Two interesting posts when Dan turned the blog over to you:
"Reform the procedures of Philadelphia courts to make the rules for victims and witnesses the same as those in the rest of the state."
And so Dan asked for more info, and got:
"For starters, Philadelphia requires witnesses to show up at every single court session, regardless of whether they're required to testify. State rules don't have this requirement."
Good grief.
The kind of team, including people in Congress and the State House, that John Baer has Mike Nutter dreaming of today is starting to make a lot of sense.
Comments (7)
That "dream" assumes that Michael Nutter is the best man for the job. But as Dwight says, he has more experience than Nutter, and maybe Nutter should be the one to step aside. The candidates can't roll over and unit as one until the voters of this city decide who the right leader is. Annointing Nutter, without hearing more from everyone else, is a poor position to take.
Posted by Mark | September 18, 2006 9:34 AM
Whoever ends up getting elected mayor next year is going to need a lot of support in Harrisburg, if only to fix the SEPTA mess but also for other reform that, IMO, is needed.
Having Rendell as governor would be helpful, I think, and that will be a significant factor (Swann's lack of experience and qualifications aside) when I decide who to vote for in the gov race.
Having somebody like Evans in Harrisburg would also be helpful but, having said that, I do support his right to decide for himself whether or not he runs for mayor.
Posted by Dave | September 18, 2006 12:08 PM
I agree with you, Dave. I think that is another element important to the candidate - can s/he work with others and has s/he proven that he can - on both sides of the aisle. Not just a promise to, but even some proof that they have. With Congress (Spector, Santorum/Casey, Brady, etc.), Harrisburg (State Reps./Senators, Governor) and with City Council and Ward Leaders. Taking from some of the things in the PICA report, the next mayor will need all the support they can get, and need to show they can work with others in getting things done and making changes.
Posted by Mark | September 18, 2006 12:31 PM
I agree that, based on his work (and achieved results) with the smoking ban and BPT reduction legislation (which didn't become law only because of a mayoral veto), Nutter has shown that he can work with politicians at the city level.
He'll definitely need to make good use of that ability, if elected. A notable difference between the Rendell and Street administrations appears to be their willingness and ability to work with prominent members of city council, compromising where appropriate. While I've heard that Rendell worked closely with such councilmembers as Anna Verna, Michael Nutter, and even John Street himself, it would appear that Street has worked almost as hard during his time in office to alienate these same people (excluding himelf, of course).
Posted by Dave | September 18, 2006 2:52 PM
I think it's strange that John Baer brings up the "issue" of losing Evans' and Fattah's clout in the state house and Congress as a reason not to vote for them. From what I've been told, no one bases their votes on this. No one will not vote for Evans and Fattah because they'd prefer to see them stay where they are. It's just not how people think when they enter the voting booth.
Posted by Dan | September 19, 2006 4:44 PM
If they ran for mayor and lost, would they lose their congressional seats? If so, maybe that was his point: "don't run for mayor so we'll be sure you can at least serve the public in your current capacity."
Posted by Dave | September 19, 2006 7:23 PM
That's just it. Neither Evans nor Fattah has to give up their current seats to run for mayor. I think what Baer is saying is that it would be worse for the city for either of them to win because then they'd have to give up their seats. If that's the case, then neither of them should run since there's the possibility that either of them could win.
Wow... that makes less and less sense every time I read it.
Posted by Dan | September 20, 2006 9:49 AM