The 62 Project: #’s 21 and 41
#21. Speaker of the House Pete Schwartzkopf (14th RD).
The District: The 14th Rd became a Sussex County District following the 2002 redistricting. It had previously been a blue-collar Elsmere-based district. Schwartzkopf has held the seat since its inception, having initially defeated Michael Meoli in the 2002 General Election, 4530-3932. His only other tough challenge came in 2010, where he overcame the Sussex surge for Christine O’Donnell, by defeating Christopher Weeks, 6425-5526. The district should still be considered a swing district, with 7540 D’s; 6431 R’s; and 4321 I’s. Unlike most of the rest of Sussex County, however, the D’s here tend to vote D, and the Tea Party influence is not as pronounced. There is a large and active gay community in the district, and Schwartzkopf has been a strong supporter of equal rights. This is an extreme easternmost district that encompasses portions of Lewes and most of Rehoboth. All of it is to the east of Route 1. Here’s the map (PDF). Obama edged Romney in 2012 in the 14th, 6398-6232. While I haven’t checked, I’d bet that the 14th is the only Sussex RD to vote for Obama, making it the most unlike Sussex of all the Sussex districts.
Pete Schwartzkopf ran for the 14th RD seat following a 25-year career with the Delaware State Police. Police captain and troop commander. As we have learned, this is not an uncommon career path for Delaware politicos. In his youth, he was a lifeguard at Delaware beaches. During his early legislative years, Schwartzkopf also had a security gig at the Delaware State Fair, but apparently ran afowl afoul of Senator Thurman Adams, which ended the moonlighting. He now calls himself a full-time legislator, and indeed he is.
When I started the 62 Project, I had Pete Schwartzkopf ranked 13th on my initial list. That was largely because I thought that he, as House Majority Leader, effectively pushed through key progressive bills, including civil unions. He also was able to get the at-the-time controversial ‘revenue enhancement’ package through a fractured House. This helped balance the budget during the early Markell years. He wasn’t afraid to use legislative power to get things done. While I didn’t always admire his tactics, I respected the results. The role of House Majority Leader requires tough tactics in tough times.
However, as Speaker of the House, Schwartzkopf has governed as if he were still Majority Leader. Aided and abetted by an equally-enthusiastic, though far less skilled, arm-breaker, Valerie Longhurst. Pete not only handpicked Longhurst to be his successor, he insisted that they both be elected as a team or he would not serve as Speaker. Uh, I wonder if he’d be willing, or in any position, to make the same demand today. Put simply, Pete Schwartzkopf is in danger of being a one-term Speaker, and not because the D’s are in any way facing the loss of the House chamber.
Schwartzkopf’s term as speaker has been defined by his abandonment of the House as a harmonious institution where legislators and staff generally like and respect each other, and work as a team. He, instead, has opted for fear. Punishing those who opposed him. Keeping staff walking on eggshells while treating them as if they are unnecessary and eminently-replaceable. There can be no other explanation as to why he does this other than it reflects his personality and experience. This approach is so far removed from his predecessors, Lonnie George, Chuck Hebner, Brad Barnes, Terry Spence, and Bob Gilligan, just to take it back to 1982, that it either reflects a conscious change or a complete lack of understanding of what makes the institution work. He has destroyed the institutional comity, which is a tragedy. He has also buried progressive bills in unfavorable committees, like minimum wage and death penalty repeal.
Which is why he’s dropped to #21 on this list. He deserves ample props for his legislative leadership up until his time as speaker. Equal rights for all is a landmark accomplishment, and Pete played a huge role in bringing that to fruition.
However, this is the Pete(r) Principle at work. Bob Gilligan was an effective and admired Speaker. Schwartzkopf was an effective Majority Leader. Pete Schwartzkopf appears to lack the judgment, temperament, or affinity to the institution, to serve as Speaker. Barring some real soul-searching, he could well be one and done. On merit.
#41. Rep. Joe Miro (22nd RD).
The District: One of the few remaining New Castle County RD’s where an R has a reasonable chance. This Hockessin/White Clay Creek-based district (here’s the map) has a marginal R registration edge. Razor-thin, actually. 6588 D’s; 6794 R’s; and 5234 I’s. While many of the registered D’s no doubt are those who switched their registration to vote for Jack Markell, voters in the 22nd voted for Obama over Romney by a 6947-6586 margin. As close to a traditional (aka non-Tea Party) swing district as you’ll find in Delaware. In 2012, portions of the 22nd effectively merged with portions of the 20th following redistricting, which had the impact of eliminating one R Rep District (the 20th, moved to Sussex County, currently represented by Steve Smyk) in New Castle County. The two incumbents, Miro and Nick Manolakos, faced off against each other in a primary, which Miro won by a 977-630 margin. This principally reflects the fact that Miro had previously represented more of the constituents in the newly-drawn district than Manolakos had.
Rep. Joe Miro has had a long and distinguished career. Then he became a legislator. 31 years as a foreign languages teacher in Delaware public schools (1970-2001). Starting in 1992, he added New Castle County Councilman to his resume, and became a state representative in 1998, replacing the retiring Joe Petrilli. Petrilli, of course, didn’t retire, just became one of Dover’s most powerful lobbyists. (Trivia question: Who did Miro defeat in the 1998 R primary for State Rep?) Keep reading for the answer.
Miro has been a moderate R, and played a key role in helping to pass legislation prohibiting talking on a cellphone while driving. However, he voted against civil unions (in contrast to his future primary opponent, Nick Manolakos), against the minimum wage increase, and, of course, against marriage equality.
So, when defining Miro as a moderate, one is simply contrasting him with the increasing ‘crazy’ of the Republican Party. He has become more conservative and more doctrinaire in his votes as he’s aged. He, like Deborah Hudson, could well be the final vestiges of what once was a flourishing Republican Party in New Castle County. With Miro likely facing a three-way race against Democrat John MacKenzie and Libertarian Steve Newton, 2014 could possibly be his swan song.
Time for that trivia question answer: In 1998, Miro defeated Mike Ramone, 751-582. Now you know. Now I go.
Tags: El Somnambulo, Featured, Nick Manolakos, Rep. Joseph Miro, Rep. Pete Schwartzkopf, Rep. Valerie Longhurst, Steve Tanzer Delaware
“then he became a legislator.” Hah hah El Som.
This may be the year that the good people of the 22nd District send a D to Dover. It’s never happened before but Miro ran unopposed for much of his tenure and the registration has always favored him, even when he had an opponent. Not so much anymore. We have a brilliant candidate this year in John MacKenzie. He’s smart and energetic. He’s thought a lot about public service and how to represent the 22nd. Since he is retiring from UD this year he will be a full-time legislator. He was a door-knocking dynamo when he ran against Lianne Sorenson for the old senate seat up here. Many of the voters in this district have already met John, and voted for him. It has hurt my feelings for years that I’ve been represented by an R in the House. I’m looking forward to doing everything I can to help John change that.
Speaker Pete is a nice guy and I am sure he could be a great speaker but when you keep comparing the job he is doing to that of Bob Gilligan than no, he won’t be a good speaker in your eyes. I am not defending him, I think that the Speaker should be Helene, but then again I am not a Rep
MacKenzie sounds good, but does Delaware’s one well regarded Libertarian represent a fly in the ointment?
No libertarian will win office in DE for a very long time! Spiegleman(?) is the closest you will get
AustinA: I’d respectfully argue that there are a lot of people who do NOT think Pete is a nice guy.
They think he screws them because he can. Not because he has to, or because it’s in his best interests to screw them.
Jason,
I dunno the answer about Steve Newton. IF, it’s a big IF, voters line up on ideology Newton would theoretically pull more votes from Miro than MacKenzie. But I’m not convinced that most voters know what a Libertarian is. With the D-R split so close in the 22nd these days both candidates will need support from the “Others” in the district and I don’t know how that will break. Miro has years and years of splashing his road-fund money around the district and that’s a tough thing to beat. But MacKenzie is younger and driven and he’s going to talk to every swing voter between now and November. Plus, he’ll have support from up-ticket that won’t be available to either Miro or Newton. May the stars align.
Much of the 14th is WEST of Rte 1. The map is hard to read but “highway one”is route 1. I live west of route 1and I am in the 14th. The district still goes west as far as Rehoboth Bay/Indian River and includes manufactured home and also farm communities
Gotcha, thanks. I find those maps real tough to read.
Miro should get props for being a cosponsor of death penalty repeal.
You’re correct. You can find the bill’s sponsorship here:
http://legis.delaware.gov/LIS/LIS147.nsf/2bede841c6272c888025698400433a04/c7bff1bfb2558e9385257b2600724583?OpenDocument&Highlight=0,death,penalty
“Schwartzkopf’s term as speaker has been defined by his abandonment of the House as a harmonious institution where legislators and staff generally like and respect each other, and work as a team. He, instead, has opted for fear. Punishing those who opposed him. Keeping staff walking on eggshells while treating them as if they are unnecessary and eminently-replaceable.”
I can only speculate as to the source of this or the specific situation, but I would just caution that there are often two sides to any story, and it would be prudent to obtain both before making a generalization such as this.
As for my experience, in several conversations with House staffers I have heard lots of praise for the way the Speaker has related with staff. While there is no doubt an expectation for employees to perform their duties at a high level, the Speaker has been repeatedly described as a man who is very approachable and down to earth- treating his staff as equals rather than just employees. He’s been known to take care in them as people first, and workers second. That’s high praise for any employer, and the atmosphere as I understand it couldn’t be farther from how you represented it.
Gee, that’s interesting. I’ve talked to a lot of people, a LOT of people, who are either representatives, staff (both sides of the aisle), lobbyists, old Leg Hall hands, and plenty of people with no axes to grind, and almost to a person, they disagree with your assessment.
Not one, not one, has ever spontaneously poured out their love for the great humanitarian that you portray him to be. Quite the opposite.
Perhaps YOU would be served by recognizing that there are two sides to every story.
Except when virtually everyone is telling the same side of the story every time, the anecdotal eventually becomes the
empirical.
Nice try, though.
Anyone who has to work so hard to emphasize how many people they’ve talked to probably hasn’t talked to any more than a few like minded individuals with the same stories to tell. What am I saying though? What do I know? You’re the insider.
Have any “eminently replaceable” staffers been, ya know, replaced? If so, were they necessary?
Perhaps we should elect a speaker that had an affair with his or her staffer. Now THAT is harmonious.
There’s dead wood in every organization, and the more I hear about Leg Hall, the deader and more incestuous the place sounds. It would not surprise me if Pete had a lot of housecleaning to do of useless hangers-on. The parties, not taxpayers, should be footing the bill for their operatives.
There are more ‘operatives’ there now than at any time. In fact, the staffing is at least as high as it was during Terry Spence’s final years, when the R Caucus staff was nothing more than a political operation. Bob Gilligan said he would change that. He did. Schwartzkopf has reversed course.
Thanks, Dan, for keepin’ it real. Not much I can say to the deniers, other than keep on believin’.
I also find it ironic that Pete supporters view what I wrote as an all-out attack on him. I think he can still be an effective speaker if he understands the differences required to be a speaker as opposed to being majority leader, and acts on it.
In the abstract, the point of power is to acquire more power. On a basic human level I would say that it is unlikely that a speaker could lose his grip after only one term. There is too much psychological and institutional momentum that moves in the direction of keeping power once attained.
Knowing nothing about this specific case, that’s just my observation of humanity in general.
This case is a bit different. Pete has not necessarily moved to consolidate power, rather he’s ‘rewarded and punished’ legislators based on where they stood. Even caucus members who supported him in his narrow victory are having second thoughts.
He can still do what you say, but he’s got some work to do.
As to ‘institutional momentum’, what he’s done reflects a sea change as to how the Speaker traditionally operates within the institution. Which has led to the second thoughts.
I’ve got to say it, I like Pete. He’s a great representative and very responsive to his constituents (I was one, so I know), and he’s straight forward as a legislator. I know he left a bad taste in people’s mouths when he did a little house cleaning when he took over as Speaker, but that’s life, as the cliché goes, “A new broom sweeps clean.”
We need a lot more “sweeping” in Dover.
Numbers as high as Terry Spence? Pete reversing Gilligans course?
Facts, details and numbers, please.
Leave the feelings for The View. ” ‘cuz he’s a meanie” is hardly a foundation for being a one termer. Especially if that meanie is getting the job done.
Schwartzkopf is a bully. If he likes your issue you’re in luck, but if not (and by if not I mean if you are fighting for the 98% or if you care about good government), then he might as well be a Republican with power. The House used to be the good chamber and bills went to the Senate to die. Now the Senate is the good chamber and the House is the one where bills go to die. We had an opportunity to have a good legislature where bills go to have a fair hearing and hopefully progress if they move our state forward. We don’t. You can thank Pete for that. 21 is generous.
Rep. Miro is also willing to publicly support driving privilege cards for undocumented Delawareans. That does not excuse his other votes listed in the post, but I thought it noteworthy…