| This can’t be the profile Brian Fitzpatrick was hoping for.
Philly Magazine goes deep on the vulnerable Republican congressman this morning… and Fitzpatrick’s comments are illuminating.
Key segments include Fitzpatrick insulting his own constituents by saying that town halls are designed to “waste people’s time” (he hasn’t held one in more than 8 years) … Philly Mag reporting that “there were things in the OBBB he liked a lot” (he was the deciding ‘yes’ vote to advance the Medicaid-cutting bill out of the House) … Fitzpatrick claiming that local newspapers are ‘hack partisan outlets’ (he specifically insults the Inquirer) … and the brutal assessment from Philly Mag that “for all his talk of bipartisanship, he rarely casts a vote that makes a difference” – which they describe in their words as “the kid-gloves act.”
Here are the key segments you need to read for yourself:
Philly Mag on “the two faces of Fitz”:
- Democrats in his district […] noted that his no vote was essentially inconsequential — Republicans had enough yes votes that the One Big Beautiful Bill passed anyway. In contrast, those Democrats will tell you, when a version of the bill came before the House a month earlier, Fitzpatrick had not only voted for it, but had effectively put it over the top. The final tally was … wait for it … 218 to 217.
- It was a perfect example, Dems say, of “the two faces of Fitz” — on one hand preaching consensus and cooperation, on the other reliably siding with his fellow Republicans when their agenda is on the line. […]
- This raises the issue that Democrats most often bring up when they weigh in on Fitzpatrick: that for all his talk of bipartisanship, he rarely casts a vote that makes a difference.
- Over the years, for instance, Fitzpatrick has broken with Republicans and joined Democrats in supporting, among other things, gun control legislation, LGBTQ rights, and the CHIPS Act — but in all those cases, the bills were going to pass whether he supported them or not. As one Democratic member of Pennsylvania’s congressional delegation has put it: “He’s always with us — when we don’t need him.”
On Fitzpatrick’s refusal to hold an in-person town hall:
- Not that everyone is a fan. In addition to questioning whether his independence is more for show than impact, opponents charge that Fitzpatrick can be, well, a little weaselly when it comes to explaining and owning what he’s done. For instance, while he’s acknowledged that he didn’t vote for Donald Trump in 2016 — he penciled in Mike Pence — Fitzpatrick has declined to say if he voted for Trump in 2024. As for his ubiquity in his district, critics say he can be quick and slick about it — a handshake here, a photo there, then out the door, with no real substantive exchange about issues.
- Indeed, over the past year the progressive group Indivisible has ridden Fitzpatrick hard for having held only one in-person town hall during his entire time in Congress — and that was back in 2017.
- Fitzpatrick fires back fiercely when I mention town halls. They’re not models of civic discourse, he says; they’re staged gotcha moments exploited by hyper-partisan activists. “Isn’t it interesting that no one ever called for me to have a town hall when Joe Biden was president?” he asks. “They’re looking to waste people’s time; they’re looking to embarrass people. They’re looking to get a video clip they can use AI to distort.”
On Fitzpatrick ignoring local press inquiries:
- If he’s not eager to engage publicly with left-wing ideologues, Fitzpatrick hasn’t always been so accessible to the local press, either. In a piece it published last spring about Fitzpatrick’s voting record, the Bucks County Courier Times noted that the congressman hadn’t replied to at least eight requests for comment sent between February and April that year. The Inquirer has reported similar experiences of ignored requests for comment.
- I bring this up to Fitzpatrick, who initially says that calls from reporters can sometimes be overwhelming. “We probably got 25 today, between Politico, CQ, Roll Call, CBS News, the Washington Post,” he says. “They want to talk about the ACA. They want to talk about Ukraine.” But a few minutes later, he allows that whether he sees a publication as biased is also a consideration. When I say that I don’t perceive either the Courier Times or the Inquirer to be hack partisan outlets, he replies, “The Inquirer is.” He likes Inky reporter Julia Terruso, he continues, “but we’ve had some experiences with the Inquirer that have not been great. They’ve shown their true colors. And I hope they get better.” (After endorsing Fitzpatrick’s reelection in 2018 and 2020, the paper’s editorial board went against him in 2022 and 2024, citing, in part, his vote against the post–January 6th impeachment of Trump.)
On Fitzpatrick’s refusal to sharply criticize the Trump Admin:
- But he’s far less blunt when I bring up some other Trumpian issues. When I ask how he feels about what’s happened to his beloved FBI under Kash Patel, Fitzpatrick calls it “heartbreaking.” But then he adds, “You know, we’ve seen the weaponization of the Justice Department now, I believe, in two administrations.” Of Trump’s recent call for six Democratic members of Congress to be hanged after they posted a video reminding U.S. troops of their duty not to obey an unlawful order, Fitzpatrick calls it “unbecoming” — not exactly the harshest language one might use in condemning, you know, a threatened execution. (A threatened execution of people with whom one works closely on the issue of … getting along.)
- […] But the kid-gloves act also reflects the reality that, though Fitzpatrick wishes otherwise, politics remains a team sport.
On Fitzpatrick voting for – and praising – the Big Beautiful Bill:
- Fitzpatrick says there were things in the OBBB he liked a lot […] What’s more, he says he tried to temper some of the harsher parts of the bill, working to ensure, for instance, a Medicaid provider tax rate of 6.5 percent, which would have protected Philly-area hospitals. When the bill came up for that vote in the House in late May, Fitzpatrick voted yes — hoping, he says, that the Senate might make the bill better. […]
- Fitzpatrick’s telling of how all this went down is plausible, though it ignores the fact that the first version of the bill — the one he supported — was pretty damned harsh itself, calling for $750 billion in cuts to Medicaid and nearly $200 billion in cuts to SNAP, all while adding more than $3 trillion to the national debt. Labor unions and nonprofits were just as opposed to that version of the bill as they were to the final one.
- And, of course, Fitzpatrick’s narrative also doesn’t include the political math at play: Vote against the final version of the bill, and it wouldn’t really make a difference. But vote against the first version? Well, now you’ve torpedoed Trump and MAGA world’s prized bill. And so the distinguished gentleman from Bucks County, a lifelong Republican, made the decision to vote with his team.
On Fitzpatrick being more vulnerable than ever:
- Democrats are feeling good about their chances of unseating him. November’s election results suggested that the political winds are blowing in their favor. (Democrats swept Bucks County’s row offices.) And the party believes they’ll have a strong opponent for Fitzpatrick […] It doesn’t hurt that the D.C.-based Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has targeted Fitzpatrick’s seat as one it thinks it can flip.
|
