The short answer: he’s talking.

So, I went away for a week. And when I came back, I found that Tom Gannon had sunk to new personal lows in the PA-161 state house race. (Lentz campaign’s response is here.)

The ads from Gannon are despicable. But my gut tells me not to worry too much. If Gannon wants to take on a notoriously aggressive former prosecutor on crime, I’ll take those odds. Lentz has the voice, the team, the friends, and the cash to defend his substantive record. (UPDATE- I’m sure he would want me to mention that more cash would REALLY help.)

Here’s the most telling part of the Inquirer story by Mari A. Schaefer:
“Gannon would not say whether he approved the ad.”

Oh really Mr. Gannon? Let’s do a little forensic investigation of the circumstantial evidence.

• September 14th– Tom Gannon sends out a postcard to constituents advertising October meetings in Brookhaven and Ridley on the topic of internet child predators.
• September 21st– The HRCC makes a “Willie Horton” attack on Lentz, claiming he helped an accused child predator as an attorney. [emph. mine.] Gannon doesn’t take responsibility for the ad.
• September 22nd– Advertisements hit email accounts of PA-161 constitutents calling Lentz unfit for office on the basis of his involvement in the case. The emails come from votetomgannon.com, Gannon’s campaign website.
• September 26th– Another email advertisement sent out re-iterating the attack. Again the ad is from Gannon’s campaign site.

This was a long-planned attack, and obviously coordinated by Gannon’s campaign.

Here’s something that’s interesting, though. Both the emails of September 22 and 26th are sent with two incorrect email addresses for my wife. (They attempt to CC her at my employer’s domain, where she doesn’t have an account.) Since January 1, 2006, I have received at least seven other messages with exactly the same incorrect addresses, in exactly the same configuration. (2/14, 7/14, 7/21, two on 7/24, 8/9, 9/1)

They were all from Tom Gannon’s legislative office.

So, remember when you sign up to be kept posted by your legislator’s activitiy, he’s going to use that information for personal, political purposes. He will share it with his party’s election campaign committee.

A brief reminder: two weeks ago, I challenged Tom Gannon about his abuse of franking privileges. I was prompted by four taxpayer-funded mailings from his office in six weeks. He yelled. And then he lied.

So imagine just how satisfied I am the sitting legislator of the PA-161 when I arrived home yesterday to find… THREE (3) items of franked mail in our mailbox in ONE (1) day! Each mailing used a different format. One was a newsletter. Glossy, or course. One was a postcard. Another was a letter with a color insert.

I thought that Pennsylvania law prohibited sending out franking literature within sixty (60) days of an election!

Tom Gannon has no shame.

If you have any remaining shred of hope that government can still be made to serve the interests of citizens, vote Lentz.

* * *

UPDATE: My spouse points out that she also received the same three mailings on the same day. So, for those scoring at home, that was six (6) items of taxpayer-funded campaign-related mail from Tom Gannon to our domicile in a single day.

Tom Gannon flat-out lied to my face the other night. As he was canvassing my neighborhood, I challenged him about his excessive use of taxpayer-funds for franking privileges. To be fair, I conceded that both parties exploit this power of incumbency. (Heck, The Gov has practically made himself the patron saint of Pittsburgh tourism recently.)

But I pointed out that I’d received no fewer than four mailings from Gannon’s legislative office on glossy or card stock in six weeks. All paid for by the people of Pennsylvania. This has gone well beyond quarterly newsletters.

Mr. Gannon, got in my face and yelled, “I AM the the sitting legislator of this district!” poking his finger at me repeatedly. And he vehemently insisted that he sends out just as many mailings throughout the year. That was a lie.

I asked him whether he would support the pledged legislation of several Republican candidates to do away with a significant share of the slush funds for franking. “Absolutely not!” insists the Rep.

Let’s just see this for what it is. Gannon has had this seat for 28 years. He considered it “his,” including all of the perks that come with it. I’m sure he resents having to give back his unvouchered expenses. When an opportunity arose last November repeal the wildly unpopular pay raise, he was one of only two who representatives who did not vote. (And only after Judge Nigri had been oustered by an angry electorate, did he make any effort to get on the record with a too-late repeal vote.) He spends $650 of tax money every month on a leased vehicle, instead of at least taking a less expensive state fleet vehicle, or none at all.

None of it should come as a suprise. That leopard will not change his spots.

Above Average Jane continued her series of interviews with state house candidates by talking with Bryan Lentz. (Isn’t Jane awesome?) This response from Bryan was music to my ears. And Bryan better know that I’ll be holding him to his word:

AAJ: Tom Gannon voted for the pay raise, took unvouchered expenses and was excused on the repeal vote. When running against Curt Weldon you criticized his ethical lapses. Given that state legislators have access to per diems and vehicle allowances with little oversight and no lobbying disclosure rules, what can you tell your future constituents about your plans to be ethical? (Source: Lentz, Bryan, “It’s time to clean house, Huffington Post 2/06/06)

Lentz: I am going to follow the rules before they become rules. I am going to be an open book and I will pay for my own car and expenses. My only special interest will be the interest of my constituents and I will not be wined and dined by anyone other than my wife.