A new precedent, but is it a good one?

Last week we were the first to break the story of state Senator Bob Regola stepping down and likely being replaced by Kim Ward. Now that it has officially happened, political campaigns may never be the same in Pennsylvania.

If Regola had been convicted of a crime when charges were brought against him it would make sense for him to step aside, much like when state Representative Sean Ramaley stepped down after charges were filed against him in Bonusgate.

But Regola was cleared of the criminal charges. Regola is stepping down because his polling numbers are bad. Once a candidate is on the ballot should they be allowed to be replaced because they are not polling well? Should the campaign committees for both the Democrats and Republicans commission polls a week before the deadline and decided who is trailing badly and replace them on the ballot? That is effectively what has happened today. The Republicans polled the district, found out Regola was trailing badly and decided they needed to replace him with a candidate who would be stronger.

We need to wonder aloud what type of precedent this sets. Will this become a norm? Should this become a norm or should a candidate need a more valid reason to drop out and be replaced besides they can’t win?

A new precedent has been set, but is it a good one?

More Inside Edge

Below is Regola's official statement

The following is a statement from State Senator Bob Regola: 

“After much consideration, I have decided to not be a candidate for reelection to the Pennsylvania Senate. 

This has been one of the most difficult decisions I have ever faced because of my desire to see the cause of conservative reform advance in Harrisburg and because of my fondness of serving the people of the 39th District. 

For the past four years I have fought to reform our government, lower taxes, bring home Westmoreland County’s fair share from Harrisburg , and stand up for our conservative values.  I am proud of my record of the last four years and look forward to serving out my term and continuing to work on these priorities.  I want to thank the voters for the trust they placed in me. 
                                                                        

Despite my belief that I would win re-election, I am unwilling to put my family, friends and supporters through the type of negative campaign that my opponent would likely conduct.  Even though the jury acquitted me of these charges in less than 3 hours, my political opponents and some of the news media would likely spend the next several months vilifying me further. As one of the jurors has said, this was a political witch hunt, and I did not want to put my family through additional anguish. 

I am disappointed in the conduct of the media during this process.  They have focused on sensationalism more than the facts of this case.  Despite my acquittal, it is easy to see that voters can have doubts about my character given what the media unfairly wrote about me.  Their tabloid like reporting has tarnished my reputation in this community, and made it more difficult to seek reelection. 

The death of Louis Farrell was a tragedy for the Farrell family and also for mine.  Early on I attempted to reach out to the family but they rebuffed these attempts.  Since then, the trial attorney they hired to represent them has attempted to denigrate me in the press by misrepresenting my actions and most of the time, outright lying about the facts of the case to create uncertainty among the public. 

I have worked hard over the past four years to do my best to represent the people of my district.  I have done so with honesty and integrity. I want to thank my friends and supporters who wanted me to fight on.  Stepping aside helps me serve a cause greater than self and to ensure that our district has the type of representative it deserves.”