#HD182: Worst Philly Democrats Cooking Up Challenge to Best Philly Democrat

Share With Friends
  

Sorry Babette, you used to be an effective politician many many years ago, but now you are 73 years old and your political career is over. Spend this time with your family, and please do not sully any good memories of your career wasting your time helping three crappo Democrats who also should no longer be in office:

According to several sources close to the House Democrats, Josephs is preparing for a rematch.

Josephs did not respond to numerous requests for comment.

Several Democratic sources said Josephs is receiving encouragement from some of her former colleagues.

In his ongoing efforts to build a statewide coalition in the House, Sims has been direct in his support for primary opponents to some of his colleagues. He endorsed Jared Solomon, who is running against Rep. Mark Cohen (D-Phila) and Billy Smith over Rep. Margo Davidson (D-Delaware).

In the 13th congressional district primary, Sims backed state Senator Daylin Leach (D-Montgomery) over his state Rep. Brendan Boyle (D-Phila).

Two Democrats close to the Philadelphia delegation said Josephs is being encouraged to run by Cohen, Davidson and Boyle. Boyle and Davidson dismissed the suggestion.

(via Brittany Foster)

This entry was posted in State House.

43 Responses to #HD182: Worst Philly Democrats Cooking Up Challenge to Best Philly Democrat

  1. julia says:

    You know, you don’t have to insult her. She hasn’t said she is running so there is no reason to make ageist statements like that Jon. Like have a little respect for the woman who was the standard bearer for progressive politics in this state for over 2 decades.

    • Ed H. says:

      Jon doesn’t respect progressives with his marching orders from the Commonwealth Foundation. This is good news if she jumps in. Sims sucks as a Democrat and even if she doesn’t win (and she very well might win), it shows why he sucks, when he’s picking fights within his own caucus that doesn’t help the party at all. His only viable argument is that she’s experienced and doesn’t make dope moves like Sims bringing his Little League game to the Majors.

  2. Jon Geeting says:

    I’m not insulting her. I just think at 73 years old it’s time to move on. It’s absolutely true she was completely ineffective at the end of her career and people wouldn’t touch bills she was on just because she was so polarizing. That’s why Sims ran against her, that’s why the voters picked Sims instead of her.

    • Consistency says:

      Can I quote you on 73 being too old for a candidate? That’s what Biden would be in 2016 and Hillary in 2020.

  3. I USED TO be Babette’s constituent. I was disappointed the second I tried to contact her office and got nothing back. Then at a candidates night during a primary race, she didn’t bother to show up and just had staffers tooting her horn, so I grilled her staff there on the spot. Her staffers couldn’t race to the back of the room fast enough to shut me up. I had had enough of her so I didn’t want to bother with her anymore.

    Babette as long as I’ve known her was a doorstop. Or as YPP once put it ages ago: where all good legislation goes to die. There’s a reason why the Philadelphia delegation was swept aside when the Tea Party took over PA, and Babette’s style [basically the Philly answer to Rep. Metcalfe] were one of those reasons.

    • jerrykott says:

      My family is not represented by Brian Sims. However, I recently had made a post on his face-book page and was requested by his office to write them. I had written his office before hadn’t gotten any response. This time, I wrote again and haven’t received a reply, then written again thinking I had the wrong address and still no reply. My family is disappointed that we have not gotten any acknowledgement but have become accustomed to be brushed off. We are a Senior Gay couple who believes were have been in the crosshairs of bias/hate and living in harms way. We simply would like to know why our police have avoided investigating the bullet hole in our security light shade that we believe is there as a warning and retaliation because we have taken a stand. The entry and exit hole of the bullet line up with a neighboring property owned by a person who we believe the police are protecting.
      Not every Politician is a candidate for Sainthood. My family believes we have been hung out to dry and we simply want to know why. If someone can shoot at our property once and get away with it, what is preventing them from doing it again?
      We are also disappointed.
      Regards

      Jerry Kott

  4. Pingback: 2/20 Morning Buzz | PoliticsPA

  5. phillydem says:

    But you would rather have a rep who brags about sitting down with Pileggi, remember the guy who, along with Corbett, cooked up a plan to “fix” the electoral college by awarding their votes on the basis of congressional district votes?

    Maybe Sims ought to try building his “power” by getting and supporting Dems to run against guys like Pileggi instead of
    against members of his own party.

    FTR, your dismissal of 70-somethings is ageist, right up there with any other form of discrimination.

    • Jon Geeting says:

      I want a rep who can get things done in Harrisburg, even when in the minority. There are plenty of issues we can find common ground on with non-tea party Republicans if we’re willing to get creative.

      I don’t think I made an ageist statement. I’m not saying that every 70+ lawmaker should retire, but I think it’s unwise to be running for office nearing the end of life. She had a 20-year political career. It’s time to let it go, not cash out all the good will people have left for her and spend it on these dopes.

      • phillydem says:

        What issues, besides your obsession with the state stores, are those?

        Trying to make nice with a Republican party that has made being only a reactionary member (like Sam Smith) akin to being liberal is a fool’s errand.

        Rep Sims would be far better off using whatever influence he has to support Dems running against Republicans to help Dems re-gain
        control of the state house.

        You have a lot to learn Jon.

        • Jon Geeting says:

          Rides-for-hire reform, criminal justice reform, ending judicial elections, drug policy reform, just off the top of my head – issues where plenty of Democrats have the wrong positions.

          I don’t know why anybody thinks there’s a trade-off with Sims’s efforts in the primary and the general. In the general, Sims will work for Democratic challengers to incumbent Republicans. During the primary, he’ll work to elect better Democrats.

  6. phillydem says:

    Forgot to ask, what is your objective measure of “best” and “worst”?

    • Jon Geeting says:

      The worst Philly Democrats are those associated with the Bob Brady machine, and the narrow group of white suburban voters they represent in Harrisburg and City Hall.

      • phillydem says:

        So, IOW, none.

        • Jon Geeting says:

          In other words, they’re from a sect of the Philadelphia Democrats whose power within the party I’d like to see diminished.

          • Ed H. says:

            Which translates into you wanting to see the power of progressive Democrats diminished. Never mind that you say you want to see more reps who can get stuff done, while you’re defending a rep who’s quarantining himself from the city and statewide Democratic Party and lessening his own influence. And in the meantime, cheer leading the harm done to the labor community, who do the heavy lifting for liberals, with money for elections and economic research that has direct benefits to working people who are both union and non-union, and manpower and infrastructure to put progressives in office. You’re a silly boy, Jon. Again, saving the party shouldn’t mean harming it and diminishing its ability to get shit done.

          • Jon Geeting says:

            LOL the Philadelphia Democratic Party’s voting base is working class people of color, especially women, and white liberal professionals. Most of the white working class men, who the Building Trades represent, vote Republican half or more of the time. That’s not the Democratic Party’s future.

          • Ed H. says:

            The rank and file Building Trades members generally vote endorsed candidates somewhere around 65-80% of the time. The union community is one of the top contributors to the Democratic Party, without which, the Koch brothers and other lunatics buy the elections nationwide outright. And the Republicans who do get this contributions are more in the mold of Eisenhower or Nixon, instead of the post-Reagan model, and know that working people have to have good paying jobs for the economy to work well. And Brian Sims doesn’t even have a record of being out in front on some of those issues. Take that union or Building Trade influence away, and the right wing comes back stronger than ever, and maybe making inroads back into the city itself. Your imagined model of progressive isn’t progressive and harmful to the very party you claim to want to see grow. You’re short sighted and childish and not very knowledgeable about how politics works in the real world, Jon.

          • Jon Geeting says:

            Ed let’s just acknowledge that you are here playing a hack role in our comments section for the Brady Bunch crew – the Boyles, Margo Davidson, Mark Cohen, Angel Cruz, and Babette Josephs. Those are the candidates that your tribe likes in this election, and you’re against next generation progressive candidates who, if they win, will erode your tribe’s power. That’s fine, I’d be doing the same thing if I were you. But looking at this from a fresh perspective, it’s just very clear that the Building Trades and Bob Brady are not progressives and their rent-seeking only erodes real wages for most working people in Philadelphia, and in particular, the Democratic base of working class women of color. They’re the ones who end up paying higher housing and service costs because your group’s political activities jack up the prices for those things beyond what local wages can afford. You extract resources from these people, you don’t help them.

          • Ed H. says:

            Well Jon, it’d be hard for you to throw stones about anyone being a hack with your constant hackery. So, I guess you’d truly be the hack you claim you are. But, the stats disprove your bullshit about the Building Trades being the rent seekers you claim they are. Every labor economist at the PhD level worth a semester of undergrad costs knows that the Building and Construction Trades across the country, and especially the Northeastern region of the US, raises the wages of nonunion construction workers. Every state that has broken unions with anti worker legislation, from so-called right to work, and anti-prevailing wage laws, sees lower construction wages in real wages, and often nominal wages, after those laws are signed into the books. It’s funny how you’re calling some of these guys the next generation of progressives from your tribe, while trying to roll back wages for middle class workers in the state liquor stores, construction workers in the region, while hobbling the very people who do the heavy lifting for progressive values and progressive candidates come election time. Brian Sims’ pick in the Cohen race certainly isn’t moving the goal posts for a more progressive officeholder if Solomon wins. I’ll give it to you that Billy Smith will likely be one if he can beat the long odds. But you yourself admitted in one of your hack posts that Sullivan likely isn’t in. The race for Mike O’Brien seat. So, one out of three being more progressive isn’t very good. Then, there’s still the big elephant in the living room of how Sims is going to get shit done in the House after alienating himself from his own party. It’s bad politics and the move of a neophyte. So, keep on telling us how progressive you are while pushing Commonwealth Foundation ideals. Lower wages in a recession hasn’t worked anywhere, dude. But you keep on RonPauling right along.

          • Jon Geeting says:

            To be clear, Sims has not endorsed Sean Sullivan for the O’Brien seat.

            You’re just wrong about the Building Trades’ impact on Philly’s economy. These are primarily dudes who live in the suburbs, and take all that money home with them. It doesn’t get spent in Philly. It also makes housing and office construction prices higher, so end users of housing and offices are left with less money. Less money to pay wages after rent in the case of business tenants.

            You have a vested interest in confusing people about this, but anybody who’s intellectually honest knows Philly has New York City-level construction costs, and that forces end prices for buildings way higher than the local wages can afford. The true progressive position here is caring about the housing costs and wages of most Philadelphians, not protecting monopoly wages for a small group of upper middle class suburban white guys.

          • Ed H. says:

            Your still making shit up Jon. Every labor study put there shows unions, including the Building Trades, helping to raise the wages of nonunion workers. The union tradesmen also do something the nonunion do not, which is to not only use local workers from across the Philadelphia and Pennsylvania regions, but they also pay local taxes in the city wage tax. Many nonunion contractors will be from outside the city and also make it so their employees only pay taxes into the suburban localities they live in, or the company is based in, while working in the city. You can’t point to a single labor study supporting your points, while I can point to studies associated with prevailing wages being lowered or eke inundated in states showing the who construction industry has wages depressed. Not to mention many of those same studies showing that union contractors cost the same or less than nonunion contractors in industrial and commercial work, because of the higher education of union tradesmen in their trades through apprenticeships and constant journeyman upgrading classes. Again, you can’t call yourself a progressive when you’re actively endorsing lowering wages of both union and nonunion workers dude. Your kind of New Democrat/DLC approach is the very stupidity that has enabled the Koch Brothers, or your sugar daddy Post Brothers (how’d that punk Brett Mandela make out with those guys in his election? That turd had the balls to try to show up at Local 98’s Pennsylvania Society gala in 2012, trying to use a union venue to campaign against unions) to beat down workers into low wage jobs, instead of bargaining and fighting for themselves to be able to command wages that are negotiated for, and not begged for.

          • Jon Geeting says:

            Lets see these hack studies then. About Philadelphia, not blanket prevailing wage studies. I want to see how the specific arrangement the Philadelphia real estate market has benefits the median Philadelphian. You don’t have the goods. The point that Philadelphia has NYC construction costs and Baltimore wages is well established. It’s why we “need” the 10 year tax abatement, which is actually just a back door subsidy to the Building Trades and landlords.

          • Ed H. says:

            You’re trying to say that studies in other parts of the country will show a difference to Philadelphia, Jon? You’re reaching in your desperation. I’ll post studies:
            http://keystoneresearch.org/sites/default/files/krc_prevailwage_costs.pdf
            http://www.epi.org/publication/briefingpapers_bp143/
            http://www.prevailingwage.org/wpayfor.html
            … and you show us empirically how Philadelphia is different from the rest of the nation and world.
            But, since you’re nothing but a complete hack, let’s see the proof that Bob Brady and the Building Trades made their endorsements of Brendan Boyle over the same issues or with knowledge of one party to the other. Be careful, because I want absolute proof from you, and know a bit more than you do about those endorsements. You were called out for being a… story teller… when you made the unsupported claims a few months ago, and ran away from making it known where you got your information from. But you and I know, you didn’t have any information and were making wild guesses of a conspiracy. Don’t tell me you know how party machines work. Show us the direct information, without being afraid to support your bullshit claims. Conservatives like you calling yourselves “progressives” are too easy to expose as the frauds you are, Jon. The ball is in your court a) disprove the markets working in Philadelphia the same as they do in other parts of the nation and the world and b) proving your claims about the Brady/Building Trades endorsement of Boyle. Links to websites citing such, with firsthand witnesses or empirical evidence should be enough.

          • Jon Geeting says:

            LOL Ed I’m aware of how unions in general help the economy. I’m asking you how the Philadelphia Building Trades Guild helps anybody but themselves. The difference in Philadelphia of course is that the building trades fully control access to work on big projects (and use it to shut out people of color and women). This is not the case in New York City, or Washington, DC, or Pittsburgh, not to mention any number of nearby smaller cities like Bethlehem and Allentown. The monopoly on access to construction jobs is the difference.

            The EPI model, where union wages push up wages for the competition, doesn’t work if there’s no actual competition! Then you’re just extracting monopoly wages, which drive up rents. Do you believe in trickle down economics now Ed? Maybe that is the theory of how high construction costs are trickling down to working class women of color?

          • Ed H. says:

            So, you can’t point to any differences between Philadelphia’s Building Trades and other major cities like New York or Washington DC, as they do the same exact things as is done here. There’s plenty of competition in the residential and commercial projects in this city, and so you making nonsensical statements about monopolies being here but not in NYC, where the larger projects are done even more union than here, falls apart. So, you can’t support your claims on prevailing wages in the construction markets, the endorsement of Boyle, your insinuations that a cabal of State Reps are asking Babette to run on behalf of the Building Trades, or that other State Reps in the Philadelphia caucus are supportive of Sims blundering into endorsing people to knock off progressives. Can you support anything at all you say, Jon? Anything? Buehler?
            You conservatives are too easy to corner. Make sure to acknowledge who gives you and Brett Mandel your talking points…
            http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Commonwealth_Foundation
            While you’re at it… Source the claim of yours that every Democratic politician outside of Pennsylvania agrees with privatizing liquor, and that they’d rather toss aside that source of funding that’s a stable and large source in Pennsylvania. I’m willing to bet a lot of them would privately love to see their states more like PA.

          • Jon Geeting says:

            Huh? I did. The lack of monopoly control over construction projects. It’s not like that in other cities. Obviously that changes things. We’d pay less for cable in a market where Comcast didn’t have monopoly power, etc

          • Ed H. says:

            As if I’d take Jon Geeting’s word on this… NYC is closer to that than Philadelphia is. You should take a ride up to Manhattan one of these days. You’d be hard pressed to point to a single building built by nonunion companies. Better yet, work in NYC like I have, and maybe you’ll learn something about union construction. The wages are far higher in NYC than Philadelphia, both in the paycheck and in the Bennie packages. But, as expected, not a single bit of support for your many premises.

          • Jon Geeting says:

            I lived in NYC for many years, I’m aware that the union presence is strong. But it’s not a monopoly like in Philly, and land rents are the main factor driving up housing costs there. In Philly, it’s land rents and also construction. Nobody else in Philly gets paid the same wages as in NYC. The construction workers for some reason expect this, but it’s hurting everyone else’s wallets when the rent check is due. It should cost much much less to build buildings – especially small buildings – in this city.

          • Ed H. says:

            So, you say Philadelphia union construction workers do get paid as much as NYC union tradesmen do, then say they don’t, and both are a problem? The NYC trades have a higher percentage of large scale jobs done union than they do here. And that still is good for the nonunion workers up there, as it is here, by raiding those nonunion wages. I think you had better recheck your Heritage Foundation talking points a little better, Jon. You’re contradicting yourself. Of course, conservatives always do contradict themselves, don’t you?

          • Jon Geeting says:

            Where did I say Philly tradesmen don’t get paid as much as in NYC? They do. That’s the problem. The local wages can’t afford what buildings cost after all the overhead is paid. That’s why we have the 10-year tax abatement. That’s why Johnny Doc writes op-eds defending it.

          • Ed H. says:

            Let’s see… Jon makes up stories and then runs away from his stories when confronted with them. And according to wage rate sheets and benefit packages, Philadelphia Building Trades members make far less than NYC building Trades members. Again, you’re making stuff up because in spite of your ignorance of the construction trades, you feel like making up facts will make your comments seem relevant to someone. All it does is destroy your own credibility as a blogger and as someone who wants to make a mark in politics. You can claim to be laughing, but the words are here for all to see. I’m not in a position of making up facts, so I’m not sweating your discomfort at all.

          • Jon Geeting says:

            Let’s see the data then. Happy to recant any incorrect claims, but Tom Ferrick isn’t wrong about this:

            In his analysis, Gillen said he looked at building costs and found that Philadelphia ranks fourth in the nation in cost per square foot. It is $128 per square foot here, compared to a national average of $102 per square foot. Only New York, San Francisco and Boston have higher costs, so we are in heady company.

            The problem is we cannot get New York, Boston or San Francisco prices for our homes. We don’t have the wealth. Our median household income is lower — a lot lower — than that of those cities. At $37,000 a year, we are far below the U.S. income average of $50,000 per household.

            Why are construction costs so much higher in Philadelphia? High labor costs. The building and construction trades unions enjoy a virtual monopoly on construction in the city and the hourly rates their workers charge are high. Using an all-union workforce can add 30 percent to the cost of a project. (You can fly under the radar and use non-union help on small projects, but watch out if you try that with larger ones. The Ratmobile will soon be parked outside.)

          • Ed H. says:

            Tom Ferrick’s comments are comparing oranges to sardines. The price differences between Philadelphia and those other cities for housing has more to do with density, and manufacturing that has left the region, than Building Trades costs. And again, I’ve cited the studies showing how a higher prevailing wage in union construction still has a beneficial effect on nonunion wages. So, I’ll take this as a concession from you, since you can’t address the issue or show how a $10-15/hour lower wage/package rate compared to NYC in Philadelphia is the same as their costs. Lower those wages for the construction industry, and your left with more construction workers making poverty wages when you break the unions, as you seem want to do. Not to mention, the studies show that lowering wages of construction workers doesn’t bring with it a reduction in costs. Saying that using an all union workforce costs 30% more isn’t shown in the data.

          • Jon Geeting says:

            DERP! No clue, dERP! Greater density makes cities more affordable, not less. You have no idea what you’re talking about. Show us some proof of these wage differentials or shut the hell up.

          • Ed H. says:

            Ahhh… Gotta love the non responses you give when you’re asked to support your claims. Maybe you’re hoping to start rumors to give Perez Hilton a run for his money. Or, Drudge, since you’re of the same ideology.

          • Jon Geeting says:

            Now you’re just trolling

          • Ed H. says:

            There ya have it folks… Jon, when he’s not potty mouth and losing it, is calling other people trolls for pointing out he’s made claims he cannot support. Just remember that when he’s laying down Commonwealth Foundation, in the name of the Ron Paul libertarianism, on you. LOL!

          • Jon Geeting says:

            Who’s losing it here Ed? I am laughing my ass off at these comments not sweating yr shit at all. You are probably getting a little sweaty and having to take some diarrhea pills.

          • Jon Geeting says:

            Also gotta LOL at the state stores claim

          • Ed H.:
            What, exactly, has Bob Brady & Co. done for Philadelphia? I have my differences with Jon but he’s right that cutting Bob Brady & Co. down to size would be a good thing. We need less corruption, not more.