Q n A with Congresswoman Allyson Schwartz on her potential run for governor.

She also said she expects to run for re-election or governor, but not both simultaneously.

Asked whether running for governor was her life’s ambition, she said it was not a long-held aspiration, but rather a combination of a governor she believes is not leading, and an opportunity for her to continue her work in Congress on jobs, education and health care. And that a rising hunger for a woman candidate is “palpable” among voters, “everywhere I go.”

She sat down with Capitolwire Bureau Chief Peter L. DeCoursey for a 20-minute Q n A session, where she also discussed her love of scarves and bandannas, the fashion attention she will get but not particularly want as a female candidate for governor, and various issues.

Q. Why will you be able to get the Legislature to invest in education and other issues when Gov. Rendell could not his final two years?

Schwartz: Several things. One is that each of us has their own leadership style. I actually worked with some of these legislators here. I was a legislator here. I was a state senator for a long time [14 years]. My work in Congress is how do you find that common ground, how do you get it done. … I believe strongly in having a big vision. …

In fact, as you look now at what the governor is doing, it is Republicans, particularly in the Senate, who’ve pushed back on the lack of investment in education, particularly in higher education. If Jake Corman hadn’t done what he did, state universities would have been cut even more. … I see a number of Republicans who are also saying we do need to do something more on transportation, why aren’t we taking the governor’s own task force recommendations on investments in infrastructure? What is going to happen if our bridges fall apart if we’re not at least doing at least basic maintenance if not more? And the economy is going to get better, which is a good thing. … But Pennsylvania, in order to be a leader in some of these industries, really has to look at where are the proven programs? What are our priorities? How can we make investments that do pay off? It’s having a serious conversation, with the leadership here, Republicans and Democrats. I think there is such a hunger for that kind of leadership that says, here’s a vision, here’s what it takes, how do we get there? And hopes to get as much of it done as you can.

It’s never an easy process. It’s not an easy process, this is a Republican-controlled House and Senate right now for the governor, who’s still not been able to get thru his priorities, but I think the priorities that I have, are the voice of what Pennsylvania is looking for, which are: how am I going to make sure that I can send my kids to college? How am I going to make sure our schools are good? How to make sure our property taxes don’t go up to compensate for what is not getting done by the state? How do we make sure the investments we are making are smart ones? That they are strategic? That they can really lead to growth. I talked about the bio-tech sector and building on the assets that Pennsylvania has in science and engineering and energy. These are huge assets we have and that we ought to build on, make sure people are trained for the jobs and know the jobs and we see that kind of leadership in working with the private sector in those kinds of things as well.

I don’t want to get too far ahead of ourselves. … I think there are opportunities here because Pennsylvanians are anxious for that kind of leadership and that kind of clarity about how we can grow this economy and be leaders as far for our oown people and potentially for the nation.

Q. You sound like you plan to run for governor

Schwartz: I have to be careful because of the legal constraints I am under, actually to say what you might want me to say, But we are certainly moving in the direction of a run for governor.

Q. How surprised would you be if you don’t end up as a candidate for governor in 2014?

Schwartz: I’d be surprised.

Q. Will you run for one office or for Congress and governor in 2014? Do you see yourself as choosing one or the other?

Schwartz: I do. I would be asking voters to be all-in for me. It’s really galvanizing people who share my hopes and expectations for Pennsylvania, to be all-in, and I would expect myself to be as well.

Q: To what extent are you running for governor, because, like Tom Ridge you always wanted to be governor, or because you look at Tom Corbett and saw a change is needed?

Schwartz: I guess the latter. Again, I’m proud of the work I’ve done as a legislator both in the state Senate and in Congress, to be able to be that reasonable voice on fiscal policies, to understand tax policy of this country, to consider how we grow the economy and deal with serious financial problems. And challenges on the federal level have been fascinating and important. And I’ve been able to weigh in on how we sustain Medicaid and how we actually respect our veterans and be real about that, I’ve done some legislation to do that. I’m very proud of my work and I like my work in Congress.

But when I see a governor without the leadership skills and without the vision for how we build on the assets of this state and grow the economy and provide hope and expectation for people here when we have such great assets and people, that it does compel me to think about – given how prepared I believe I am, the energy and determination I bring to whatever I do, certainly I brought it to my work in elected office, to be able to do that on the state level as governor, is something I’m willing to do because it is I think so important for the state.

So it’s time. It’s maybe the right time. It’s not something I woke up as a 4-year-old, and 8-year-old or a 16-year-old and I always wanted to be governor. Little girls didn’t do that so much [at that time]. Maybe it’s good that you can grow into … the position … to be in the position to do this and recognizing this is going to be hard to do, to still take it on and say I have the confidence to do this if we can galvanize Pennsylvanians to join with me.

Q: To what extent are you emboldened by the Kathleen Kane phenomenon?

Schwartz: I always thought Pennsylvania was ready for women in executive positions. I think Kathleen Kane certainly showed that. It’s time for women to step and do this.

Q: Looking at the county-by-county Kane results. … Republicans think that there were thousands of women who voted for Kane because she was a plausible female candidate.

Schwartz: She was prepared and skilled. … I hear it also, everywhere I go… It’s palpable, how not just ready, but excited women are where they feel like a woman could go in and really get something done. You’re different, just by the nature of who you are, have different expectations, different style, and that’s a good thing in Harrisburg and in government. But a real readiness and excitement for a woman candidate, there’s no question – it’s everywhere I go.

Q: Is it nice to see that change considering how things have changed since when you first arrived in the state Senate, as a plus instead of…

Schwartz: “You mean instead of ‘what are you doing here?’ which is kinda the way they looked at me when I first got here. But again, I had to find my way, I had to figure out how to build the relationships to get things done, I got legislation done. I stood up for women and children issues, I was proud to do that. It’s important, everything from the work I did on healthcare, seniors, also women – these are not small things. The CHIP program I did – families, men and women to this day say ‘thank you for CHIP, it was a year I needed it for children when I was unemployed’ … It became one of the national models for how we did CHIP in this country. 11 million children are covered as a result with private insurance. It was a creative, innovative way to do it.

But no question when I got here, we weren’t sure how women were supposed to dress: were we supposed to wear suits? Were we supposed to wear skirts?

Q: wasn’t there a dress code issue with you?

Schwartz: I don’t think it was never written down, but we certainly thought we weren’t supposed to wear pants.

…I never wore a pantsuit when I was here … only rule I know is you have to wear a jacket, which is the male definition of business attire. …When I was here … I decided I wasn’t gonna take on that battle, that I was here to fight for my constituents, here to get things done, and if that meant wearing suits, I was finAe with that.

Q: As long as they didn’t have a no-scarf rule…

Schwartz: at the time, that’s right. I still love scarves, I don’t wear them so often.

Q: Are you doing the fund-raising thing with the scarves again?

Schwartz: I don’t think so, but I used to donate scarves for auction and those kinds of things. I gave out bandannas [in her 2000 election for U.S. Senate and her congressional campaigns]… people still value those things. I don’t think scarves will be the issue in this race, but you never know.

… There was a whole thing to it in when I ran in 1990, about that the bright blue color I used to wear and I enjoy wearing and it became a ‘Schwartz Blue.’ … Look, they talk about what women candidates wear far more than many of us would like to discuss.

Q: Are you ready for the attention to your fashion choices a female candidate gets?

Schwartz: I think I can handle the dress code issues, not a problem. Although I will wear pantsuits… It’s nice to be comfortable when you are driving across the state in a car. … But it really is much less about what I wear than it is about what I believe in and what I can get done.

…

Q: what do you have to raise by the end of the year to feel comfortable that you would do this?

Schwartz: I think it sort of feels premature to get into the real specifics around the process of the campaign, but I will say is that without limits, certainly in Pennsylvania, you have to raise – against a sitting governor who will have all the money he needs – we will need all the resources we could get. I will raise the money necessary to win. I have every confidence I could do that.

Q: Are you confident that party leaders could prevent an expensive primary?

Schwartz: My answer to that is I need to be strongest candidate I could possibly be in order to hopefully suggest to others who want to run – because they share with me an interest in having a governor that leads the state in the way we’re talking about: grow jobs, invest in education, to really help move Pennsylvania forward in a way that builds on its assets, so I think that’s a good thing. It shows the strength of interest in changing the direction of Pennsylvania, at least changing the governor. That’s what I could do, be the strongest candidate, I think there’s interest in the party to not have it be an expensive primary.

Q: Medicaid expansion, what do make of other Republican governors opting in to MA expansion? What do you say to Corbett’s argument that it’s not going to be as good a deal for PA?

Schwartz: The issue here is that (not opting into Medicaid expansion) leaves 40 percent of uninsured Pennsylvanians – these are working Pennsylvanians who don’t have health coverage, can’t afford private insurance – without options. It leaves billions of federal dollars that would come to Pennsylvania to reimburse for those health services that people will still need and still get, they’ll just get them in the most expensive way. It leaves off the table the opportunity for Pennsylvania to be a leader in healthcare delivery reforms, and making sure people actually need the healthcare they need in the most cost efficient way possible. It leaves hospitals and providers without reimbursement. It leaves both the healthcare sector as providers and 500,000 Pennsylvanians without options.

I think one of the things is you want to be as predictive as you can be over the next five years, but the fact is there’s a lot of work to do make sure this works well. I want Pennsylvania to be a part of it. (Rejecting MA expansion) is short-sighted economically and unconscionable from the point of view of the sort of responsibility we have in state government.

Republican governors across this country have, even those who are very right wing and very opposed to the health law, still say they don’t wanna disadvantage their citizens. And so they’re gonna take the 100 percent federal funding and work it out.

-30-