrel Hill district largely insulates him from fossil-fuel pressure.) And that vote came in October — less than two months before she launched her bid.
Second, these numbers are already outdated. Weinstein’s report, for one, doesn’t cover activity at his January campaign kickoff, which doubled as a fundraiser. There’s been talk that his campaign would have $1 million to draw upon once it really gets underway.
Similarly, you can bet that SEIU hasn’t written its last check to benefit progressive standard-bearers like Innamorato this year.
But in county races, we won’t really have a picture of that spending until early May — just days before the May 16 primary — thanks to the state’s filing calendar.
Confidential to would-be government reformers: If you want to take a big step forward for transparency, push for a stepped-up reporting calendar, like the one used for candidates running in Pittsburgh. A city ordinance requires an additional financial report in March. I’d argue increased disclosure is more valuable than an outright limit on contribution amounts. Because as we’ve also seen in the city, those can be gotten around.
Until recently, local elections have largely been spared the influence of “dark money” and other forms of big-money independent expenditures that can reshape a race. That’s what happened in the 2021 Pittsburgh mayoral race, where incumbent Bill Peduto seemed to have a big fundraising advantage over Ed Gainey. But Gainey got a huge shot in the arm from “Justice For All,” an outside spending group heavily backed by SEIU. We know how that turned out.
Third, politicians come and go, but money lives forever. I’ve been around long enough to see a couple changings of the guard, and each one has been accompanied by denunciations of the “old boys’ network.” But one factor in these generational shifts is that the old boys have a hard time finding new boys to replace them.
This year, for example, outgoing County Executive Rich Fitzgerald is sitting on $2.2 million — and without an heir apparent to spend it on. Other than some money he’s dropped on former county solicitor Andy Szefi’s bid for a Common Pleas judgeship, he’s played little role in the cycle so far.
And while Weinstein hopes to replace Fitzgerald as county executive, he does not appear to have lined up a would-be successor for his current post as county treasurer. It’s no secret that he hoped to have deputy Janice Vinci seek the seat, but only two candidates appear to be campaigning for the job: previously declared challenger Erica Brusselars and well-known defense attorney Phil DiLucente.
DiLucente’s entry came in the form of a surprise filing for the Democratic Party endorsement. And it prompted suspicions that DiLucente is “the Weinstein guy.” But Weinstein told me the two haven’t discussed the race yet — though he spoke admiringly of DiLucente’s intelligence and name recognition (which is saying something, coming from the official whose own name is stamped on every dog license in the county.)
About the only outgoing local politician who appears poised to choose a successor is Pittsburgh City Councilor Bruce Kraus, whose aide Bob Charland is the only candidate seeking his party's endorsement, though he has a rival in William Reeves.
But hey, if you find yourself getting nostalgic for the good old days, take heart in knowing that Weinstein has attracted contributions from such folks as John Verbananc and Bill Lieberman, whose influence during administration of former Mayor Luke Ravenstahl once made headlines a decade ago. Everything old can be new again.
