Sit-in at Costello office deserves context

As a constituent of Representative Costello’s and one of the fifteen citizens that peacefully occupied his office on Thursday, December 7th, I’m writing to provide context for the sit-in and to share my concerns with the way our Representative characterized this action in a fundraising email sent out by his team on Thursday afternoon. Seeing as he was not present, it sounds like he may have been misled about the nature of our visit.

A few points of clarification I will offer up front.

- Our actions were entirely non-violent and lawful.

- We arrived in the congressman’s office at 9:00 AM and left of our own accord at 1:30 PM.

- We were never asked by staffers to leave his office.

- We were asked to step away from an unoccupied staffer’s desk area and back into the “designated public waiting area.”

- We complied with this request.

- We were not informed staff was calling the police.

- When police arrived to mediate the situation, no citations were administered and no arrests were made.

- Our interaction with the police was respectful

Imagine my chagrin at reading the following in a fundraising email that came from the congressman’s office later that afternoon, “There has just been more evidence of the inappropriate and disruptive behavior from the radical left. They are invading our offices, staging sit ins, yelling at hard working Americans, and not leaving when asked. They are in our offices across the country, on our private property, and disturbing the peace instead of having a civil, political debate.”

Our group represented a coalition of constituents that spanned a wide range of ages, faith traditions, and a diversity of local organizations including Phoenixville’s The Way Forward, the district 6 Concerned Constituent Action Group, Sierra Club, AFSCME local, Food and Water Watch, WCU students, a United Methodist clergywoman, and a Moderator of the United Universalist Church of the Restoration.

To my knowledge the property we sat and stood upon was public and funded by taxpayer dollars. So I have to ask, is it really all that “radical” to sit peacefully in a congressman’s office and ask that he not vote for cuts to Medicare benefits? To date our congressman still refuses to go on public record as to whether he supports the current version of the “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.” Many provisions of that very bill strike me as far more radical than any of the actions taken in the congressman’s office Thursday.

A few points Congressman Costello’s constituents made on Thursday regarding the bill:

· 60% of the tax cuts are going to the richest 1 % of Americans

· Ultimately, to pay for those cuts, the bill will raise taxes on 87 million middle class families

· Strips 13 million Americans of their health insurance and will raise market premiums for millions of others

· Mandates automatic Medicare cuts of $25 B next year and $400 Billion over 10 years

· Adds $1 Trillion to the national debt which will result in cuts to medicare, Medicaid and education

· Opens the Arctic National Wilderness refuge to drilling

As for myself, I took a day off from my full time job as a software analyst at IBM to express my concern for the haste with which the bill had been conceived and debated, and to better understand how the congressman’s “Yes” vote on the House version of the bill actually aligned with his own stated values.

Many of the congressman’s colleagues have spoken openly that they believe we currently do not have the revenues to fund critical healthcare programs like CHIP, which Congressman Costello has gone on the record to say he supports. Now I want to hear from the congressman why he believes voting for this tax bill won’t undermine the sustainable economic future for that program.

I grew up in the West Chester borough and this part of the country is close to my heart, and I am concerned at the lasting consequences this legislation will have on Chester County and all of District 6 if it is to pass.

I urge Congressman Costello to walk back his characterization of his constituents as “radical,” and to listen to the myriad of concerns we have with the legislation before him. His constituents deserve to hear from him on this issue.

Luke Bauerlein

Phoenixville