Mar 17, 2006 By Jennifer Harr 4 min read

Michael J. Cavanagh said Thursday he will fight to remain on the primary ballot, alleging that those who want him off subscribe to “communist and dictator-type” ways of thinking. “America’s about putting your name down and letting the people decide,” said Cavanagh, one of several vying for state representative in the 51st legislative district.

The seat is held by Rep. Larry Roberts (D-South Union), but Roberts has announced he does not intend to seek another term in office. Cavanagh has filed to run as a Democrat in the May primary.

On Tuesday, Phillip Michael of Uniontown filed a challenge to Cavanagh’s nominating papers, citing a 2001 conviction for auto insurance fraud, forgery and other related charges. Michael, through attorney Kenneth B. Burkley, has alleged that those crimes are “infamous.”

Anyone convicted of an infamous crime “… shall (not) be eligible to the General Assembly, or capable of holding any office of trust or profit in this Commonwealth,” according to the state constitution.

The word “infamous” has never been defined, Cavanagh said, and courts should not be able to arbitrarily decide what does and does not fit that distinction.

He also noted that the wording in the state constitution does not mention that someone cannot run for office – just that they cannot hold office.

The portion of the constitution cited in Michael’s motion says that “no person hereafter convicted of embezzlement of public moneys, bribery, perjury or other infamous crimes, shall be eligible to the General Assembly, or capable of holding any office of trust or profit in this Commonwealth.”

Webster’s Dictionary defines infamous as “having a reputation of the worst kind,” or someone who has been “convicted of an offense bringing infamy.”

Cavanagh also questioned what makes for an office of “trust or profit.”

Through a recent conversation, Cavanagh said he has learned that several people in the House of Representatives have criminal records, and have still been permitted to serve.

“The people of the district are the ones who decide who they want to serve them. By deciding this, the courts are overstepping their bounds. Judges are interpreting the constitution the way they want to,” Cavanagh said.

He questioned Michael’s assertion that he was filing the challenge as a member of the 51st legislative district and not as a cohort of candidate Tim Mahoney’s

“When is the last heard of average citizen challenging someone?” he asked. “I guess they think that people are so gullible and dumb to believe them.”

He noted that Mahoney cried foul when he was removed from the ballot in 2004 by Roberts for paperwork problems with his nominating papers. Cavanagh said he believes that it’s “hypocritical” for someone friendly with Mahoney to file the challenge against him and alleged that Mahoney was behind the filing.

Michael said Tuesday that he made the decision to file the challenge on his own.

Cavanagh said he realizes that there are people who question why he is running, knowing that the conviction is likely going to be used to challenge his candidacy. In response, he said he tells them he is running to give people a choice, and because he believes that voters and not the undefined “infamous” crimes should decide who represents them.

He also vowed to continue fighting his conviction. Cavanagh said he is innocent of the charges and is currently appealing his case.

Cavanagh said he is still debating whether he will hire an attorney to represent him at the March 27 hearing in Pittsburgh.

“I don’t think anybody could say what I have to say as good as I do,” he said.

He represented himself during the 2004 challenge proceedings.

The hearing is scheduled for Monday at 9:30 a.m. in Pittsburgh. In addition to having Cavanagh removed from the ballot, the petition asks Cavanagh to pay court costs.