Romanelli Press Release responding to Dan Savage suggestion of dragging him behind a truck.
Bob Casey Supporter Threatens Life of PA Senatorial Candidate
Dan Savage, Editor of Seattle’s “The Stranger” and the sex advice column “Savage Love” made terroristic remarks in regards to Carl Romanelli and his candidacy that advocated violence against Romanelli, the Green Party, and its supporters.
Dan Savage told Stephen Morse, a reporter for The Daily Pennsylvanian, “Someone should run Romanelli over with a truck” and “any progressive that votes for a green is a fucking idiot and should be beaten with sticks”.
Carl Romanelli issued the following statement in response: “Dan Savage is very irresponsible in his remarks. He has a responsibility to speak like a responsible adult in his position as editor of “The Stranger”. Inciting violence and essentially calling for my death is the tactics of individuals like Osama bin Laden. Savage is not fit to be the editor of any newspaper. As a strong supporter of Democracy and free speech I welcome his opposition to my candidacy, but I condemn his call to violence. Dan lacks good judgment and I hope his newspaper’s sponsors will not support Dan Savage and his calls to terrorism and my death. Like Osama Bin Laden, Dan Savage is a coward. If he wants me dead he should do it himself and not hope some zombie-like supporter will do it for him. Tim Keck, publisher of “The Stranger” should fire Dan Savage and all sponsors should pull their advertising dollars, or they should consider themselves aligned with terrorist-like behavior. Any newspaper that prints his column is printing the words of a potentially violent man.”
Romanelli Continued, “You would think a man who has been discriminated against as a gay man would be more sensitive then to support violence and hate crimes against individuals for their political beliefs. I hope Philadelphians Against Santorum were not aware of Savage’s inclinations toward violent action and I hope they will donate the money from their fundraiser to a group that helps victims of hate crimes.”
Whichever side of the political spectrum you are on, I think that my video speaks for itself. This was by far the most insane interview that I’ve ever conducted.
Highlights?
On Electing Casey
Excited about electing Casey because: Patrick Leahy, head of the Judiciary. Hillary Clinton, more power. Chuck Schumer, more power. He’s pro-Casey because of that.
Regarding Carl Romanelli
“Carl Romanelli should be dragged behind a pickup truck until there’s nothing left but the road.”
That used to be a bad thing. Well maybe it still is. Depending on who the target is.
“Any progressive who votes for a Green anymore after Nader and now Romanelli is a fucking idiot and should be beaten with sticks.”
Voter intimidation be damned! We have Democrats to elect!
“If Carl Romanelli gets back on the ballot, someone should run him over with a truck.”
It’s pretty much a five and half minute long commercial for tolerance from the left. Leading by example no doubt.
He said he owes around $100,000 to his lawyer, but the lower court opinion also left him owing roughly $900,000 in legal fees. About $90,000 is court costs, he said, and the rest is owed to lawyers for Bob Casey Jr., the state treasurer and Democratic hopeful for U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum’s seat.
Romanelli also plans to appeal that decision.
He believes he was unfairly treated because Casey’s lawyers were given an opportunity to amend their challenge to signatures Romanelli gathered to get his name on the ballot, but he wasn’t given an opportunity to defend those signatures.
He said it seemed like the state judicial system was telling him, “It’s too late; you’re off the ballot. And by the way, for fighting this so long, you’re responsible for all fees and costs.”
Wilkes-Barre resident Carl Romanelli’s bid to make the ballot in the U.S. Senate race ended Wednesday after the Green Party member lost a second state Supreme Court appeal seeking to revive his candidacy.
The court, in a one-page opinion, upheld a Commonwealth Court decision that found Mr. Romanelli fell about 9,000 voter signatures short of the 67,070 needed for a third-party candidate to land a ballot spot. It came a day after the high court ruled against him in another appeal that sought to lower the signature threshold to less than 16,000.
Had he won either court fight, Mr. Romanelli would have been listed on the Nov. 7 ballot alongside incumbent U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum and Democratic challenger state Treasurer Bob Casey Jr.
Mr. Romanelli said he now plans to mount a write-in campaign but admits he has little chance with such an effort.
“I still want my supporters to have a choice, but you know I’m not going to garner anywhere near the votes I would if I was on the ballot,” he said.
One of the biggest problems with our political system is the lack of choice. In Pennsylvania (as in many of these battleground states) the Democrats have nominated a very conservative candidate who is both pro-life and is not in favor of a quick pullout in Iraq. Those who wanted a classic pro-choice anti-war liberal could have voted for Romanelli. Now they will have to figure out a way to write in the name or settle for the the conservative Democrat.
This is the hypocricy of the Daily Kos netroots crowd. There is little difference between the stances of Bob Casey Jr and Joe Lieberman. If anything Casey is more conservative. But in one case they are willing to suck it up to defeat a GOP incumbent, but in the other it apparently is a matter of principle to the highest degree. However, one thing remains static for the crowd. Don’t allow any competition. They attempted to push out Lieberman and went to court to push out Romanelli.
Open elections that allow everyone the chance to vote for who they want to? Don’t ever let them fool you into believing it is really what they want.
“I am devastated,” Romanelli said. “All I have left is to declare a write-in candidacy.”
Romanelli isn’t the only one distressed. State Republicans have been hoping the Green Party candidate would siphon votes from Democratic contender Bob Casey Jr., the state treasurer, thus helping Republican incumbent Sen. Rick Santorum.
“Obviously some people thought this might help Rick in this race,” said Michael Barley, deputy political director for the Republican State Committee. “But we didn’t know how [the court] was going to rule. We can only affect what we have control of.”
Santorum made no secret of the fact that Republicans wanted Romanelli on the ballot. “We thought it was very important to have another person on the ballot who was willing to speak out,” said Santorum spokeswoman Virginia Davis. “Casey has run an illusive, under-the radar-campaign. Romanelli wanted to be a part of the process.”
Mark Rauterkus responds to Romanelli’s $90,000 bill.
Perhaps Pennsylvania is 46th out of the 50 states in terms of job creation. But, I have a hunch that PA is 50th out of 50th in terms of its sense of democracy.
This is what is killing our state, our region and our city. People in power don’t have respect for the big-minded values of what makes us different and something other than those we fight against.
Bob Casey Jr. does not get my vote.
Yes, it is being reported that the decision to knock Romanelli off the ballot is a big victory for Casey. No way. I see it in another way. Casey’s goons knocked Romanelli off the ballot and knocked democracy in the teeth in doing so.
Then they issue a dental bill for $90,000 to be paid by the citizen candidate Romanelli. He works for the rail road. He went through hell just to get an attempt to try to serve his country and this is the thanks he gets — from Casey and his cronies.
Perhaps it is Casey’s wish to put PA back into the dark ages. He just wants to win. Screw that mentality.
The state Democratic Party has hit Carl Romanelli and his attorney with a nearly $90,000 tab a week after the Green Party candidate lost a legal challenge to his bid to get on the U.S. Senate ballot.
The bill, submitted as part of a state judge’s ruling that Romanelli is responsible for all costs associated with the challenge, includes more than $48,000 in attorney fees. It adds to what Romanelli described as a deepening campaign debt.
‘’This is a blatant and transparent attempt on behalf of the Democratic Party … to destroy me personally as well as politically,'’ Romanelli said Monday of the judge’s order and the resulting bill for $89,668.
Romanelli is appealing last week’s ruling, which found him to be nearly 9,000 signatures short of the 67,070 required to put a minor-party candidate on the ballot alongside U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., and Democrat Bob Casey Jr.
Too often in Pennsylvania we see judges at every level showing the utter disrespect for the important role of the legal process, for the litigants who appear before them, and for the appearance of justice itself. They do this in many ways, sometimes they display overt friendship with one lawyer or another, by demeaning a party or counsel, or by refusing to explain their decisions to the litigants. Judges of Courts across the Commonwealth are more frequently resorting to one sentence, or even one-word decisions, leaving litigants and their counsel left only to guess at the basis. And worse, to assume that there was no rational basis for the decision — that the decision was based on prejudice, cronyism, or favoritism of some kind.
And now, the Supreme Court of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has “led” the way by modeling that behavior. In an important appeal, with grand implications for access to the ballot by third parties, closely watched in political corners near and far, and of more than passing interest to the more than 50,000 Pennsylvania residents who put their names on the line of the Green Party nominations, the Supreme Court refuses to explain itself. They devote but 17 words — including the date — in “deciding” the appeal of the Green Party.
“AFFIRMED” is the entire holding, discussion, ruling, and decision of the Court.
Oh, we knew Romanelli would lose, although it was clear that his argument was correct. Apparently, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court was unable to come up with any justification for the result which they wanted to achieve, so they did what small minds everywhere do when intellectually overwhelmed — they just gave the finger to those 50,000 residents, the litigants, and fairness.
The state Supreme Court dealt another blow Tuesday to a Green Party candidate’s U.S. Senate campaign by refusing to reduce the number of signatures that minor-party candidates need to run for statewide office.
In a one-sentence order, the court upheld a state judge’s decision in August that required Carl Romanelli to gather an unusually high 67,070 signatures to qualify for the Nov. 7 ballot alongside Republican Sen. Rick Santorum and Democratic state Treasurer Bob Casey.
Romanelli had argued that the formula for calculating the number of signatures should be based on last year’s judicial retention elections in which state judges run unopposed and voters cast up-or-down votes on whether they should serve additional 10-year terms.
Pennsylvania law sets the number at 2 percent of the ballots cast for the largest vote-getter in the last statewide election. This year’s 67,070 threshold was based on Casey’s record vote count in 2004 when he ran for treasurer. Romanelli’s arguments would have cut the number to fewer than 16,000.
“I’m disappointed,” said Romanelli’s lawyer, Lawrence M. Otter.
That’s pretty much it for Romanelli. They’re still appealing the actual signature decision. But the odds are longer on that case.
It’s amazing that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court can take a hundred pages to explain why they deserve payraises, but can’t even bother to explain why a statewide election is not a statewide election.
“God, I wish I could tap into that guy’s $20 million and some of the legal people he has access to,” he said of Santorum. “I never made any secret about the money. Heck, without it, the Greens wouldn’t have got on the ballot.”
The Democratic party immediately challenged the signatures on his petitions.
“It would be one thing if there was an organic effort by Green Party supporters… but it was a firm paid for by Rick Santorum’s supporters,” Casey campaign spokesman Larry Smar said.
Asked if he was concerned about Romanelli being a “spoiler” in the race, Smar said, “He’s not on the ballot, so it’s not really an issue at this point.”
To the same question, Dr. G. Terry Madonna, director of the Center of Politics and Public Affairs at Franklin and Marshall College in Lancaster, replied, “The answer is, I don’t think so.”
A Quinnipiac poll released Tuesday shows Casey leading Santorum by 12 points. Likely voters chose Casey by 51 percent, Santorum by 39 percent, and Romanelli by 4 percent. If the race between Santorum and Casey tightens to where one or two points makes a difference, then Romanelli would be a factor, Madonna said.
Additionally, Romanelli has no money for campaigning, which matters in a race that could end up costing from $30 million to $40 million between the two candidates, Madonna said.
However, he said it is good to have third-party candidates in the running and believes the 2 percent requirement is too extreme and too variable from year to year.
“That’s just a flat-out unfair number,” Madonna said. “The legislature needs to reduce it… so third-party candidates can get on the ballot.”
Blame the Democratic State Committee’s lawsuit that led to a six-week review of tens of thousands of signatures since Mr. Romanelli’s candidacy is more likely to hurt Mr. Casey, a fellow liberal.
The state’s draconian election laws — enforced by the duopoly of Rs and Ds — define political enlightened self-interest. That’s probably why GOP funding sources are helping Romanelli.
Candidates other than Democrats and Republicans this year needed 67,070 valid signatures; a duopoly candidate, only 2,000.
The state Supreme Court must overturn the decision — and all laws enabling state government to play favorites by allowing bipartisan insiders to pass laws ensuring their opponents remain outsiders.
Making every vote count in Pennsylvania should not be limited to Republicans and Democrats.
Romanelli argues that the threshold should be based instead on last year’s judicial retention elections, in which case he would need fewer than 16,000 signatures. The state Supreme Court is weighing that issue.
In 2004, Ralph Nader needed “only” 25,697 valid signatures in Pennsylvania to get on the ballot for president. (He didn’t make it.) As important as most senators think they are, there’s no argument that the presidency is more important. So why allow a candidate for the highest office in the land to obtain fewer signatures than a candidate for Senate?
The Republican and Democratic parties should not be so fearful of a little competition. New Jersey has a far more reasonable approach to third-party candidates. For example, to get on the ballot for U.S. Senate in New Jersey, an independent candidate must collect 800 valid signatures. This low threshold has not led to the dismantling of the two major parties.
That said, this time around Romanelli has no choice but to abide by current election law. If he didn’t collect enough valid signatures, no matter how unreasonable the target, he’s not going to be on the ballot.
But this mess underlines the need for Pennsylvania to lower its requirements for third-party candidates to get on a ballot. It’s a democracy, not a members-only club.
His current attempt to run for U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum’s seat may be on the ropes, but he’s been tilting at windmills for so long that it’s folly to lose faith. He has had successes.
A former child support officer in the Luzerne County court system, he pushed for a referendum that would reduce the number of Wilkes-Barre City Council members, which was approved by voters. Then he opposed the proposal to split the city into five ribbon-like districts, a plan that has since been tossed in favor of neighborhood districts.
Most recently, he joined the opposition to a new referendum that would eliminate the districts completely, electing all council members “at large.” That plan was scuttled by a judge.
A perennial part of the periodic war protests on Public Square and co-chairperson of the Luzerne County Green Party, he won the 2003 State of the World Leadership Award for helping to increase local Green Party membership nearly tenfold in three years — from about 34 to more than 300.
Of course, the prize was handed out at the annual State of The World forum, a festival held in the back yard of Mario Fiorucci’s Main Street home in Sugar Notch, so it didn’t get quite the publicity of, say, a Nobel or Pulitzer.
Lawrence Otter, Romanelli’s lawyer, countered that Kelley’s decision isn’t the last word, since Romanelli’s ballot spot could be restored by the case pending before the state Supreme Court.
In that case, the Greens are challenging the Department of State’s interpretation of the law spelling out the signature requirements for third-party candidates.
The law requires third-party candidates to obtain at least the number of signatures equaling 2 percent of the vote total of the highest vote-getter in the most recent statewide election.
Rendell administration officials, like their predecessors, have pegged that number to contested elections for statewide offices — in this case, the 2004 elections. That year, Casey received the most votes, 3.3 million for his current post of state treasurer.
Romanelli argued the state has incorrectly ignored the 2005 statewide retention elections for state Supreme Court judges. In such elections, voters are given only “yes” and “no” options, and the judges have no opposition.
Using the 2005 judicial elections, Otter said the signature requirement for minor-party candidates would drop to 15,000 — a number, all sides agree, Romanelli would meet.
Otter said he remains confident Romanelli “will be on the November ballot, and the citizens of Pennsylvania will have three choices … for U.S. Senate.”