Senator Casey prevails against GOP newcomer and 'war on coal'

Incumbent Pennsylvania Sen. Bob Casey (D) won reelection against a candidate who tried to make an issue of Democrats' position on coal.

Tim Shaffer/REUTERS
Sen. Bob Casey Jr. (D) of Pennsylvania speaks to supporters during his election night rally after defeating Republican challenger Tom Smith in Scranton, Pa., Tuesday.

Sen. Bob Casey (D) of Pennsylvania overcame a long-shot challenge by self-made and self-financing coal executive Tom Smith, despite being significantly outspent in the race.

Not only did the freshman senator face a challenger with an unusual financial advantage, he also beat back what Republicans had hoped would be a decisive issue in Pennsylvania and other coal states across the nation: that President Obama and the Democrats were waging a war on coal that hurt jobs and the economy.

"While we came up a little big short tonight, let me tell you it remains the same: We must repeal Obamacare. We must stop deficit spending. We must end this war on American energy, this war on Pennsylvania coal. And most importantly, we must get this economy roaring again," Mr. Smith said in his concession speech Tuesday night.

With a war chest of some $20.3 million, Smith mounted an aggressive television ad campaign that dubbed Senator Casey as "the invisible senator," who hadn't passed a single bill in six years, "even to help jobs." A newcomer to politics, Smith brought the race to within single digits, but was never able to overcome the incumbency advantage and Casey's popularity in the state.

A centrist with a conservative record on social issues, Casey, who raised $12.5 million, never fell behind in the race. He appeared to engage the challenger relatively late in the race, after polls signaled that Smith was making gains. His ad campaigns dubbed Smith a "tea party extremist" whose coal mines endangered workers.

A former state treasurer and the son of a former governor, Casey launched his first Senate bid with significant name recognition the strong support of the national party establishment, eager to find a candidate who could defeat then-Sen. Rick Santorum. His support of conservative social issues, especially his opposition to abortion rights, riled many liberals in Democratic Party ranks, but also made him a tough target for GOP challengers, including Smith this year and Senator Santorum, who were both held to 41 percent of the vote.

Exit polling signals that 6 in 10 Pennsylvania voters called the economy their top issue, with only 1 in 8 concerned about deficits – a leading GOP issue. Just over half of voters said that government was doing too many things better left to businesses and individuals. Independent voters fell out evenly between Casey and Smith, according to the Associated Press.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.