Campaign literature & endorsement

Here is some literature from Allegheny County Common Pleas Carrie Bengel. Bengel received one of my 5 votes for the Committee endorsement but unfortunately came up short in her bid for the endorsement. Bengel comes highly endorsed by The Pittsburgh Hoagie.

Bengel for Judge web page







Joe Luvara is another candidate for Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas. I don't really know much about Mr. Luvara and he has not responded to a request for a Q&A.

Chris Potter article

Chris Potter of the Pittsburgh City Paper did a nice article on local blogging that you should check out.

Potter blogger article

Here is a piece of it...

"In recent years, there's been a lot of talk about how paid journalists will be put out of business by bloggers and other online sources. But at least one group of people isn't buying it: the bloggers themselves.

"I don't have high hopes for bloggers adapting to the role of mainstream journalism," says Bram Reichbaum, who writes the Pittsburgh Comet (pghcomet.blogspot.com).

"I don't think blogs will ever replace professional journalism," agrees Matt Hogue of the Pittsburgh Hoagie (matth614.blogspot.com). "Most people I know don't read blogs. It's a small community."

And these are two bloggers who've had success playing the mainstream media's game. Last year, Reichbaum's blog revealed close ties between a billboard company and a since-departed city official. Hogue recently broke allegations made by a city council candidate, Anthony Coghill, about improprieties in the Democratic Party endorsement process.

Bloggers do have gripes with professional journalism. Reichbaum, for one, thinks reporters are too complacent: "When a candidate says something, why isn't that news?" he asks. Among professional journos, "There's a tendency to say, 'Oh, you hear that every election.' But it's not your job to decide that."

Of course, there are agendas and then there are agendas.

Reichbaum, for example, volunteers for city council candidate Georgia Blotzer; Hogue became Coghill's campaign manager shortly after posting the candidate's allegations. And Hogue, who backs Mayor Luke Ravenstahl, recently touched off an online debate by posting video accusing Ravenstahl's challenger, Patrick Dowd, of flip-flopping. Other bloggers began speculating about who created the video, and whether Hogue was shilling for Ravenstahl's campaign. (Hogue stresses "I'm my own person," rather than the mayor's mouthpiece. But he admits creating the video "wasn't just me. That's all I'm saying."

Coghill video

Motznik/Diven video

Coghill Tribune-Review article

Coghill article

"Pittsburgh City Council candidate Anthony Coghill scoffs at rumors that he has crammed his Beechview lawn with 500 campaign signs.

Maybe 300. Four hundred, tops, he said.

"We just decided to fill the yard, and now it's just like one big shining star up here," said Coghill, 42. It has become a neighborhood sensation, with dozens of people a day driving past to take pictures, point, laugh and sometimes swipe a sign. "It's beautiful."

It might be illegal. City zoning laws lay out restrictions for campaign signs — including no more than one along each street frontage for a home, or two along each frontage for an industrial site.

But at least they're smaller than the city limit of 12 square feet — individually, anyway. They're not illuminated, which is something else the city bans, according to Susan Tymoczko, Pittsburgh's zoning administrator.

Coghill said he has had no complaints.

"They laugh. They smile. I've not gotten one negative comment," said Coghill, whose house serves as headquarters for his campaign and for Coghill Roofing Company, his business. "Every door I knock on, they say, 'Did you see that guy on Wenzell Avenue with all the signs in his yard?' It's like a spectacle."

Coghill, who lost to outgoing City Councilman Jim Motznik by 4 percentage points in 2005, is running against three candidates in the May 19 Democratic primary. Patrick Reilly, Natalia Rudiak and Richard W. Weaver could not be reached for comment.

Reilly won the Allegheny County Democratic Committee's endorsement March 8, beating Coghill by six votes, 46 to 40. Coghill sued the committee, alleging at least one vote was cast by proxy, in violation of committee rules. The committee contested Coghill's charges in a court filing April 2.

Coghill, who had 1,500 signs made, planted hundreds on his lawn to turn the area into a distribution center.

"We put them here for people to come by and pick them up," he said. The number of people taking up his offer has dwindled from about 100 a day to about 40 a day, he said. "It's slowed down a bit, but it's still a busy place."

Getting to know Judge Anne Lazarus

Judge Anne Lazarus is a Democrat running for Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

Anne Lazarus

1. Why are you running for office?

I am running for Superior Court because I believe everyone deserves equal access to justice through the courts. If elected, I will bring nearly two decades of experience to the bench, having served as a judge in both the Criminal and Civil divisions of the Common Pleas Bench and currently on the Orphans' Court. I have tried complex civil cases and all types of criminal cases, from misdemeanors to homicide trials.
Perhaps most importantly, at a time when too many have lost faith in our political and judicial systems, I have served as the Chair of the State Conference of Trial Judges' Ethics Committee for the last four years and was recently rated "highly recommended" by the Pennsylvania Bar Association. I am as passionate now as I was when I was first appointed to the bench by then Governor Casey, in 1991. I believe that my experience, skills and ethical standards make me an ideal candidate for the Superior Court.

2. What would you like to see accomplished while you are in office?

Never having sat on the Superior Court before, it is difficult to say what opportunities I will have in that capacity. I am particularly concerned, however, with the loss of public confidence in the courts. If people do not see the courts as the final and a fair arbiter, the underpinnings of our system of government weaken. I believe it is incumbent on the courts to take clear and consistent stands on key issues facing the commonwealth, follow precedent in order to make it easier for people to understand how the law functions, and take strong measures to enact the highest ethical standards.

3. Which federal court decision do you think has most impacted society? How and why?

I believe that Roe v. Wade has, without a doubt, had the most significant impact on society. The decision remains one of the most divisive and most important in American history. There are not many Americans who are not directly affected by the Supreme Court’s ruling to allow access to abortion, and the right to obtain an abortion means so many different things to us all. That is not to say that I discount the federal court decisions dealing with discrimination, segregation, civil unions, creationism. But, in terms of a controversial issue, Roe v. Wade has impacted society directly and indirectly the most.

4. How much freedom do you think a judicial candidate should have to express his views?

Judicial candidates must be mindful that they need to be perceived as impartial, and must not blur the lines of justice by stating a personal opinion or preference. The judge must not, even by personal opinion appear to indicate that the judge will not keep an open mind and follow the law. Pennsylvanians must understand that, regardless of a judge’s personal views, he or she is bound to enforce the law of the land. Ultimately, it is for the public and Legislature to create the law and for judges to enforce it.

5. Do you think judges should be elected by the people or appointed by a commission?

I personally believe in the election of judges by the people. I analogize election of judges to jury trials. If you can have twelve members of the jury from different socio-economic, geographic and diversified backgrounds agree on a verdict, you can feel relatively confident that the jury has made the correct decision. In the same way, if I convince enough of the voting public that I have the credentials to be worthy of election, most of the time the voters make the correct choices. The worst part of running for election for judge is having to raise money. The best part of it is meeting people from all of the 67 counties and telling your story to the public. I would be in favor of merit election, and by that I mean creating higher standards for the judiciary, such as so many years in practice or a minimum rating of qualified by a non-partisan rating mechanism. I have been both appointed and elected and, although I see the problems with election of judges, the system is transparent. That would, in my opinion, be lost with appointment of judges.

6. Do you believe the composition of juries adequately and fairly reflects society at large? Why or why not? If not, what can we do to change this?

In Philadelphia, we draw our jury pools from voter registration and drivers’ license records. I believe that this goes one step beyond most counties, which solely picks jury candidates from the voter registration files. In order to strive for a composition that most fairly reflects society at large, we must attempt to encourage more minority participation in our jury pool. Judges and our administrators must find ways to make jury duty less onerous for our citizenry. Expediting trials and fairly compensating our jurors will also help. We must also educate the public so that they understand their responsibility to serve as jurors.

7. What do you perceive as the greatest obstacles to justice?

One of the greatest obstacles to justice is the lack of funding for pro se litigants, or those individuals who are not able to afford legal assistance. I have always believed in the right of all people to have equal access to the court and, to that end, have been an advocate for pro bono services in the First Judicial District of Pennsylvania.
I am a member of the board of the Philadelphia Volunteers for the Indigent Program and serve as the chairperson of the First Judicial District of Pennsylvania Judges’ Pro Bono Committee. I am also the first judge to receive the Pennsylvania Bar Association’s Judicial Award for Legal Services to the Public (Pro Bono). The award recognized my work to encourage judges to create rewards for attorneys who excel in providing pro bono legal service.

8. Do you feel the war on drugs has been effective or ineffective?

There seems to be a disproportionate number of minorities in jail as a result of the war on drugs. Statistically speaking, our county has more people in prison per capita than any other country in the Western world. As a judge, I am only responsible for enforcing the laws created by our legislative body, but it may be more reasonable and more economically effective to devise another way of dealing with the issues raised by drugs.

9. Who are your judicial role models? Why?

Former Orphan’s Court Judge Judith Jamison taught me that, as a woman, when you succeed, you should always bring two other women to follow you. She also had a tremendous reputation for knowing the law precisely. Judge Edmund S. Pawelec, for whom I clerked after law school, taught me to be a great judge. To do so requires a judge to have the law at his or her fingertips, and to be kind, patient, and understanding; to allow the attorneys in front of your to try their case and to render a decision in a timely manner. Although neither Judges Jamison nor Pawelec may have attained national prominence, they instilled in me the understanding of the characteristics necessary to be a good judge. I hope that the parties that have appeared in front of me over the years agree.

10. What would make you a good Judge?
I am hesitant to tell you why I would make a good Superior Court judge, but I believe that the Pennsylvania Bar Association’s evaluation of my candidacy answers your question best. Granting me their highest rating, “Highly Recommended,” the Association said the following:
"The Candidate has served as a common pleas judge in Philadelphia County for 18 years. She was elected to a 10-year term in November 1991 and retained for a second term in 2001. For the past five years, she has served as an Orphan's Court judge. She previously served as a law clerk and practiced law in a solo practice and later with a large firm. The Candidate serves as chair of the Ethics Committee of the State Conference of Trial Judges and is called upon for advice on ethical questions by members of both the bench and bar. She has an impressive record of facilitating settlement in a large number of cases assigned to her. The Candidate is intelligent, thoughtful, candid and scholarly, and she demonstrates superior writing ability, knowledge of the law and exceptional judicial temperament. Her advocacy of pro bono service has encouraged lawyers to participate in these programs. The candidate has mentored law students and young lawyers and has served in many capacities in community organizations. The Commission concludes that the Candidate would bring exceptional skills, experience and personal qualities to the Superior Court and would serve the court and the commonwealth with distinction."

Hilarous Jim Motznik/Michael Diven video

19th Ward District Justice candidate Michael Diven has released a Jim Motznik spoof video which can be found at Diven video.