- Council Committee Passed the Freeze
- Carol Campbell Passes Away
- My first trip to the public library
- Fight digital exclusion
- What if half of Philadelphia didn't have roads?
- You know, let's not even worry about the City Commissioners office messing up voter registration processing
- Bold ideas to fix the budget
- Mayor Nutter's Town Hall Meeting Schedule
- City Releases Library Information to City Council
- Size of Philadelphia government?
The rules!?!?
Submitted by Edawg309 on Wed, 02/07/2007 - 1:04am.
Many of you criticize the current bill put into place by Kenney. You say that fair is publicly financed campaigns. That is not going to happen this election. You then say we cannot “change the rules of the game in the middle of the competition”. Imagine if in a football game, somehow one of the teams, through a loophole, could buy touchdowns at will. Changing the rules would make the game competitive. Failing to do as such would ruin the season. This is for high stakes: why, why, why let Knox go on a spending free-for-all. Is it because you want him to combat Brady (for Nutter and or Evans…)???? Progressive thinking would want a fair chance for ALL candidates! Real campaign finance reform is past this election... So... let them ALL spend, and get a truly fair competition.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
Well, for your analogy, I
Well, for your analogy, I believe the NFL doesn't make up new rules mid season. They have competition committees after the season to do rule analysis and changes.
I also think calling it a "loophole" is an exaggeration. It isn't like millionaire self funders is a new issue and it isn't like it was known Knox was going to self fund.
If you don't think the current rules are fair, where is all your outrage at the original legislators that didn't legislate for it ahead of time for a well known possibility?
Why Knox is popular and why we cannot repeal the caps
You just do not get it.
There are higher values than a level playing field. Assuring that whoever is elected does not owe favors to rich groups is really really important. It is so important that many of us are willing to risk a Tom Knox mayorship to preserve it.
Also, obviously, it is so important that many many people are willing to vote for Knox... not because his momma put him to be hungry, or because his brother was an addict, but precidely because regardless of how bad a mayor he will be, he will owe nothing to no one: No Ron Whites, Fatcat union bosses, Carol CAmpbells: No one. He can govern with what is best for the city in mind.
Do not get me wrong: I do not favor Knox for Mayor. But I think his popularity stems as much from a rejection of old school pay to play as it does from media saturation.
Political Doc
I don't get it? I am
I don't get it? I am against repealing the caps.
Agreed
I agree with you! They should have put in this provision in the first version. Oh well, I guess they'll just have to clean it up now!
tv ads
Don't make the classic mistake of conflating a revulsion with " pay to play" with a media blitzkrieg to explicate Knox and his surge in polls. As I predicted -time will erode his ephemeral gains. The wooden indian will drift into oblivian.