
Saint Clair Council candidate aims to bring fresh ideas to the borough
At 24, Blake Herndon is younger than most who run for municipal posts in Schuylkill County, but the Saint Clair Council candidate is hoping voters will give him the opportunity to bring fresh ideas to the borough.
Herndon is one of nine candidates running for three four-year seats on council, making it one of the busier races in the county.
The municipal primary election on May 20 will send three candidates from each party on to the general election, where the three council seats will be filled.
Herndon is running against fellow Republicans Justin Cappel, Thomas Kelly, Shirley Tina Campion, John Zachar and Vaughn Vesay.
The Democrat candidates are Michael Petrozino, Anthony J. Klazas and William M. Dempsey.
Dempsey and Klasas are current council members.
Herndon grew up in Saint Clair and graduated from Pottsville High School in 2019, having also attended Schuylkill Technology Center North, where he studied diesel technology.
He currently works as a rollback truck driver for a local garage, and for years has been a volunteer firefighter for Rescue Hook & Ladder Company in Saint Clair.
He joined the company as a teenager because he felt it was important for everyone to serve their community and help their neighbors, and that is also his motivation in running for council, he said.
Herndon said that he has a lot of respect for Saint Clair's current leaders, but said he thinks having a younger voice like himself join them would benefit the borough.
'It's something I've wanted to do for a long time,' he said of his run for office.
Herndon said that if elected, he would prioritize supporting small businesses in town, try to get more children involved in youth programs such as sports, work to attract more volunteers to Saint Clair's five fire companies, and attempt to bring natural gas service to the borough, which he feels could save residents money on their home heating bills.
He said that he hopes his efforts as a firefighter shows his commitment to the borough, and said that work has taught him a lot about the town.
'We're a tight-knit community, and I get to see how we pull together even during tough times,' he said of the fire calls he has responded to.
Herndon invited anyone with questions about his plans for the borough to reach out to him.
'I'm hoping people are willing to give a young guy a shot,' he said.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Newsweek
34 minutes ago
- Newsweek
If Clarence Thomas Resigns Under Trump, Here's Who Might Replace Him
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. There is speculation within the legal community over whether Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas will retire during Donald Trump's presidency, given he is currently 76 years old. Justice Samuel Alito is 75 years old, sparking similar speculation about his future as well. According to Supreme Court scholar Adam Feldman, there are six judges in the U.S. who are likely to be considered by President Trump if either justice resigns. Feldman told Newsweek that the possibility of either judge retiring is "unlikely but possible." "Neither are terribly old by Supreme Court standards, both are in their mid-70s, but Thomas will be 80 around the end of Trump's term. Neither have major health issues, at least those that have been made public. If they have confidence that the next president will be a Republican then they have incentive to stay," said Feldman. Supreme Court Justices Samuel Alito, left, and Clarence Thomas look on during the 60th Presidential Inauguration in the Rotunda of the U.S. Capitol in Washington, Monday, January, 20, 2025. Supreme Court Justices Samuel Alito, left, and Clarence Thomas look on during the 60th Presidential Inauguration in the Rotunda of the U.S. Capitol in Washington, Monday, January, 20, 2025. Chip Somodevilla/Pool Photo via AP Why It Matters President Trump has already picked three out of the nine justices on the Supreme Court. If he had the opportunity to pick two more justices, his presidency and worldview could have a lasting impact on the future of US law long beyond the next three and a half years. However, Justice Barrett has not always ruled in the Trump administration's favor recently, showing that appointing a judge does not guarantee their support from the bench. What To Know Supreme Court seats are lifetime and supposedly apolitical appointments, but justices occasionally retire during the term of a president who aligns with them politically in order to ensure their legacy is retained by the court. For example, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg declined to retire during the Obama administration before passing away under Trump, meaning her seat is now occupied by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who is significantly more conservative in her interpretation of the law than Ginsburg. "Ginsburg's light on the risk of waiting too long to step down. Since both Thomas and Alito have a lot of sway on the direction of the Court's outcomes, I don't foresee either stepping down unless there is another reason, [for example] health or fear that a Democrat will win the next election, that motivates them," Feldman told Newsweek. According to Feldman, the six judges who are likely to be tapped for consideration are judges Patrick J. Bumatay, Aileen M. Cannon, James C. Ho, Andrew S. Oldham, Neomi J. Rao and Amul R. Thapar. Trump has said in the past that he wants to appoint "more justices like the ones I already picked," so Feldman, creator of the Empirical SCOTUS blog, analyzed decisions and written statements made by the prospective judges and compared them to Trump's picks: Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett. He also compared their decisions to those made by Thomas and Alito, examining the language and citations used in their work to determine how it would appeal to the president. According to Feldman's research, Judge Andrew Oldman, who currently is in a Trump-appointed role for the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, is the most similar to Trump's picks, whereas Judge James Ho is the most similar to Alito and Thomas. Despite ruling in the President's favor several times, including blocking lawmakers from reading the Jack Smith report into Trump's handling of classified documents, and currently being the presiding judge in the case surrounding the second assassination attempt on the president in 2024, Cannon appears to be the furthest away from the Trump appointees and Alito and Thomas. She is one of the most frequent users of "hot-button" words in her writing, including "tyranny," "culture," "elite," and "freedom." These are terms Feldman has singled out as appealing to Trump. However, she does not possess the same qualities as other potential candidates, such as clerking for a Supreme Court judge. Feldman told Newsweek: "My best guess is that Trump would appoint her to a federal appellate court first and nominate another judge (Ho for instance) if there is a SCOTUS vacancy soon although the Cannon likelihood goes up if there is a vacancy towards the end of Trump's term." According to Feldman's metrics, the most likely pick to replace Thomas is Ho, and the most likely pick to replace Alito is Oldham. U.S. Associate Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, Jr., U.S. Associate Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh and U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts attend inauguration ceremonies in the... U.S. Associate Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, Jr., U.S. Associate Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh and U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts attend inauguration ceremonies in the Rotunda of the U.S. Capitol on January 20, 2025 in Washington, DC. More Chip Somodevilla/Getty images picture-alliance/dpa/AP Images What People Are Saying Attorney Bradley P. Moss told Newsweek in a previous article: "I see absolutely no reason to believe Clarence Thomas will step away from the bench until either he physically is unable to continue with his work, or he is assured that a handpicked successor will be confirmed without incident." Adam Feldman told Newsweek: "With the recent news that Trump is unhappy with Barrett in particular I think he is likely to pick someone who has a more pronounced judicial track record (Barrett's was minimal) that conveys a more conservative bent. That is why my sense is that Judge Ho is the most likely nominee if there is a vacancy. He is about as much a surefire bet to fit the Alito/Thomas paradigm and he clerked for Thomas which adds to his pedigree." Adam Feldman wrote in his Legalytics Substack: "My sense still is that Judge Ho is the obvious pick if Justice Thomas is the next justice to step down and Judge Oldham likely gets the nod if Justice Alito is the first to leave SCOTUS as recent history has shown that presidents may look first to a justice's former clerk to as a replacement if possible." What Happens Next Neither Alito nor Thomas have said they are thinking about retiring. Early in his career, Thomas threatened to quit over his salary. However, that has now been raised. Were either justice to pass away or retire, the president will pick a replacement justice who will be voted on by the Senate.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
‘Shut Up!': House Hearing Erupts Into Chaos After Dem Calls Out ICE Barbie
A congressional hearing quickly devolved into a shouting match between two Republicans and a Democrat who sought a subpoena for Kristi Noem over the forcible removal of Senator Alex Padilla from a Thursday press conference. During a Thursday hearing of the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, Rep. Maxwell Frost (D-FL) implored his fellow lawmakers to subpoena Noem over the incident, which saw her security team manhandle and handcuff the Democratic senator after he loudly questioned the Homeland Security Secretary about ICE raids that have led to nationwide protests. Rep. James Comer (R-KY), the committee chairman, quickly waved off Frost's concerns over the incident. 'Mr. Chair, also, we were just talking about this. I want to know if you can commit to working with us so we can subpoena,' Frost began to say, before Comer cut him off. 'You're out of order,' Comer replied. The two congressmen briefly spoke over each other until Comer recognized MAGA firebrand Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), who entered the tense scene guns blazing. 'Oh, Democrats can't follow the rules, can't follow the law,' she said twice. 'We need to subpoena Kristi Noem,' Frost repeated. 'It's her staff, DHS federal officers, that threw a U.S. senator to the ground.' Greene continued to talk over the young Democrat: 'There's a privilege of the majority, and that means we're in charge. Not your side because you lost the election because you supported the invasion of our country.' Frost, Greene, and Comer all refused to back down until the chairman grew exasperated with the back-and-forth. 'Shut up. Just shut up,' Comer told Frost, who had repeatedly asked him to commit to subpoenaing Noem. 'No, you're not gonna tell me to shut up,' Frost hit back. 'He's been out of order six times,' Comer said of Frost. 'He is trying to get on MSNBC. You probably knocked somebody off MSNBC to get on there.' The chairman then handed the floor over to Greene, who lobbed a bizarre accusation at Frost without providing evidence. 'I think because he's been arrested as a former Antifa member, right?' she said of Padilla, referring to the far-left movement. 'He's a former Antifa member… Not surprised.' Frost appeared to be in disbelief as he asked for Greene's remarks to be taken off the record. The dramatic interaction ended when Greene turned her attention to New York Governor Kathy Hochul to ask questions. Several Democrats have rallied around Padilla following his wild takedown. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer called for an immediate probe into the 'un-American' incident: 'To look at this video and see what happened reeks—reeks—of totalitarianism," he said. 'This is not what democracies do.' House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries echoed Schumer in a post, stating that those behind 'the brazen and aggressive manhandling of Senator Padilla' must be 'held accountable.' Noem called Padilla's interruption 'inappropriate,' while Homeland Security official Tricia McLaughlin slammed the senator for choosing 'disrespectful political theater.' Noem and Padilla spoke for 15 minutes after the incident, McLaughlin said.

Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Trump's ‘big beautiful bill' to make wealthy even richer and punish poor
Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' will hand thousands of dollars to the rich and leave poorer Americans worse off, a US spending watchdog has warned. The top 10pc of households will get a windfall of $12,000 (£8,800) per year from the Bill's tax cuts, while the bottom 10pc will see a net loss of $1,600 per year because of benefits cuts, according to analysis by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). This means the richest people in America will get a cash boost worth 2.3pc of income while the poorest households will see losses worth 3.9pc. Mr Trump's 'One Big, Beautiful Bill Act', as the legislation is known, was narrowly passed by House Republicans last month and is currently under scrutiny by the Senate. The president has set a July 4 deadline for a final version of the Bill. The Bill has come under heavy fire for driving up America's debt burden just as economists are sounding alarm bells over the sustainability of the US debt pile. Earlier this month, Mr Trump's former 'first buddy' Elon Musk slammed the Bill as a 'disgusting abomination' that he said would saddle America with 'crushing' debt. The US lost its last triple-A credit rating in May after a downgrade from influential credit agency Moody's. According to the CBO, the measures outlined in the Bill will add $2.4 trillion to the US deficit over the next decade. The Bill includes tax cuts worth $3.7 trillion over the next 10 years – primarily through extending the income tax cuts Mr Trump introduced in 2017 which are due to expire at the end of this year – alongside $1.3 trillion in spending cuts. The bulk of the spending cuts will come through reductions in Medicaid, which funds health insurance for low-income families, and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (Snap), which provides food stamps for the poorest in America. This means that although households will technically benefit from the tax cuts, the benefits for the lowest earners will be far-outweighed by the cost of their lost benefits. Around 16m Americans are expected to lose their health insurance as a result of the Bill. In a letter to Democrat lawmakers, who had requested the analysis, Phillip Swagel, the CBO director, said: 'The changes would not be evenly distributed among households. 'The agency estimates that in general, resources would decrease for households toward the bottom of the income distribution, whereas resources would increase for households in the middle and top of the income distribution.' Households in the middle of the income distribution would gain just $500 per year, or 0.5pc of their annual income. Speaking on Thursday, Mr Trump said the Bill was 'one of the most important pieces of legislation ever signed, ever approved, so it's going to be something very special.' Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.