Local Government TV

▼

Thursday, March 13, 2008

Norco Council Inches Towards Campaign Finance Reform

The pervasive influence of our "pay to play" culture of corruption is rampant throughout the Lehigh Valley. For the past few weeks, I have provided you with example after example of its common use by Allentown Mayor Ed Pawlowski. Unfortunately, he's the rule, not the exception.

Pennsylvania is one of only twelve states that place no limits on campaign dough for pols. So Politician Mike Fleck can brazenly defend a $1,500 campaign contribution from the city's own financial advisor, Concord Public Finance. "If you disagree with that reform the system because 90% of the pols. in the Valley do that." In Northampton County, part-time public defenders and other patronage employees were regularly assessed $1,000 per year under former county executive Glenn Reibman. Many individuals who were major campaign contributors just happened to have county contracts. This culture of corruption, in which one hand washes the other, hurts those financially unable to play the game. Locally, developers and big businesses end up making the real decisions, while local voters are ignored. Ridiculous "riverwalks" or "Renaissance squares" are proposed, and the public often ends up footing part of the bill. Taxes go up and wages are frozen.

From this deep freeze, a new kind of pol emerged, county executive John Stoffa. He shunned the wheelers and dealers who attempted to bankroll his campaign, and that is part of the reason he was elected.

Philadelphia, which had problems of its own, enacted its very own campaign finance ordinance. Late last year, the state supremes (you can read their decision here) sustained that law against claims that only the state legislature can decide something that important. Zack Stalberg, president of the Committee of Seventy, a Philly watchdog group, explains this decision has "clearly changed the landscape already, in the sense that the big donors - the corporations or law firms or unions with big political action committees - are already finding themselves with less clout." That decision applies to any home rule municipality. Bethlehem is the first local municipality to propose its very own campaign finance ordinance, which is currently under scrutiny. A bill similar to Scwhweder's proposal has also been proposed in Pittsburgh.

Ron Angle's campaign finance committee, which is considering its own campaign finance ordinance of its own in Northampton County. ran into some resistance yesterday. Council member Diane Neiper originally stated, "I'm not in favor of this. It's my right to raise as much money as I want to run my campaign." Several other council members, including Peg Ferraro, John Cusick and Wayne Grube, agreed. And Ann McHale noted that, whatever limits are imposed, creative people will find a way around them.

But there was still widespread agreement yesterday to at least try to rein in a failing system in which money makes some animals more equal than others. Council members Angle, Neiper, Cusick, Ferraro, Grube and McHale at least appear to support a campaign finance ordinance with the following provisions:
  1. Prompt online disclosure of filed campaign finance reports on the county's web page.
  2. A limit on individual and PAC contributions.
  3. A ban on contributions to candidates seeking county office from anyone who is employed by the county.
  4. A two year ban on county contracts with anyone who contributes to a person seeking countywide office, unless that contract is the result of competitive bidding.
County clerk Frank Flisser will now draft an ordinance for legal review.
at

3 comments:

  1. AnonymousMarch 13, 2008 at 2:07 PM

    What Angle is proposing benefits him, as he can self fund his campaign without financial limitations and those that don't have the financial wherewithall are screwed by the fat cats, Angle being the worst.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Bernie O'HareMarch 13, 2008 at 2:30 PM

    Bullshit.

    I have a link to Angle's campaign finance reports on the left side bar. Look at it. He never spends his own money in an electoral contest.

    I personally believe there should be a cap on total spending for given races, and so did Angle yesterday. Nearly ever member of council on that committee were vocally opposed to that.

    If anything, this proposal will make it more difficult for a fat cat to self-fund a campaign. The amount that one can give to oneself is limited.

    Don't let your anti-Ron animus destroy a good idea.

    ReplyDelete
  3. AnonymousMarch 13, 2008 at 5:29 PM

    different anonymous here. he COULD though, and would have a huge advantage. if he (or any wealthy candidate) dumped a ton of personal cash in at the tail end of the campaign, the opponent wouldn't have to time or resources to respond.

    ReplyDelete

You own views are appreciated, especially if they differ from mine. But remember, commenting is a privilege, not a right. I will delete personal attacks or off-topic remarks at my discretion. Comments that play into the tribalism that has consumed this nation will be declined. So will comments alleging voter fraud unless backed up by concrete evidence. If you attack someone personally, I expect you to identify yourself. I will delete criticisms of my comment policy, vulgarities, cut-and-paste jobs from other sources and any suggestion of violence towards anyone. I will also delete sweeping generalizations about mainstream parties or ideologies, i.e. identity politics. My decisions on these matters are made on a case by case basis, and may be affected by my mood that day, my access to the blog at the time the comment was made or other information that isn’t readily apparent.