Letter to the Editor: Jamieson’s Lament – Mistaken and Misplaced

We read the , and write to respond to Ms. Jamieson’s unfounded charges. 

In calling a foul on the Republican Party’s recent campaign, Ms. Jamieson wishes for an instant replay on the role played by the “Earned Income Tax” (“EIT”) issue.  Ms. Jamieson mistakenly blames the Republican Party for what actually is her party’s failure to level with the voters and take a clear position on the EIT. 

In the recent campaign, the voters of Tredyffrin faced a choice on both the economic and educational future of this community.  Our school district faces critical decisions about upcoming labor negotiations and how to address looming pension obligations.  In this context, the T/E School Board, under the leadership of a president who was the acknowledged leader of the Democratic ticket, began “studying” the imposition of an EIT to “educate” the public on the subject.  

Everyone understood that this process could result in the imposition of an EIT.  In the midst of an election campaign, that process included multiple public meetings and a special meeting of the School Board to vote on whether to call a referendum on an EIT.  It is hard to understand how one studies a new tax and “educates” the public on it but does not support its imposition. 

Valuing the great schools we have, recognizing the potential impact of an EIT on Tredyffrin taxpayers and the area economy – and knowing that higher school spending does not equate to higher performing schools, the Tredyffrin Republican Committee voted unanimously to oppose the imposition of an EIT in this past campaign.  That same group and the Republican candidates for School Board determined that it was critical to take a stand now.  We stated plainly our opposition to the imposition of an EIT to fund our schools. 

At the same time and in the pages of this newspaper, the Democratic candidates claimed that the School District could handle no more cuts without being “irreparably damaged” and that situation facing the School District left only options such as eliminating busing and increasing class sizes.  The Democratic position ignored numerous possibilities such as outsourcing custodial services to save hundreds of thousands of dollars, raising revenues with temporary fees for activities, and gradually drawing down on the School District’s $25,000,000 fund balance (“rainy day fund”) until the State Legislature addresses the pension issue facing every public school system in Pennsylvania.  At the same time, the leader of the Democratic ticket supported the EIT “study” process and all but one Democratic candidate (Ms. Wessels) failed to take opportunities to say that they would vote to end the EIT process.  Instead, the press quoted a Tredyffrin Democratic “insider” as claiming that while the Democratic candidates were “personally opposed” to an EIT they favored putting the issue to a referendum in 2012.  Far from ruling out an EIT, the collective position of the Democratic candidates emphasized the need for a new revenue stream, denied viable alternatives and promoted a process to impose an EIT. 

 So, the EIT issue was very real and this election was an opportunity for the voters to effect the process on a critical issue of public policy.  Ms. Jamieson now complains that the issue was false and manufactured as part of a cynical ploy.  Not so.  Just because the campaign raised issues for which Democratic candidates were unprepared or took the wrong position does not mean that the opposition is false or dishonorable. 

And yes, the TTRC bought signs that stated that a vote for a Republican candidate was a vote against the EIT and the process to impose one.  In response, the Democratic Party paid for signs that voting Republican would “Lower Home Values”.  Were those signs misleading?  And the Democratic Party also paid for signs saying “Protect Our Schools – Vote Democratic”.  What were Democrats asking the electorate to protect our schools from?  In these and other ways, the Democratic Party misrepresented Republican positions, motives and backgrounds – starting during the spring Special Election and continuing right up to Election Day.  Ms. Jamieson omits all this and applies one standard to Republicans and another to her own party.  The Republican campaign did not attack individuals and did not make matters personal – to Ms. Jamieson or to any of her candidates.  Nor did the Republican Party try to scare parents and other voters with claims that the School District is “in crisis”, “imploding” or beg voters to “not give up on our future – our children” as Democrats did. 

 At the end of the day, campaigns – like any contest - can become heated.  In the midst of the contest, both sides may say and do things that they later regret.  By putting our committee’s names on signs and literature, we take responsibility.  We live together and are together responsible for the future of our community.  We take that responsibility seriously by defining issues and putting forward clear and strong positions with candidates ready to carry them out. 

Sincerely,

Mike Broadhurst, Barbara Morosse, Cheryl Bergsma, Ed Sweeney, Gio D’Amato, and Neill Kling.   We are members of the TTRC and live in Berwyn, Strafford, Paoli, Wayne

Editor's Note: The Tredyffrin Republicans submitted this letter at Patch's invitation to respond to the post-election letter submitted by TTDems Chair Dariel Jamieson. Patch welcomes your thoughts on these or any issues in the community. We encourage political leaders, office holders and voters to blog in our Local Voices blog section. Because these two letters related directly to the political campaigns and election night Patch opted to run them as letters in the context of election coverage. We invite any interested parties to express their opinions on future topics as a blog.

This is a public invitation to any member of the TE community. A similar open invitation has been extended to leaders of both major political parties.