This is WESA Politics, a weekly newsletter by Chris Potter providing analysis about Pittsburgh and state politics. If you want it earlier — we'll deliver it to your inbox on Thursday afternoon — sign up here.
On the eve of the Democratic primary six months ago, I wrote that if Sara Innamorato was poised for victory in the race for county executive, it would reflect not just the strength of her candidacy but the fact that “what progressives have put together — a mix of grassroots organizing and support from a broader national movement — seems to be working.”
That was true as well in Matt Dugan’s effort to topple longtime incumbent District Attorney Steve Zappala: Dugan benefited mightily from a combination of outside funding and a seeming mutual fatigue between Zappala and voters in the Democratic base.
But what the progressive movement is up against in next week’s general election is not just Zappala’s return this fall as the Republican nominee, or Innamorato’s Republican foe, Joe Rockey. It’s an effort to field a movement to counter what progressives have assembled. And it doesn’t lack for resources.
Financial reports filed at the end of last week show that Rockey amassed a nearly $1 million fundraising advantage over Innamorato since June, raising $1.6 million to her nearly $650,000. Outside spending by independent groups has helped him as well: One pro-Rockey group, Save Allegheny County Action, reported $275,000 in fundraising and nearly $231,000 in spending, mostly in the form of ads attacking Innamorato as a lightweight and extremist.
That money can be traced through the long-established Commonwealth Leaders Fund committee to hedge-fund billionaire Jeff Yass, who has long bankrolled conservative causes across Pennsylvania. And not all of that money is being spent on TV: Commonwealth also gave $100,000 to the county’s Republican Committee, nearly two-thirds of its pre-election haul. In a county where Democrats outnumber Republicans by two-to-one, the GOP has raised roughly $157,000 for get-out-the-vote and other efforts since June — slightly more than the $151,000 raised by the local Democratic party apparatus.
Innamorato’s campaign has sought to turn these numbers to its advantage: The proof that her message is winning, she’s argued, is how heavily Republicans are spending to drown it out. Her campaign’s closing argument comes courtesy of Gov. Josh Shapiro, arguably the party’s biggest closer, whose TV spot on her behalf reminds Democrats that the next county executive will hold a decisive vote on the county’s board of elections.
That’s a message Democratic insiders have long awaited from the campaign, and one Rockey tried to get out ahead of with a pledge to leave the election department’s leadership intact. (Make no mistake, though: GOP activists, too, see the conduct of next year’s presidential election as a critical issue in this year’s county-level races.)
Innamorato allies also are spending money on their own. As I write this, the Working Families Party has sent out a little more than $190,000 worth of mailers attacking Rockey, with talking points drawn heavily from an “on this race” page found on Innamorato’s campaign website. The Republican Party’s county chairman, Sam DeMarco, called this “flagrant coordination” between the campaign and a group that is supposed to be independent.
I first wrote about this practice, widely called “redboxing,” nearly six months ago. It’s been a common tactic in races outside Allegheny County, though it’s often decried as an attempt to get around rules that ordinarily bar candidates from coordinating with outside groups. In fact, it’s one that will be sharply limited in future cycles, thanks to a package of campaign-finance reforms pushed by County Councilor Tom Duerr this past summer.
On the other hand, the case Working Families made for redboxing last spring — that it helped level the playing field in races that could otherwise be dominated by a handful of wealthy interests — may resonate better now, with folks such as Yass wading into the fray. After all, Rockey’s campaign has received over $400,000 from just three individuals: William Benter, Charles Hammell, and Kent McElhattan.
Duerr’s campaign finance rules would put an end to contributions of that size as well. But those rules won’t take effect until after this election is decided … and it’s not just Republicans benefiting from the absence of such limits.
Dugan’s bid for district attorney is being kept afloat almost entirely by Pennsylvania Justice and Public Safety, a political committee bankrolled by billionaire and criminal justice-reform advocate George Soros. The committee has spent nearly $1.1 million on Dugan’s behalf this fall, in the form of TV ads and mailers reported as “in-kind” contributions to his campaign.
Dugan himself, meanwhile, has raised a paltry $67,000 on his own behalf, and $28,000 of that is money he kicked in himself. To put that in some context, Zappala’s last challenger — 2019 independent candidate Lisa Middleman — raised just shy of $200,000 in her last full pre-election report.
While this space has mocked Zappala’s sleepwalking approach to his losing bid in the Democratic primary, he’s been far more energetic since a write-in bid made him the Republican nominee. He’s raised $684,107, and it assuredly doesn’t hurt his standing with conservative voters that he’s torched Pittsburgh Mayor Ed Gainey on everything from the city’s policing strategy to its contracting procedures.
Gainey has repeatedly suggested that this is all driven by the election, and it’s hard not to notice that one of Zappala’s biggest contributors is the Laborers union — a Gainey ally-turned-foe that has donated $75,000 to Zappala at last count. But far be it from me to suggest an ulterior motive. Zappala has always had close relations with building-trades unions, and a long-established habit of calling out Pittsburgh mayors. If anything, the more notable fact here may be that Dugan hasn’t raised more money from Gainey and other Democrats to counter that influence.
Of course, campaign finance reports aren’t the whole story. Progressives have long touted their ground game, arguing that their real strength is measured at the doors. Campaign finance reports don’t document all of a candidate’s friends. But this fall, they may reflect the enemy Democrats must be wariest of: complacency.
