What Shapiro and Mastriano share in common

The outsize personalities in the Senate race are taking up the oxygen from Pennsylvania’s more mundane gubernatorial race — and that’s a problem. The governor will arguably have more impact on our lives than any U.S. senator.

The vast media coverage of Mehmet Oz and John Fetterman is distracting — and obfuscating this election season’s most fascinating transformation: Democrat Josh Shapiro trying to adopt the policy positions of his Republican opponent, Doug Mastriano.

If I asked you to guess which candidate was calling out the draconian COVID-19 shutdowns, promising to address rising crime throughout the state, saying he’ll lower the corporate tax rate more dramatically and faster than what the Republican legislature voted to do, and advocating for school choice (including the Lifeline Scholarship bill that would give money directly to families rather than schools), you’d say Mastriano — and you’d be right. You’d also be right in naming his rival, Shapiro. To wit, the Philadelphia Fraternal Order of Police endorsed Shapiro, not Mastriano.

Shapiro is taking a sudden swerve to the right in his politics — especially his school choice policy, which seems to have appeared on his campaign website only weeks ago. The Democratic Party has too often become the party of woke progressivism. Gone are the days of advocating for the poor and middle class. Its biggest stars often push for higher taxes for environmental justice, embrace big government socialism, and advocate for defunding the police.

Is a savvy political operative with known presidential ambitions really going to abandon the party platform?

There’s skepticism about Shapiro on both the left and the right. This is especially true with Shapiro’s weeks-old commitment to school choice and expanded educational opportunity for our most vulnerable children — a policy opposed by most Democrats. Gone are the days when Elizabeth Warren and Cory Booker took a stand on expanding educational choice. Gov. Tom Wolf euphemistically said that a child’s education should not be defined by their zip code. But in 2019, he vetoed a bill that would have eliminated the wait list for tax credit scholarships.

It’s not difficult to see why many Democrats abandoned poor kids. Just look at the enormous sums of money poured into the Democratic Party by teachers’ unions both here in Pennsylvania and nationally. Unions representing teachers are vehemently opposed to any expansion of educational opportunity — even to kids in failing schools.

It’s as if Shapiro is suddenly becoming a Donald Trump-style fiscal conservative with a subscription to Reason Magazine (albeit with better hair).

Shapiro painted Mastriano as a “radical extremist” — is he now one, too? Considering how radical it is for a modern Democrat to adopt any of Shapiro’s views on crime, taxes, and education, his party mates may think so. But Shapiro should continue on this libertarian journey — because those policies benefit all Pennsylvanians. They’re popular, too.

Polling conducted by the Commonwealth Foundation shows that nearly 70% of Pennsylvanians think the state is on the wrong track — that’s after eight years of a Democratic governor. Eighty percent of respondents were in support of overhauling education, taxes, and post-Janus v. AFSCME workers’ rights. It’s clear Pennsylvanians are ready for a change — one that gives each of us, our children, and our businesses and employers the opportunity to thrive.

Mastriano’s polls are abysmal, and many people have written him off and are instead focused on the Senate race. Mastriano has received little — if not zero — funding from the conservative establishment. Republicans are actively working against him in some cases. But he defied every political convention in May’s primary, when he won the Republican nomination despite the lack of support.

Many write off the Pennsylvania gubernatorial race as a foregone conclusion, but policies still matter. With a wild card like Mastriano against an experienced political operative like Shapiro, November’s election could be closer than politicos think. Many of those same forecasters did not foresee Donald Trump winning Pennsylvania in 2016. Trump won by less than 1%. Four years later, despite many predictions to the contrary, Joe Biden captured Pennsylvania by a similarly small 1.17% margin.

It’s highly problematic that there have not been debates for this gubernatorial race. Voters need to hear — outside of media coverage and campaign slogans — how each candidate responds to deeper interrogation. Without a debate, it is more difficult to discern each candidate’s stance on issues.

» READ MORE: At stake in Mastriano vs. Shapiro, the fate of abortion rights in Pennsylvania | Editorial

For example, Shapiro has already started walking back his support of Lifeline Scholarships. He hasn’t stated whether or not he would sign the bill and has now claimed that the current legislation is flawed, without explaining why.

Pennsylvanians deserve better, and it’s understandable why people become skeptical of politicians. But we can also be encouraged. Perhaps the sudden shift by the Democrats’ gubernatorial candidate means that the state party is ready to embrace an agenda that puts workers, children, and safety first.

Having both parties work together on meaningful reforms postelection will ensure our state gets the policies and prosperity it deserves.

Jennifer Stefano is the executive vice president of the Commonwealth Foundation and a fellow at the Independent Women’s Forum. @JenniferStefano