Call this the ‘The Great Pensylvania Un-debate.’
Two of Pennsylvania’s marquee 2022 political candidates – Democratic Party gubernatorial nominee and Attorney General Josh Shapiro and Republican U.S. Senate nominee Dr. Mehmet Oz – had Pennsylvania’s most influential room to themselves Monday night, with back-to-back appearances before leaders of the state’s business world at the Pennsylvania Chamber of Business and Industry’s fall dinner.
The individual sessions, moderated by the state chamber CEO Luke Bernstein, gave both candidates an unchallenged path to the political center on this night as both of their opponents were invited no-shows.
Oz, the celebrated heart surgeon-turned-daytime television superstar, spoke to some of the psycho-politics that has informed his stump speeches this year, dropping several barbs at a “radical left” that he said is threatening core American values by insisting on a mantra of victimhood, adding that a large part of the reason he’s in this year’s race is to push back against that.
“I think that is very disenfranchising,” Oz said. “That takes people who have tremendous potential, and gets them to sit on the sidelines waiting for someone to come rescue them.”
But he also promoted a mindset of governing from the middle.
“I don’t have a lot of big fights with folks in other belief systems or other political parties. I know that all of us together are smarter than any one of us,” Oz said. “But I am going to fight for what I think is important so that it is reflected (in the solution), and so that you can do the same. And if we don’t do that we abdicate control over our future.”
Shapiro, a career politician who is now running to be chief executive officer of the state’s $40 million state government enterprise, cut through a detailed policy platform that included support for expanding Pennsylvania’s existing school choice programs, a deeper, faster cut in the state corporate net income tax than was passed by Gov Tom Wolf and the state Legislature this summer, and an all-of-the-above energy policy that will seek to marry natural gas development with support for greener alternatives.
Stepping back from one of Wolf’s second-term policy centerpieces, Shapiro also told the audience that he would not place Pennsylvania into the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative without legislative approval. Shapiro stopped short of saying he opposes Pennsylvania’s participation in the regional pollution tax program, but there is little chance that it would ever win approval in the Pennsylvania Legislature.
Shapiro said there are better ways to cut power-source pollution in Pennsylvania, including a concentrated effort to seal orphaned wells and mines and boosting state mandates for the amount of the power generation that comes from renewable energy sources.
If there was a common theme between these two candidates for different offices from different parties, it was that both promised to bring pragmatism to their respective capitols, something that they argued their opponents are too extreme to do.
For Shapiro, that candidate contrast came out most vividly as he took a moment to address the business leaders on the hiring problems and business headwinds he believes they will find themselves facing if Pennsylvania adopted the kind of rollbacks on abortion rights that Republican nominee Doug Mastriano has pledged to sign.
“My opponent is by far the most extreme and dangerous candidate ever to run for governor of Pennsylvania,” Shapiro said, “… and his extremely dangerous views on restricting a woman’s right to choose, on marriage equality, on climate change are things that are going to make it harder for every employer in this room to be able to attract the kind of talent you need to work in your offices.
“We’re not going to agree on every issue,” Shapiro said at a later point in his interview.
“But we’re going to find common ground when I’m governor,” Shapiro promised to the roomful of state business leaders. “We’re going to come to the table, and I’m going to recognize that the folks on the other side of the aisle? They need to accomplish some things too, for their constituents.”
For Oz, the call to policy pragmatism came through most clearly on a question about his opponent John Fetterman’s pledge to end the Senate’s filibuster rule, which can often require a 60-vote majority to get most major policy issues decided. Fetterman has railed against the filibuster as a systemic impediment that keeps the Congress from responding to voter’s will.
Oz, who won a razor-thin Republican primary victory in a seven-candidate field with the help for former President Donald J. Trump’s endorsement, said he sees it differently, calling the filibuster rule a worthy tradition that guards against what some call the tyranny of the majority because “it automatically puts the brakes on some decisions that could be problematic for the country.
“It (breaking the filibuster) would be destabilizing for the for the government,” he said, adding “and by the way, I don’t want to pack the Supreme Court (with more members) even if we had the ability; I don’t want to add more states to the Union even if I had the ability. It’s just not right for our country.
“We need pragmatic leaders who are willing to govern based on the deep joy they have from listening to their constituents, and the love they have for this nation. And I’m not going to let anything pull me off of that. In surgery that’s what you do. You’re pragmatic. You are purpose-driven. You are very focused and you don’t get pulled off of your goal… We fixed things, and that’s what I’ll do as your senator.”
Some of the other policy fixes Oz advocated for Monday included:
- Making a significant change to immigration policy that would require those seeking asylum in the United States for a proven cause to make that application from their home countries and waiting there for an ajudication before entry rather than being able to claim asylum once in the U.S. and then being released here while their case is considered. Some argue that this a major loophole that undocumented migrants are exploiting to get into America now.
- He assailed Fetterman’s relentless advocacy as chair of the state’s Board of Pardons to increase the chance of commutations for people serving life prison sentences, and abolishing the automatic life without parole for that can be imposed on crime accomplices who participated in a felony that led to a death, even if they had nothing to do with the killing. “Why does he seem to care more about the criminals, than the innocent who were hurt?
- On abortion rights, Oz called himself pro-life, but stated that he believes abortion policy should be set at the state level. “I know how difficult it is for a doctor and patient to come to an agreement when there are deep values issues that are involved. And I desperately want local medicine, local values and local government to be driving this decision.”
Shapiro, for his part, touted plans for:
- A statewide inflation relief program that would include the abolition of the state’s 11 percent tax on cellular phone service, and a $250-per-vehicle state-funded gas tax rebate to help car owners cope with the increased cost of gasoline. He has said he would use surplus state cash and federal pandemic aid, respectively, to cover the costs.
- An administration where the operative watchword for regulators will be “getting to yes,” so existing Pennsylvania firms will be able to grow and new businesses will want to come. Where Mastriano has proposed dramatic cuts in government regulations, however, Shapiro’s main regulatory reform Monday centered on giving businesses greater certainty on the pacing of permit and licensing decisions.
- Shapiro also pledged to leverage the state’s improved fiscal position to prioritize building out affordable, high-speed internet access statewide, offering a pool of state aid to help cities and towns to boost their police staffing levels, and to make Pennsylvania a player in federal plans to create at least four clean hydrogen hubs around the nation.
Monday’s program marked the first time since 1986 – when then-Lt. Gov. William Scranton and Robert P. Casey were running to succeed Gov. Dick Thornburgh – that the state chamber’s election-year dinner has not played host to a side-by-side forum with the candidates for governor or Senate. The un-debate came about for different reasons.
Chamber spokesman Jon Anzur said Monday that Fetterman’s Senate campaign did not respond to the organization’s invitations; it is worth noting that both Oz and the Lieutenant Governor have agreed to a debate on Oct. 25.
In the governor’s race, meanwhile, Anzur said Mastriano asked for a change in the chamber’s terms, including that the candidates would be able to choose their own moderators. With no agreement with the Shapiro campaign on that point, the chamber reverted to its original rules, including an independent moderator, and Mastriano declined both a side-by-side debate and, later, the separate stage forum.
No other side-by-side debates are currently scheduled in the governor’s race.
Fetterman and Mastriano received a bipartisan roasting Monday from one of Monday night’s keynote speakers, former New Jersey governor Chris Christie, for their decisions.
“I think that both candidates that did not show up tonight made a mistake, and it’s a disservice to the people of the Commonwealth,” said Christie, who kicked off the Monday program in a joint appearance with national Democratic Party political strategist Donna Brazile.
