|
A Committee of 70 interview with Larry Farnese
 As part of our spotlight on hot election contests in the April 22 primary, the Committee of 70 has asked the Democratic candidates for the 1st District Senate seat to meet with us for short question-and-answer sessions about the issues and the campaign. We'll present these in the days leading up to the vote. Links to ongoing media coverage of the campaign are on this page.
Attorney Larry Farnese spoke with us over coffee at a Cosi restaurant near his home in Center City:
70: You're running in a district where Vincent Fumo has been in office for 30 years, re-elected repeatedly by voters. Your opponents recently accused you of being a "surrogate" for Fumo. They meant that as a criticism -- but wouldn't that be what the voters in the district want?
Farnese: My opponents were attacking me before Senator Fumo got out of the race, trying to make up all kind of conspiracy theories. The truth of the matter is that I'm the one candidate in this race that is appealing to every single constituency, all the different neighborhoods. One of my opponents [John Dougherty], when I was in the race with the Senator said that I was in the race [just] to take away votes from him. Well, where? In Center City -- where Larry Farnese ran and almost beat Babette Josephs? In the progressive 30th ward and 2nd ward? In South Philadelphia, where Larry Farnese is a very respected name? My uncle Ben was the principal of South Philly High. We have strong name recognition throughout this entire district.
70: Anyone who wins the seat will go in without the sort of clout that Sen. Fumo has built. How can you make an impact?
Farnese: There's no doubt all three of us would go in as first-year legislators. I think two things are important: what kind of educational expertise you bring to the table, and two, what is your ability to work with people, build coalitions, and do the heavy lifting that being a legislator requires?
On the first point, as an attorney, I have been dealing with complex legal issues for over 12 years. Furthermore, I have the experience to know what types of damage ambiguous laws can cause. I have been interpreting the laws and applying the laws that this state legislature has been passing for the last 12 years. No other candidate in this race can say that. Every day, judges and lawyers make public policy arguments because the legislature is not clear on what the law is supposed to do. On the casino vote, a lot of legislators admitted that they didn't read it. It was too long.
70: Your stance on the waterfront casinos is that they should go elsewhere. Is it realistic to think they might?
Farnese: I'm looking at this realistically. By the time 2009 comes around, either the lawsuit that's pending right now is going to come down in favor of the casinos, and they're going to be building already. Or the lawsuit's going to go the other way, and the neighbors and community groups are going to win, and the casinos are going to have to look at other venues. And on both occasions I'm going to be there for the comminuty. I'm going to do exactly what they want.
If the casinos do happen to be built, I'm going to work for a very strong Community Benefit Agreement. I'm going to be working in Harrisburg to ensure that the casinos follow throuigh on their promises. And I'm going to working to bring back the kind of funding that's going to help those communities develop. Flip side, if the casinos are not built, then I'm going to be right there supporting [State Sen.] Mike O'Brien's position and the position Senator Fumo has taken in the past, which is to force an amendment to the gaming act for re-siting.
70: How can you cut through city-versus-state conflicts to deal with guns in Philadelphia?
Farnese: It's all about how you are perceived in Harrisburg. Are you a polarizing fiugure? Are you somewhat naive? I think when you're talking about getting real gun legislation passed, like a requirement to report lost or stolen guns, that's a reality than can be done. I think a one-gun-a-month law is a possibility, with the right legislator. The solution to crime that people aren't really talking about is giving people in my district in Philadelphia a living wage. I want to go after poverty the same way the other candidates are talking about one-gun-a-month, with the same enthusiasm. It's not a real catchy topic, but I think its' a real solution to the crime in the city. You do that for people and they have less incentive to go on the street and get involved in crime. And you give nonviolent repeat offenders an opportunity to get back into society and be productive, give them skill sets. I support programs to give nonviolent offenders educational programs.
70: Should the state be more involved in healthcare coverage?
Farnese: When they told my father that the bone-marrow transplant was an experimental procedure and not covered [by insurance], that was a personal experience with healthcare. When they told me in 1995 that they weren't going to pay for the procedure to be done by his own doctor. And I had to fight the insurance company and HMO. I was just a young lawyer at that time, and that was a battle I was lucky to win, but for every family that wins there's probbaly 10 or 15 that lose that battle. That's a personal experience I bring of fighting for insurance coverage for my own dad.
It's also important to get 767,000 uninsiured Pennsylvanians immediate healthcare coverage, and I believe the quickest way to do that is to follow what the legislature just did, the ABC program that just came through. It's not as extensive Governor Rendell's Prescription for PA, but it does offer what we need and it does cover all Pensylvanians. I also support allowing all medical practitioners -- midwives, nurse practitioners-- to operate at the highest level of their training, to give certain types of exams. So people won't need to go to the emergency rooms for initial treatment.
70: Can Philadelphia schools be fixed?
Farnese: We have a funding gap....In suburbs, the high real estate taxes pay for schools. The funding formula right now, the costing-out study that the general assembly passed does not pay part attention to that topic. I think we need to amend that so that each municipality's ability to funds its own school district is taken into account. That's one way to addfress the funding gap. The money is there. We need to get Philadelphia its fair share.
70: You previously were endorsed by the Fraternal Order of Police, but now you're running against a labor leader [John Dougherty] who has been endorsed by the FOP and other unions. Can you surivive without the backing of labor?
Farnese: Without union support I think the voters are the ones who make the difference. I was the only candidate who had been endorsed by the FOP before, because of my position on handgun violence, my support for police funding, and my willingness to work with the district attorney and the legialative units in the House that would ering back legislation that was good for crime prevention.
I believe my Liberty City [LesBiGayTrans Democratic Club] endorsement is extremely significant. That community is supportive of not just LGBT issues. They have their finger on the pulse of every issue that's important to voters in this district. The progressive community knows that this race is not just about who we're going to have next as a Senator, but it's about the next generation. People who go to the polls are going to have a chance to select a leader who's going to represent them for the next ten years, specifically throughout Michael Nutter's administration. Whoever goes to Harrisburg for Philadelphia, when it comes to funding, and purse strings, is one of the most significant choices this city has faced.
* * *
|
