If their goal was to somehow garner support from proponents of open records, I think it backfired. They certainly got some attention, but it was the wrong kind.

The governor was mostly dismissed in committee. Open records got out of committee, and was on the floor for debate. While the open records bill is not perfect, it could have been something that Dems claimed they accomplished while in the majority in 2007. The timing of the walkout couldn't have been worse, from a statewide PR perspective.

Can we deduce that you believe in closed records and subverting the legislative process when you don't get your way?

PS: Although I'm a proponent, I have been far in the background on open records. Most of the reform juice on this issue is coming from folks like Tim Potts, Eric Epstein, Gene Stilp and Barry Kauffman of Common Cause - all of whom reside much closer to you than they do me on the political spectrum. :)

You thought you knew. Now you do.
Tip of the Spear

Stopping people from killing each other: Good.

Limiting how many guns a law-abiding citizen can buy: Bad, unconstitutional, and not related to the above whatsoever.

Why on earth would it work in PA when it doesn't work anywhere else? That's the tough truth, Ben. It's not a gun problem, it's a people problem.

PS: Once we open up government, perhaps we'll discover exactly why the laws already in place haven't worked and/or aren't enforced, why judges let violent thugs off easy, and exactly how loudly these people we put in positions of trust have fiddled while Pennsylvania burns.

You thought you knew. Now you do.
Tip of the Spear

I agree with you Ben, I think the fact the Democrats won't bring forth some sensible gun legislation to a vote is a tragedy; but I think the fact the rest of the Philly delegation didn't join the Black Caucus is outrageous.

The truth is that a majority of the state would support the gun legislation being proposed, but it would force members to pick between their constituents, and the NRA. I think it's time the entire Philadelphia delegation started treating this as the crisis it is, and not a political hot potato.

Next time (and I hope it's very soon) the Black Caucus walks out, it would be great if they had company.

I'm actually with Russ on this - at least this far - one of the reasons we can't even get something as common sense as the requirement to report a weapon lost or stolen passed is because the 'burg is crawling with NRA lobbyists. Open records law is important and in the long haul thats going to help getting these bare modicum of common sense procedures that most Pennsylvanians even in the "T" support more than one-time gestures that won't change the demographic ballance of the state as a whole will.

One-a-month, the reporting requirement - they won't stop bad people who want to get illegal guns from getting them. They are at best a tool that can in some instances help law enforcement slow them down, drive up the street price for illegal weapons. One-a-month is good legislation but its not going to directly impact "stopping the killing" even as much as full equity in public school funding might.

One-a-month is good legislation but its not going to directly impact "stopping the killing" even as much as full equity in public school funding might.

Until someone does, they are not mutually exclusive. If we were to get equity in public school funding, that wouldn't mean that adding a sensible law wouldn't add further benefit.

I think there are valid questions as to how much one gun per month laws would help. But, given the conditions we're talking about, it's worth a shot. The reason being, there are no valid reasons to not pass such legislation. Unless you like collecting contrubutions from the NRA, that is.

I agree that there's no reason no to push and push hard for one-a-month. Its a tool in the toolbox. Its not a panacea. At best it will force a certain class of professional straw-purchasers in cities like Philadelphia to change up their tactics, get a little bit more advanced in how they approach the business of illegally re-selling weapons to convicted felons. Its not going to eliminate poverty, failing schools, a thriving drug economy and a not so thriving legitimate economy in many Philadelphia neighborhoods.

At best it would cause a short terms spike in the street price for illegal weapons that gradually settles into a hopefully slightly higher lasting long-term price as criminals get smarter at figuring the next step in gaming the system. When you are facing an epidemic, every little bit helps.

That said I feel like for the last almost 8 years the Street administration rightfully pointed at the intractable power of the gun lobby and acted like thats enough to stem the tide. Its not.

We need changes in the social conditions of violence. We need changes in the courts (see the recent move by Philadelphia City Council to sue the state to finally force it to pay its fair share for supporting our courts). We need changes in law enforcement - including substantive moves towards community enforcement, not just crime emergency zones. We need a change in the culture that glorifies quick material gain over the value of human life. We need an end to "Stop Snitchin'".

So while I think its great to make grand gesture of storming out to show that the alarming death toll really matters, I kind of wish they could have done it during the debate over something else because I think greater openness in how Harrisburg operates is also really, really important and may actually do much more to help our long term aims than one set of gun laws - a set of gun laws which may still unfortunately never make it out of committee in this state even if the Caucus were to chain themselves physically to the Speaker's chair.

I guess I'm just tired of pissing into the wind when there are things we can do now in other areas to reduce the environment of violence that pervades our city.

Symbollic actions are indeed important. Its important to reconnect the cost of legislative inaction to real actual deaths on the streets of PA's towns and cities.

I just happen to suspect that the passage of real open government laws with teeth may have as much impact on the quality of government, the quality of education, the quality of healthcare for Philadelphia citizens over the next 6 months to 2 years as running into the same legislative brick wall yet one more time will.

Rock it, make some noise but don't completely blow off the significance of open records either.

-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.

Perhaps it is because I have been personally impacted by an open records battle and I know how crappy the open records and sunshine laws are in Pennsylvania, but I was looking forward to seeing some half decent legislation passed to improve our open records law. I appreciate the Black Caucus's position, but to hold up important (though perhaps not a hot button piece of legislation for many people) that could greatly benefit democracy in our state is unfortunate. It would have been better if they could have picked a different piece of legislation to delay. I care about gun control but not at the expense of a better open records law.

I agree with elp and I have watched a young man die from gunshot wounds a couple hundred feet from my front door. Lack of transparency in government contributes to tangible soical ills also.

-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.

Russ, Mr. Luigi,

I feel it is time for Philadelphia to strike back against the rest of the state. If our needs won't be addressed, then why should we care if yours are?

I think that derailing open records should be only the beginning. If there's a piece of needed legislation that is contingent upon only one or two votes, let's put the point across to the rest of the state: if you keep ignoring and voting down measures that would help us, we'll do the exact same thing to you.

Of course, the ability of this to work would be heavily reliant upon how wide a margin the measures in question relied upon to be passed. We should make a real effort to coordinate with legislators from other parts of the state that are also affected by violence. It would not be a cure all by any means. However, it would get a point across: Philadelphia is a major part of this state, and if we suffer, you will too, whether you like it or not.

The Expatriate

1. Russ represents the "reform Republican" perspective of the rest of the state - or at least his version of it.

2. I posted earlier that I saw a young man die from gunshot wounds a few hundred feet from front door and I was not lying or saying just for dramatic effect. It happened in a public park less than 20 feet from kids playground full of kids at the time. I know how real this problem is. I still think transparency in government, "open records" law is in ballance as important as what I anticipate will be an unsuccesful push for "one-a-month" is.

Transparency in state government is not just a "rest of the state" problem - it is also a Philadelphia delegation problem - and it does not reflect well on the likelihood of our own delegations chances at impacting the social conditions of violence, the lack of jobs and educational opportunities available to many in Philly if we don't acknowledge from the get-go that lack of transparency in state government is part of why its so hard to fix those social conditions. Sorry I support "reform" because I think "reform" is integral to actually getting safety on our streets and social justice. Skipping that open government stuff helps set you up to fail on the other stuff.

Sorry I got to call it like I see it.

-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.