Most of the serious jousting in municipal elections happens after all the kiddies have returned to school, but the Delco County Council race has been unusually hot this Summer. In case you’ve missed anything, here a a bunch of links to help you catch up.

Above Average Jane posted an interview with David Landau. Jane’s long-format interviews with notable PA candidates are among the best original, informational contributions from any area blogger. Her interview with David was her first (and hopefully not her last) for the 2007 elections.

David’s Democratic running mate, Ann O’Keefe launched her new campaign site.

Congressman Joe Sestak (PA-07) held a roundtable along with all three Democratic County Council candidates to support their push for a new county health department. Both the Delco Times and the Evening Bulletin covered.

Up in Montgomery County, the Republican candidates for County Council are trying to distance themselves from the national Republican party by calling for the dismissal of Alberto Gonzales. (Hilariously, though, their press release called him “Roberto.”) In the meantime, their Delco counterparts are trying to say that the 2007 election is a local election; they claim the disarray of Republicans nationally will not be a factor in local races. (Keep telling yourselves that, Andrew Reilly!)

David Landau’s making the case that County Council is pandering to the wealthier Western sections of Delco, at the expense of the inner ring communities like Lansdowne and Yeadon. Landau held a press conference with Lansdowne Mayor Jayne Young, who agrees with him.

The Delco GOP is claiming that they’re the environmental party. (No, seriously!)

Landau met with local union members at Steelworkers local 10-1 in Linwood. Take special note later in the article at how the Republicans laughably try to label Landau as an ACLU lawyer. They’ve used the tag repeatedly in recent public statements. It’s true that David worked for the ACLU decades ago. The problem for them is that the ACLU has strong credibility among David’s core Democratic supporters, who are sick of encroachments on civil liberties by the Bush administration. The association will simply not damage him at all among independents and any non-dittohead Republicans, either. Those machine guys have been drinking the one-party water for too long, that they’re still stuck on 1988 talking points. (And by the way, isn’t that nationalizing the debate?)

David Landau’s campaign office held it’s grand opening. Joe Sestak and State Rep. Greg Vitali (PA-166), were in attendence at the celebration in Clifton Heights.

Here concludes our roundup. And that’s just covering the news in the last 10 days, here in the dog days of August.

For those who missed the August 5th program, the NBC10 Live @ Issue program is available online. Both Congressman Joe Sestak and State Representative Bryan Lentz are interviewed.

Bryan Lentz also has posted video of the July 23rd hearing on HB1182 held by the PA House Transportation Committee in Ridley Township. HB1182 is the Lentz’s bill proposing to create a regional airport authority.

Congressman Joe Sestak (PA-07) will hold a town hall meeting in his district this week. The topic will be Iraq. Sestak plans to give brief remarks and then take questions from the audience.

When: Thursday, August 16th, 6:30 pm
Where: The Science Center, Room 101, Swarthmore College [map]

The event is open to the public and the press.

Ornery Delco Times pundit Gil Spencer has never missed an opportunity to tweak freshman Congressman Joe Sestak (PA-7). In his most recent column, he performed a useful journalistic service while dishing out his usual critique of all things Sestak.

Gil got the goods on who Sestak’s opponent might be in 2008. Delco GOP candidates don’t run in primaries. They obtain blessings from machine power brokers like Upper Darby’s John McNichol. According to Spencer, two men are currently courting the approval of the war boarders–attorney Steve Elliott and wealthy real estate developer Tim Pulte. McNichol pulled no punches in explaining to the Times columnist how his party sizes up its potential candidates:

It was Pulte, Upper Darby GOP leader John McNichol mentioned first.

“He’s an attractive candidate, but his family is a little reluctant.”

Which is to say, he’s “interested,” but his wife is less so.

While not dismissive of Elliott, who is a state department lawyer with excellent national security credentials, McNichol looks at all the money Pulte could bring into the race with him.

“The family has a ton of money,” McNichol says, and the candidate would have his own “personal fortune” from which to draw.

“He’s never been in the political arena,” McNichol said of Pulte, but …

“He knew a lot about Sestak. He’s done his research and if he became the candidate, he’d get in there with both feet.”

McNichol was less enthusiastic about Elliott, but only because of his lack of dough.

“He’s well spoken and knows the issues,” said McNichol. “He’s a credible looking candidate.” But, he said, “We’re a ways from making any decisions.” That won’t happen until after Labor Day.

Sestak already has over $1M cash-on-hand saved up for 2008. He can also count on the DCCC defending him like Fort Knox if his race gets even remotely close. The GOP has no choice but to consider fundraising prowess in choosing a candidate to back.

A more detailed accounting of the conversation with Sestak at Swarthmore was reported in today’s Daily Gazette by Urooj Khan.

A member from the Swarthmore community wanted to know how unified the Democratic caucus was when it came to dealing with issues of environment. Sestak answered the question carefully, starting off with “My hat goes of to Speaker Pelosi. She’s a very strong leader. she works hard to resolve differences and that’s the mark of good leadership.” Sestak continued by referencing the divide among Democrats between progressives and the more moderate-to-conservative Blue Dogs who tend to be more pro-business. He acknowledged that there are Democrats who come from districts where, for example, the automobile industry is important. “It’s understandable that they are interested in keeping those jobs…I’m not saying that it makes them right, but it’s understandable.”

For the record, the “member of the Swarthmore community” who asked that question about the caucus was me.

Congressman Joe Sestak (PA-07) made a recess visit to speak with the Swarthmore College Democrats Monday afternoon. He gave a brief report on how he has been fulfilling his campaign pledges since taking office in January. Then he took questions for most of an hour from the audience of 40-50 students and other members of the College community.

Sestak fielded questions from the audience on topics as diverse as extraordinary rendition, foreign aid, and libraries. A number of the questions focused on energy policy, global warming and the environment. (On those matters, Sestak notes that he’s co-sponsoring bills to raise the CAFE standard, and two different bills on global warming that are supported by the Sierra Club. He’d also spent time today talking with local experts on issues relating to improved management of our troubled Delaware County watersheds.) Sestak also discussed Iraq, and his view of Congress’ constitutional role in oversight and management of the war. He referenced the need to fix and extend No Child Left Behind before it is reauthorized this year. And, of course, he was asked about his recent controversial appearance at a CAIR banquet. (On that front, Joe encourages those with concerns about his appearance to at least judge him on his full remarks.)

My personal observations about Joe are that he is more at ease and less programmed than he was as a candidate. He gave answers that were more off the cuff, and he told a few light anecdotes and jokes. He’s still prone to long, meandering explanations on some topics where a simple statement of conviction is all that’s required. (His answer on the role of Congress in oversight of the war included a story of George Washington, Tom Delay’s questioning of his patriotism on Meet the Press, and a listing of the specific war power in the Constitution.) Were I able to bend his ear, I would keep encouraging him that his answers will be more powerful and direct if he can keep them short and from the heart.

Nevertheless, we have to recognize that this is no ordinary freshman legislator. He has thrown himself into the fray with a great deal of vigor and dedication. He’s sticking to his guns on tough issues and staking out his claim to influence processes in the House and the Democratic Caucus. He’s bringing high-ranking officials to the district to hear from our citizens. He’s following through with votes that match campaign pledges. I’m most impressed that he’s assumed the Vice Chairmanship of the Small Business Committee as a freshman, which is a tremendous platform for working on economic development–something that Delaware County seriously needs to stave off the slow drain of jobs and workers.

After decades of one-party representation, it’s also simply refreshing to have a Democrat in Congress to come talk to the loyal progressives at ol’ Swarthmore. (We were liberal when liberal wasn’t cool.)

We residents of Delaware County are coming to the realization that it’s going to be an uphill slog to resist the FAA’s plans to redirect flight paths from Philadelphia International Airport right over our heads.

Today, the FAA officially identified its preference for the so-called “Integrated Airspace Alternative.” Yes, Delco sports fans, that’s the one where planes taking off from PHL can turn turn directly over our heads, instead of having to stay over the Delaware River until they’ve achieved sufficient altitude.

If you peruse the documents pertaining to the airspace plans on the FAA site, you quickly realize why we’re hosed. Although County Councilman Andrew Reilly (R) and other politicians have cast this as a highly local issue about the Philadelphia Airport, the FAA has tied the traffic issues of the Philadelphia Airport with those of Newark, JFK, and LaGuardia. When you calculate the untold billions of dollars of commercial interest invested in these gigantic airports, you realize that a half million residents of a suburban county are an afterthought.

The FAA will hold one open meeting in Pennsylvania to allow for public comment. (Aren’t we so lucky?) Of course, they’re holding it in a hotel down at the airport. I’d love to see them come out to one of the affected areas, like Media or Ridley Park, because they ought to see the area and the residents that they’re really impacting.And you know they’d get an earful.

County Council is threatening to sue, although from what I’ve heard from others who know more, it’s difficult to find legal grounds to stop the FAA. They apparently have pretty broad latitude to do whatever they want. Andy Reilly (R) and Co. haven’t advanced a legal theory by which they might be able to withstand the FAA, but I suspect that his tough talk is as much about the posture as it as about results. He’s still plotting the next step in his political career, after all.

Our best hope now is to get some relief from Congress; some recognition from the Aviation committee that the FAA might need more oversight and restrictions to its ability to claim eminent domain to the air above your head.

This strikes me as an undeveloped market. Like in other matters of pollution, maybe a cap-and-trade system is needed. If Delaware County could sell direct flight-path routes to the airlines, we could at least be compensated for the real costs to us of the extra noise and pollution. Then perhaps, the airlines and air travellers who most wanted shorter delays and more direct routes could buy and trade their “tokens” to go over Delco instead of the Delaware River. The cost-conscious consumer could take the flight that takes a little longer, while the premium airline passenger could spend the extra money for a flight that takes less time and has a lower likelihood of delay. In the meantime, we’d retain our privileges to balance the compensation against the various inconveniences. If we can be paid fairly for our troubles, the market should reach equilibrium over time.

Unfortunately, this is a case where we seemingly have no standing in the marketplace. At least we know that it’ll be years before actual changes to flight paths will be permitted to take place. There is a little time for some mitigation to this initial plan. Here’s hoping that Joe Sestak can find some leverage over the FAA in the form of support from his colleagues in the House.

For more of the political reaction to the FAA’s decision, see today’s Delco Times and Inquirer takes on the news.

More »