No More Corbett Appointees. Voters Chose a “Fresh Start”

Share With Friends
  

Tom Wolf ran on a fresh start for the executive team in Harrisburg, and he won big. Voters kicked Tom Corbett to the curb.

By definition, appointing the remainder of Tom Corbett’s people to important executive branch positions is not a fresh start. Corbett had no credibility whatsoever to make any appointments on his way out the door. His political capital was deep in the red.

Voters may have chosen their familiar Republican state representative (or more likely, the Republican gerrymandering of the electoral map made it simply impossible for Democrats to win in many of the new districts) but they overwhelmingly chose a Democrat for the executive branch. Now it is time to let the Democrats govern and give the voters the fresh start they voted for.

Republicans need to accept that Corbett lost and stop trying to force-feed the voters more Corbett administration when they don’t want any.

This entry was posted in Elections, Governor.

7 Responses to No More Corbett Appointees. Voters Chose a “Fresh Start”

  1. squarian says:

    So Wolf ignores the gesture, fires all thirteen nominees and nominates his own people?

    • Matt Thomas says:

      Apparently some people have been in a coma since the past November 4th…likely Republicans suffering a severe case of trauma. Should you by any chance be among these, wake up…come around and move on…it’s all over. The worst governor in all our 50 states has been dumped by the voters…some of whom he even attempted to disenfranchise. The old fracking gasbag is gone and like the Paris of 1944, our people have been liberated.

    • Julieann Wozniak says:

      Four years ago, Corbett promised us more government transparency, and gave us exactly the opposite. From the way his administration behaved towards us, the public, you’d think they were either safeguarding nuclear secrets or burying evidence of corruption as they turned Big Gas loose upon us. So I find it particularly galling that Corbett would stiff us by leaving one of his “made men” in charge of Open Records. I voting against the man, and want none of his political appointees left behind like booby traps.

  2. timannlu says:

    Both in Harrisburg and Washington Republicans are claiming a mandate that doesn’t exist, precisely because of gerrymandering. Only those such as Wolf and Obama who win statewide and national elections truly have a mandate because you can’t gerrymander a statewide or a national election. I hope people will aggressively point out that gerrymandered exercises in power are illegitimate. PA voters didn’t just reject Corbett; they rejected the entire Republican approach to governance, a fact that gerrymandering disguises.

    • squarian says:

      I think you’re right to draw the parallel between Federal and Pennsylvanian politics now: in both cases, we’ll be seeing an interesting constitutional conflict testing the limits of the principle of separation of powers. In a sense, the PA senate’s gesture is similar to the federal House invitation to Netanyahu: an attempt by the legislative power to force the hand of, or at least embarrass, the executive. In neither case though, does it seem to me to rise above the level of defiant gesture. We’ll certainly see more of this, but with the executive power in the hands of Wolf and Obama respectively, there’s not much more the GOP can do than wave their middle fingers in the air.

  3. Gdub says:

    I do appreciate the flexibility for when a gerrymandered seat represents a “mandate” or not. I’m sure many readers are complaining about the ability of the Maryland legislature to represent the people when they just voted for a Republican governor.