Pittsburgh’s ‘final torching’ ahead?

Pittsburgh’s ‘final torching’ ahead?

At the risk of yet again being labeled by the usual suspects as a curmudgeon of cynical proportions or, worse still, a naysayer:

The Post-Gazette reports that Pittsburgh’s next generation of City Council candidates – skewing “far younger than current lawmakers” – wants to bring “a fresh perspective” to City Hall.

Do tell.

“Of eight candidates challenging incumbents or running for open seats, the median age is 31 — more than 20 years younger than the median age of current council members,” the P-G says.

Continues the story:

“Younger candidates said their different life experiences would help them bring a new perspective to governing — and stop doing things the same way simply because that’s how they’ve always been done.

“’If that’s the way we’ve always done it, that means there’s something we need to do to fix that, because it’s not working,’” said one of the new whippersnapper challengers, described as an “environmental lobbyist.”

Help us, puh-LEEZ!

“Having a younger perspective, a fresh perspective helps disrupt that notion,” he added.


Do remember that Pittsburgh City Council is a wholly Democrat affair. And, thus far, no Republicans have said they’re running in an election that will decide more than half the seats on the council.

But we can’t much say, from a public policy perspective, that we’re at all encouraged given the ecocratic-, socialistic- and other “social justice”-embracing predilections of this supposedly new and enlightened generation hoping the torch will be passed to it.

To wit:

There appears to be no talk of working to reduce onerous regulations.

Neither is there talk of outsourcing or otherwise privatizing services that very well could be provided more efficiently, if not cheaper.

Daring to discuss placing the pro hockey arena, baseball field and football stadium back on the tax rolls? Not found here.

And our list could go on and on, including from actually forcing the David L. Lawrence Convention Center to cover its own operational costs (instead of deeply discounting its fees), to stopping the insane practice of subsidizing new premier office space, then subsidizing the conversion of old office space into apartments (while the Golden Triangle is overrun with the Double Vs of a downtown’s decline – vagrancy and violence).

But there does appear to be among this new generation of city councilors plenty of talk of making things “more affordable” by making them more expensive in the long run, thus limiting supply.


Should these proverbial “new bosses” come to power, don’t hold out much hope that they’ll be any different than the “old bosses” they’ll replace.

In fact, schooled at the left hand of “progressivism” and “wokeness,” they stand to be worse.

“Fresh?” Sorry, but that’s as stale and rancid as public policies can be.

Here’s to any passed torches not being Pittsburgh’s final torching.

Colin McNickle is communications and marketing director at the Allegheny Institute for Public Policy (cmcnickle@alleghenyinstitute.org).