UPMC and Highmark don’t agree on much, but they do agree on contributing, either directly or indirectly, to Rep. Ed Gainey’s campaign for mayor of Pittsburgh.
As does Duquesne Light. And Peoples Gas. And First National Bank. And Huntington Bank. And K&L Gates. And Eckert Seamans. And so on and so forth.
If you can name a big company, law firm or union that does a lot of business in Pittsburgh, that company’s political action committee or executives probably dumped a few thousand dollars into Mr. Gainey’s war chest.
Now, we want to be clear: There’s nothing unusual or even untoward about this. This is just what happens when a new leader takes the helm of city government — or when a legislator ascends to leadership, or when power changes hands in Harrisburg. Unless the new power player is implacably opposed to some industry or interest group, just about every major institution pays a little bit of homage, and will do so in every election until the incumbent is ousted. They aren’t buying influence as much as attention; it’s a little reminder that they exist, and are happy to talk about their interests, should the need arise.
But wait, you might say, isn’t there still an election next week? Pittsburgh doesn’t have a new mayor yet, but nearly the city’s entire business, legal and labor establishment has lined up behind one candidate.
This is both a symptom and a continuing cause of the lack of competitiveness in city elections. It takes the typical incumbent’s advantage and ramps it up to a seemingly insurmountable barrier to entry for challengers from outside the established party and political cliques.
A couple of weeks ago, we criticized the Republican Party for failing to invest in city politics, especially when it has a reasonably impressive candidate in Tony Moreno — who has outraised Mr. Gainey almost six to one in donations of $50 or less. Since then, we have learned that the county party made a more significant investment of time and resources than had been previously reported, up to nearly $20,000 in campaign materials. From the perspective of the overall health of city politics, which benefits from competitive parties and ideas, this is encouraging.
But when you see every PAC in a wide radius (and several from Harrisburg and Philadelphia) line up behind the presumptive winner, it can be hard to build enthusiasm to challenge that presumptive status. In the end, it’s just easier for everyone in the city establishment to know what team to be on once the primaries conclude.
Easier for them isn’t better for the rest of us, however. We’d love to see some of these power players take a risk on change, or at least have the respect to wait for the election to be decided before paying their homage.
As for the Democrat, we want to reiterate that merely accepting this homage doesn’t reflect poorly on Mr. Gainey. And we don’t envy his position, having so many people and institutions who are willing to pay for a small piece of his attention.
Rather, this is all symptomatic of a political culture that has settled into a habitual sclerosis. Perhaps someday there will be the will to reform it, but for now, it seems to be the culture we’re stuck with.
First Published: October 27, 2021, 4:00 a.m.
