Without question, the League of Women Voters is at the forefront of many reform efforts, especially those aimed at the gerrymander. But I question this panel.
Dr. John Kincaid, Director of the Meyner Center for the Study of State & Local Government at the Lafayette University, is supposed to present an introduction on ethics in government. That's mighty nice of him, but I'd like someone to do an introduction on ethics at the Meyner Center. That outfit sells itself as an expert on everything to municipal governments, and they use Meyner to select Township managers, conduct meaningless studies that are ignored, etc. Kincaid is certainly no expert on ethics in municipal government, but he looks very dignified.
Two panelists are from the land of midnight payraises, i.e. with state government, and that hardly sends chills up and down my spine. I have no idea what Julio Guridy is doing on this panel. He's a nice guy, but has often been an apologist for all the corruption that went on under Fed Ed. Two panel members, from Philly's Ethics Commission, probably can share some insights.
Last year, the Martin Tower rezoning led to all kinds of suspicions and accusations about the pernicious influence of money in politics. But while something is better than nothing, meaningful reform has to come from the state.
I'd love to see every Bethlehem candidate pledge that he will accept no more than $250 from any person or PAC. That means each person running can rely on grassroots support, but not on developers who almost certainly while have their hands out later.
17 comments:
I don't know much about Kincaid, but if a political science professor who studies local government isn't enough of an expert for you, then who is?
He is no local government expert, though he's hauled in for every debate. If this was a discussion of Publius and the Federal papers, he'd be fine. But when it comes to local government and its relationship to ethics, he is simply is unqualified.
"I'd love to see every Bethlehem candidate pledge that he will accept no more than $250 from any person or PAC. That means each person running can rely on grassroots support, but not on developers who almost certainly while have their hands out later."
how do you deal with wealthy, self-financed candidates?
or when a campaign legally launders money through a 3rd party AC, like Brown did?
Thank you for writing about the LWV. How many folks attended the League's "Meet the Candidates" at NCC two weeks ago? Yes, there was a time the League was highly regarded, but today it appears to have lost its luster.
ethics in bedlum are a joke
5:20, I don't see any independently wealthy candidates who have run for office in Bethlehem over the past two decades. To your other point, Brown was not financed by a third party PAC. Those were contributions to him. This is local office, not the presidency. Take a pledge and get your money from grass roots supporters, not developers. It will mean less money, and that's a good thing.
Schweder, Leeson $$$$$
Not sure we want just the wealthy Saucon Valley Country Club elites running for office because they can out spend others not as financially well off.
I believe any person who refuses to take that pledge should not be elected. In other words, he can only give himself$250. Schweder and Leeson would have no problem generating grass roots support. It seems that some people love the idea of $5,000 her and $2500 there from developers and engineers bc they then don't have to work for support.
Anyone who gets elected has worked for the support of their public votes by knocking on doors, going to events. Top vote getters are not always the top fund raisers. Look at the past elections. Delgrosso, Donchez were top vote getters for many many years and never raised much money. Bernie, Who was the top money winner last election vs. the top vote getter?
Anon 2:48 are you serious. This is Bedlum. If you were a Liberty or maybe Freedom star a Moravian star a teacher you win elections. Jim Delgrosso was a great guy yet I bet you anything if someone named Delgrosso who lived in a cave put their name on the ballot they would win.
Bedlum, the biggest above ground pool in America.
Next year in Northampton County Brown will be reelected county executive and all five Republican county council members will be re-elected despite their 10% tax increase. It is just the way things are.
"To your other point, Brown was not financed by a third party PAC. Those were contributions to him. This is local office, not the presidency."
refresh my recollection: didn't JB and his friends dump a wad of money and park it at a state republican pac, who then sent it back to Brown? how would you address that?
To be clear, this pledge is not part of the ethics forum. It is my idea bc i think it unlikely that Bethlehem would adopt an ethics ordinance that would apply to next year's election. I am suggesting a pledge among city candidates who would agree to accept no more than $250 from any individual or PAC. So in effect, this means JB could give a candidate $250 and give $250 to a PAC that also contributes $250, But it is just $250, not $50,000. That's why this pledge would be effective. Persons running for office could elect not to make a pledge, and voters could decide wether that disqualifies a candidate. This would be strictly voluntary, and would be more effective than what is in place now. It would ensure grass roots support and would hopefully reduce the amount of money spent. In a Bethlehem race, candidates should rely on knocking on doors and multiple candidate forums. Money should be unnecessary except in small amounts.
If you have ideas, please make them known. But I am thinking short term and for the race next year.
I would like to see some kind of limit for contributors who end up with a cabinet position or some other type of employment from the successful candidate or (and I know this is impossible but wishful thinking) a limit for all contributors.
In reference to the above comment, this should also include family member contributions.
ah.....unilateral disarmament
Post a Comment