Through a Lens Darkly

That the Democratic nomination for governor is a hotly contested race is not news. Nor is the fact that the campaign has taken on a decidedly nasty tone going to be mistaken for a big scoop. Former Mayor Ed Rendell calls this campaign against state Auditor General Bob Casey Jr. the ugliest one he’s been involved in. For someone who’s been on the inside of Philadelphia politics for almost 30 years, that’s saying something.

And if there's one element of Pennsylvania's Democratic bloodbath that sums up the tone of the campaign, it's Philly Press. Not the Philly press, but Philly Press. Press is a Casey campaign operative whose sole assignments for the past 6 months have been to follow Rendell around to every public appearance and to record for posterity the candidate's every move on video. At fundraisers, rallies, forums and whistle stops, Press is there with his trusty little video camera. Even during forums and debates where another, or his own, candidate is speaking, Press keeps Rendell squarely in the viewfinder. The unspoken hope is to catch your opponent picking his nose, farting in public or scowling at little old ladies. At which time you will promptly have your campaign staff fire off a press release decrying your opponent's insensitivity to senior citizens and flatulent violations of the Clean Air Act.

Philly Press is a tall, affable young man who likes to talk to reporters at the functions that he attends as Rendell's shadow and who came to light several months ago when he was accused of using his name to pose as a reporter. Apparently, someone at a county commissioners' meeting that Rendell was addressing in Harrisburg asked him his name and took his reply to mean that he was with the Philly press. Rendell's campaign manager David Sweet was none too pleased to find out that the guy in the back of the room with the video camera was a mole from the enemy camp, not a member of the media.

Born Philip D. Press, the Narberth native and graduate of St. Joe's Prep began his career in politics in Tennessee working for Al Gore after graduating from Fordham in 2000. From there he went to work for the high-powered Washington, D.C.-based political consulting firm Shrum, Devine and Donilon (which runs the media campaign for Bob Casey) before landing a full-time gig in the Casey camp in November. Press doesn't consider what he does unseemly or underhanded.

"I like my job," he says. "It's a necessary part of politics. Besides, they [Rendell's people] have someone who does the same thing." He says that he conducts himself appropriately and that he even draws a line on the places he won't follow the candidate.

"I go to all the public functions, but I don't go into houses of worship or events at Rendell's headquarters," Press says. Then, as an afterthought, he questions, "Hey, this is all off the record, right?" After being assured it was on the record, he withdraws and goes to work, setting up his tripod and focusing his small video camera on Rendell, who is smiling at the assembled crowd and sweating profusely through his rumpled suit.

Karen Walsh, Casey's director of communications, defends Press and the job he does for the campaign.

"It's common in campaigns now to document what your opponent says," Walsh explains. "Especially with a candidate like our opponent, who says different things to different audiences in different parts of the state. Phil Press is an effective tool to keep the candidate honest and consistent. And we've documented some of Rendell's inconsistencies, so Phil is a very good campaign tool. This is a tough campaign, and we think it's fair to scrutinize what a candidate says and does, and that's what we've done."

Walsh says that Press' job is just as Press describes it, a necessary part of modern politics.

"The voters expect a certain amount of scrutiny," she says. "They realize campaigns are more sophisticated now. So I wouldn't characterize Phil's job as negative campaigning, it's just the way campaigns are run these days."

Walsh pooh-poohs the assertion that Casey backed away from Rendell's early public call for a positive campaign without mudslinging. According to Walsh, Rendell talked up the positive, issues-driven campaign rhetoric, but then immediately turned around and ran radio and TV ads calling Casey a liar. She says that Rendell has been distorting his own record on any number of issues and that he doesn't like to be called on his distortions -- and without someone like Phil Press to document what Rendell says, he'd probably get away with it.

Dan Fee, Walsh's opposite number in the Rendell camp, says people are sick of the politics of negativity, and he's proud his candidate has taken the moral high road.

"We don't have someone tailing Bob Casey full time," Fee says. "We sent a person to fewer than five Casey events the entire campaign, and all but once, Casey's staffers asked us to leave. And the reason why we haven't done it is because early on we decided to run on the issues, not by trying to tear down our opponent. Phil is indicative of the kind of campaign Casey is running."

As for Press himself, Fee says he has no problem with him. He blames Press' employer.

"The responsibility for the negativity of this campaign rests squarely on the shoulders of Bob Casey," he says. "He said in your paper that the buck stops with him, and he approves everything that comes out of his office. Phil is not some naive kid duped into playing political hardball, that's not what I'm saying. He certainly knows what his job is and buys into the smear tactics. I'm saying that Phil's just doing what he's been hired and paid to do. The ultimate responsibility belongs to the candidate."

Fee says that, while there's a Phil Press working for lots of candidates, and getting dirt on your opponent is not exactly unheard of in politics, he thinks the tactic of standing three feet away from the candidate at all times and running a video camera is unfair and intrusive.

A couple of months ago, Rendell spoke to a crowd of supporters at an NAACP function. Phil Press caught footage of Rendell closing his eyes for several seconds, and the next day the Casey camp issued a press release that refers to the moment. Rendell, according to the release, was sleeping at the NAACP event, a clear indication of his insensitivity to minorities. Then there was the NARAL incident.

When Rendell won the endorsement of the National Abortion Rights Action League, he held a press conference with NARAL President Kate Michelman to announce the endorsement. In answering a reporter's question, Michelman said some rather disparaging things about Casey's stance on abortion (he's pro-life) and referenced Casey's father, the late Gov. Bob Casey Sr., who was probably Pennsylvania's most famous pro-life Democrat, as well as conservatives Jesse Helms and Pat Robertson. Later that day, Casey's camp sent this to reporters around the state:

"Can you believe it? Philadelphia's Ed Rendell didn't really mean it when he said he wanted to run a positive campaign!" screams the press release. "Serial prevaricator Rendell showed his true colors today, launching a wild, intemperate, negative attack, comparing Bob Casey to Jesse Helms and Pat Robertson."

The statement fails to mention that the comments in question came from Michelman, not Rendell. In fact, Michelman isn't mentioned at all in the release. Nor is the nature of the "wild, intemperate, negative attack" discussed, or the words used. But the press release does end with this food for thought: "No wonder folks say you can't trust Ed Rendell."

"I think we've been very fair to Mr. Rendell," Walsh says matter-of-factly. "To hear him tell it, the Philadelphia School District is nirvana in Pennsylvania. We disagree. His record on the schools and everything he did as mayor is a legitimate part of the campaign. We want to make sure the voters get the truth."

Rendell's record on the Philadelphia school system is a perfect example of how rival political campaigns can see opposite sides of the same set of facts and both sides can still be essentially correct. Casey's camp says that the test scores for Philadelphia schoolchildren are abysmal, that the system is rife with mismanagement and that it's so poorly handled by local officials that the state has to step in and take over. This is true. Rendell's people argue that test scores improved during his tenure as mayor, and, while former school superintendent David Hornbeck's lofty ideas may have crashed and burned, at least Rendell made a good-faith effort to improve the schools, and that that effort was just beginning to show dividends when he left office. This is also true.

Rendell says he was instrumental in implementing full-day kindergarten in Philadelphia public schools, while Casey counters that the full-day initiative was forced by the order of Judge Doris Smith. Again, both statements are true. While Smith did order the plan implemented, Rendell called for full-day kindergarten long before that, and he was pleased at the judge's order. Around and around it goes, with charges of deception and misleading statements flying, leaving the voters wondering who's lying. Technically, both sides are telling the truth, but you have to dig around for it.

Walsh laughs derisively at the Rendell "truth squad," a band of Rendell supporters crisscrossing the state debunking Casey's assertions about Rendell's record and calling for an end to negative campaigning.

The problem is, says Walsh, that the truth squad didn't come up with one untruth from the Casey camp.

"When reporters asked me about the truth squad, I immediately said, ŒGreat. Let's talk about some of the untruths they uncovered.' And you know what? Nobody could come up with even one. So while they're not happy about what we're saying, they have yet to come up with even one lie."

It's all about spin, says Walsh. Rendell's playing the victim, she says, and he pretends to be wounded by Casey's hammering. He's got the media and even some of the voters buffaloed into seeing it his way, and therefore she finds herself having to answer for the negativity of the campaign. But what some call negative, Walsh just calls politics.

Consultant and Fox News political analyst Larry Ceisler agrees with Walsh, to a point. He says that negative campaigning works and that Rendell's people have used that negativity to their advantage.

"I don't know if Ed's so much playing the victim, but he constantly uses Casey's ads to say, ŒSee? He [Casey] only has negative things to say about me, because he has no record or experience of his own,'" Ceisler says. "Casey isn't as negative as Rendell would have you believe, but by crying foul he gets the voters' sympathy and attention. But the fact is that negative campaigning works and is an essential part of most campaigns. If it didn't work, they wouldn't do it."

Ceisler says that voters don't usually vote for a candidate, they vote against the other guy. And in that sense, Casey is following a time-honored strategy: make the other guy seem completely unworthy of the office. Will it work in this campaign? Should Casey abandon the throat-cutting and go positive? Ceisler says that Tuesday will tell the tale, but it all comes down to turnout.

"Rendell is running a near-perfect campaign," Ceisler says, adding that "the only one I've seen run as well in recent years" was Sen. Arlen Specter's against Lynn Yeakel in '92. "If Rendell gets a high turnout in Philadelphia and the surrounding suburbs, he wins. Casey should spend the last week of the campaign doing positive ads and pray for rain on Election Day."

If Casey loses, says Ceisler, he should blame his media consultants, who Ceisler says have done him a grave disservice.

"Casey has run a wonderful grassroots campaign, but his commercials are just not very well done," he muses. "They don't really say anything and don't make him look like a strong, forceful leader. He has some of the best political consultants money can buy, but they've failed to effectively communicate his message."

If the voters are completely turned off by negative campaigning and the politics of personality, they haven't shown it in the polling booth, which is the only place they can really make their voices heard, Ceisler says. Highly paid campaign consultants will continue to dig up dirt and hammer away at opponents until the voting public finally has enough. Unless and until that happens, expect to see a lot more Philly Presses following rival candidates' every move for campaign fodder. If Ceisler and Karen Walsh are right, it's just the way modern campaigns are run. The effectiveness of that strategy will be debated starting Wednesday morning, and for a long time to come.

Browse The
May 16, 2002
Issue

Join the
City Paper
Mailing List




	search citypaper.net