ShareThis Page
Lt. governor candidates John Fetterman, Jeff Bartos point out sharp differences |

Lt. governor candidates John Fetterman, Jeff Bartos point out sharp differences

Wes Venteicher | Tribune-Review
Lieutenant governor candidates John Fetterman (left) and Jeff Bartos flank WPXI anchor and debate moderator Katherine Amenta before their debate Saturday. Oct. 6, 2018

Lieutenant governor candidates John Fetterman and Jeff Bartos pointed out the sharp differences in their campaigns in a debate Saturday in Pittsburgh, covering their opposing views on abortion, the death penalty, marijuana legalization and other hot-button issues.

Fetterman, 49, the Democratic mayor of Braddock, cast himself and his running mate, Gov. Tom Wolf, as allies to unions and protectors of women’s rights.

Bartos, 46, a businessman from outside Philadelphia, said he and Republican gubernatorial nominee Scott Wagner are focused on cutting taxes and spurring economic growth.

The candidates politely showcased their views in the sole scheduled debate of the campaign at WPXI-TV’s studio in Pittsburgh. The debate, moderated by anchor Katherine Amenta, was scheduled to air at 7:30 p.m.

The exchange followed a single debate Monday between Wolf and Wagner that was moderated by “Jeopardy!” host Alex Trebek, who was widely criticized for talking more than either candidate and sharing his own views on debate topics.

Fetterman attacked Wagner more than Bartos in his remarks. He criticized Wagner for a 2014 comment in which Wagner, then a state senator, said, “there was a gentleman by the name of Hitler, he was about power and control … the union situation is about power and control.” Wagner later apologized for the remarks.

“To any union member, brothers and sisters watching, any former union members, retired or otherwise — my running mate, Governor Wolf, protects unions in Pennsylvania,” Fetterman said. “Scott Wagner, if he was elected, would destroy unions.”

Bartos, in turn, criticized Wolf for accepting campaign donations from unions during an education discussion.

“We certainly have our differences with the teachers’ unions,” Bartos said. “(Wolf) is owned by the public sector unions. The teachers union calls the shots. Governor Wolf works for the teachers unions. We will work for the students of Pennsylvania, the parents of Pennsylvania and we will work for the teachers of Pennsylvania.”

Fetterman acknowledged a difference of opinion between himself and Wolf over legalizing recreational marijuana, which state Rep. Jake Wheatley, D-Hill District, has proposed. Fetterman supports legalization while Wolf has said the state isn’t ready.

Bartos said that while he and Wagner support medical marijuana, he believes not enough studies have been done on the health risks of marijuana to justify recreational legalization. He said that arguments for legalization that cite the potential tax benefits are misguided, saying the state should be focused on cutting spending rather than bringing in new revenue.

The candidates said both tickets want to reform the criminal justice system in Pennsylvania, which has the third-highest incarceration rate in the Northeast. The lieutenant governor serves as chairman of the state’s Board of Pardons.

Bartos supported Wagner’s call to re-instate the death penalty, while Fetterman supported Wolf’s moratorium on the death penalty. Bartos cited Wagner’s call for a mandatory death penalty for anyone who kills someone on school grounds and said Wagner would lift Wolf’s moratorium as soon as he could if he won election.

Fetterman said Wolf is a “firewall” against the state General Assembly’s efforts to limit abortion. He cited Wolf’s veto of Senate Bill 3, which would have made abortions illegal after 20 weeks of pregnancy instead of the current 24 weeks, and would have restricted the use of a common second-trimester procedure known as dilation and evacuation.

Bartos noted Wagner voted for Senate Bill 3 as a state senator and would support the same measure again.

Wesley Venteicher is a Tribune-Review
staff writer. You can contact Wesley at 412-380-5676, or via Twitter @wesventeicher.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.