Anti-pipeline candidates say they were targeted
Two candidates for the state House of Representatives in the June 2 primary election, both ardent opponents of the Mariner East Pipeline construction project, were the targets of television attack ads and a media blitz in the days and weeks just prior to the election, according to the candidates.
The ads, along with other media opportunities slamming the candidates — incumbent state Rep. Danielle Friel-Otten, D155th, of Uwchlan and her close ally, small business owner Ginny
Kerslake of West Whiteland — were paid for with socalled “dark money,” funds funneled through shadowy political action committees (PACs) that do not reveal their intentions or supporters in the ads themselves.
“If we want a different kind of politics, at some point we need to not just ask for a different kind of politics; we need to vote for a different kind of politics, and we actually have to do a different kind of politics,” Friel-Otten said in a press announcement issued about the ads on Monday, less than 24 hours before the polls opened. “Some days, that’s really hard, especially when the baseless attacks are personal, filled with falsehoods by faceless cowards. Voters deserve better, and our children certainly deserve a better example.”
“Special interests are afraid of us because we’re threatening to provide a real voice for residents of Chester County,” said Kerslake, who is a candidate for the Democratic nomination for the 167th Legislative District, a seat held by a fellow Democrat, Kristine Howard, since 2019. “I can only hope that my opponent disavows these ads and allows the people of our community, to decide the outcome of this election, rather than dark money.”
In unofficial returns from the Chester County Voters Services Office, Friel-Otten appeared to have secured the Democratic nomination for a second-term, topping her challenger, political newcomer Rose Danese, with 7,256 votes, or 74 percent, to 2,492 votes, or 25 percent. Kerslake appeared to have fallen short of beating Howard for the nomination, winning 4,289 votes, or 40 percent, to Howard’s 6,209 votes, or 59 percent.
The television ads, seen dozens of times over the weekend, do not refer to Friel-Otten’s and Kerslake’s opposition to the Mariner East pipeline, which runs through Uwchlan, West Whiteland and East Whiteland
and which has been the subject of heated protests over the past year or more. Both candidates said, however, that it seemed clear to them that their stance was the fire behind the attacks.
The one targeting FrielOtten was paid for by a PAC called Building for America’s Future, an organization that is not found in any Google search. Likewise, the ads that boost Howard’s campaign over Kerslake were paid for a PAC called Stronger Pennsylvania, also not found on the internet. (There is an organization called Building America’s Future associated with former Gov. Ed Rendell that is not behind the ads.)
The two PACs share an address in Pittsburgh tied to a law firm there, Kerslake said. The Strong Pennsylvania PAC spent $157,984 on the media campaign while Building for America’s Future spent $125,500, records shared by the two women’s campaigns showed.
The ads against FrielOtten
complain that although she had not gotten any legislation passed during her 18 months in office, she had spent thousands of dollars on “perks,” including stereo speakers and a rug. Friel-Otten pointed out that among her legislative accomplishments involved land at Marsh Creek State Park that was turned over to local government for use as open space. She also said that she had stayed with the budget she had been given by the state House of Representatives for her office, and that those funds do not come out of her annual salary.
“There is no doubt that these ads are backlash for my unwavering stance against petrochemical and fossil fuel expansion in Pennsylvania,” she said in a statement.
“By an overwhelming margin, voters showed that their votes cannot be bought by outrageous falsehoods and mean spirited rhetoric,” she added. “I cannot tell you how many people reached out or mentioned that they stood in line or made a special trip to make sure to vote because they had seen the ads and they made it their priority to make sure they showed up for me. The amount of pride and gratitude that brings to me is indescribable. We showed the power of community over the power of special interests.”
The television spot aimed at Kerslake was different than that opposing FrielOtten in that it asked viewers to consider voting for Howard. But Kerslake said the selling point for Howard’s campaign — her support for environmental causes and endorsement by the Conservation Voters of Pennsylvania — are what won her attention in a race for county commissioner last year.
The ad attacks Kerslake for “dark money” raised in support of her 2019 race, referring to the $60,000 spent by Conservation Voters of Pennsylvania and
Food and Water Action as they campaigned on her behalf through an independent expenditure, according to her campaign. This ad then highlights Conservation Voters of Pennsylvania as a reason for supporting Howard.
“The ad itself is a contradiction, as it is being funded by actual dark money, likely from the fossil fuel industry, and probably on its own costs more than the amount of support environmental groups spent in support of Kerslake in 2019,” her campaign stated.
Kerslake said that she believed the ads played a role in the final results of the race in the 167th District.
“With a 19-point lead by my opponent as of 9 pm Friday, it appears fossil fuel special interests may have been successful in their last-ditch effort to buy this election with $158,000 in negative TV and radio ads layered with mailers and robocalls,” she said. My opponent never disavowed it, so she must have appreciated their help.” “The vote count is neither over nor official, but if we do come up short of victory it took a pandemic keeping us from on knocking doors, endorsements and efforts from the party, the governor and other PACs, and a massive war chest of fossil fuel money to stop our campaign,” she said in an e-mail Saturday. Howard did not respond to telephone calls for comment last week. However, her campaign spokesman, political consultant Marty Marks, said her campaign had nothing to do with the ads. Neither “our candidate nor anyone affiliated with our campaign had any knowledge or coordination with any outside groups,” Marks said in an e-mail. “We also believe any efforts by outside groups had negligible effects on the outcome of our race given that the communications from the outside groups on television and in the mail came in the last five days before Election Day after nearly 85 percent of the vote had already been cast by mail. Friel-Otten, who has been attacked in earlier television advertisements over her opposition to the pipeline, said she had no reason to think the “dark money” ads would disappear in the fall General Election. But she said she did not think it would make a difference in the eventual results. “I think their money would obviously be better spent elsewhere based on the election outcome,” she said. “My constituents are well informed and saw through it. I won more than 74 percent of the vote. We had one of the highest margin victories in the state among contested primaries. “It all just goes to show how much they have to gain by electing good little button-pushers who let them control the legislature, they’re willing to waste that much money. In a global pandemic, there are a lot of great places money like that could go to serve people in real need,” she said. To contact staff writer Michael P. Rellahan call 610-696-1544.