Jan 18, 2008 By Paul Sunyak 4 min read

There are a ton of reasons to vote for or against state Rep. Bill DeWeese – or any other politician, for that matter – but judging from early letters to the editor, it appears his supporters are again gearing up to focus on two: his seniority and status as a veteran. While these labels appeal to a certain segment of the population, they are by no means the only issues on which a candidate should be assessed. It’s important to look at the whole picture before deciding to vote for DeWeese or anybody else.

Let’s deal with seniority first. Certainly, it’s hard to get and nice to have. DeWeese is touting his 32 years in Harrisburg and, more importantly, his role as the only legislator from southwestern Pennsylvania who will have a seat at the state budget table.

He’s even handing out little laminated cards showing that of the 13 power brokers he deems “Pennsylvania budget leaders,” the vast majority hails from Philadelphia and its surrounding counties. That group includes Gov. Ed Rendell, House Speaker Dennis O’Brien, Rep. Dwight Evans, Sen. Mario Fumo, Rep. Mario Civera and Sen. Dominic Pileggi.

Two others hail come from northeastern Pennsylvania: Sen. Bob Mellow of Lackawanna County and Rep. Keith McCall of Carbon County. Two more come from Jefferson County in the northwestern part of the state: Sen. Joe Scarnati and Rep. Sam Smith.

So DeWeese is correct in noting his unique status in that lineup. He may be able to finagle some additional state cash here and there – and he has gotten two state prisons for his district, which is in the running for a third.

But in the big picture, who do you think is going to get the most? DeWeese, the Lone Ranger from Waynesburg, or the battalion of six power brokers from Philadelphia? DeWeese or the two other players from Jefferson County? The only way to judge how DeWeese or any other legislator stacks up against the competition is to see a breakdown of what each of them got for their districts during budget negotiations.

Have you ever seen such a list? The answer is likely “no.” And you’ll probably never see one.

So if you decide to vote for a candidate on the basis of seniority and the assumption of its related clout, you’re pretty much acting on faith.

Military service is a nice addition to one’s resume and should be respected. But how does it translate into being a good or capable legislator? In the current battle over open records, for example, has lack of military service hampered state Rep. Timothy S. Mahoney, the author of a House version of that bill?

Conversely, did DeWeese’s status as a Marine Corps veteran enable him, as House majority leader, to push that bill into law in all of last year? The answer is no. It’s the same with DeWeese’s recent rollout of a school district property tax reduction initiative.

At the budget table, will DeWeese’s ability to don a “Marine Corps” hat carry more clout than those who have no military service on their resume? It’s likely to be as much of a non-factor as you can imagine. What will profit DeWeese is political skill, which takes an entirely different form of basic training and is acquired on a completely different battlefield.

So if you support DeWeese for re-election, do so on the belief that he is the best candidate for the job, not because he has been there a long time or served in the military more than three decades ago. And if you vote against DeWeese, do so because you think he hasn’t done a good enough job and that someone else would do better.

History is rife with elected officials who had seniority and didn’t use, or abused, the power flowing from that status.

I’m also pretty sure that there have been veterans who held elected office who were poor representatives, or did jail time for actions that violated the law or public trust.

Paul Sunyak is editorial page editor of the Herald-Standard. You can reach him at 724-439-7577 or psunyak@heraldstandard.com