Bob Brady responds (The Next Mayor)

Did you see Brady's own response to the Kenney-bill fracas, in the editorial section of today's Daily News?

Here it is.

No one ever got cut on the corners of a square deal. But when it comes to spending in the Philadelphia mayor's race, voters are beginning to see that it's anything but a square deal.
Here's the REAL deal: In an attempt designed to level the playing field for ordinary candidates and millionaires, City Council actually made the playing field anything but level.

This is pay to play for millionaires only.

Growing up in Overbrook, I didn't know many millionaires. My friends and I understood that having money gave some people an advantage when it came to buying things. We just didn't know City Hall was one of them. Maybe we were naïve. But no mayoral candidate from John Street to Frank Rizzo bought their way into office.

Jim Kenney is a smart guy. This is not about the individual millionaire who tries to buy City Hall. The U.S. Supreme Court, under the free speech clause of the Constitution, protects the right of any millionaire to spend his money on a run for political office. So here's my bottom line:

• Report all contributions on-line within 24 hours.

• Provide electronic copies immediately to the Committee of Seventy.

• Encourage news organizations to publish contributions daily.

These simple steps are designed to be part of the solution, not part of the problem.

Philadelphia voters are smart enough to figure it out from there.

I keep reading it, but I am not sure I get it, so please comment if you do.

Kenney's bill would provide Brady (and all other mayoral candidates) with access to a lot of campaign money, and he seems to be suggesting transparency as a way to keep track of it. Which, of course, means that we'd all know it was big checks from PACs and labor that paid for all that television advertising, and I guess that would make the commercials less successful?

I don't buy that for a minute.

Comments (38)

Phaedrus:

Fattah must be giddy.

We knew someone was gonna level the trying-to-buy-city-hall argument at knox, but i don't think any of us thought a major candidate would do it quite so early, quite so directly, or quite so inartfully.

Knox has already thrown the fumo jab at brady; brady has no come back with the millionaire hook. fattah is just sitting back and letting these two candidates dismantle each other (two candidates who are largely competing for the same base) and will sail to election if it keeps up. from his perspective, keeping his mouth shut is now the knockout punch.

Not that i mind, necessarily. just seems that someone needs to call that out.

Posted by Phaedrus | February 3, 2007 3:48 AM

Friedman:

Fattah will be giddy, until a few negative ads - paid for by Knox - come his way. On Brady's statement...don't know if he's confused or just trying to spin, but millionaire like Knox spending his own money isn't "pay-to-play".

Posted by Friedman | February 3, 2007 8:17 AM

jordon:

"Philadelphia voters are smart enough to figure it out from there."

the sad truth is that they aren't. the reality is that the best way to communicate to the average voter is through the television. and since the local television media is more interested in covering barbaro and inclement weather than the intricacies of pay-to-play scandals, the guy with the most money usually wins.

if kenney wanted to level the playing field, he'd propose that all campaigns be solely funded by public money. and he would have done it a year ago.

Posted by jordon | February 3, 2007 11:58 AM

Eric:

I don't understand your comment, Friedman. It certainly is pay-to-play to contribute $1 million to a campaign so that you will gain a $200 million no-bid contract from the city. So, why is it not pay-to-play to spend $10 million on your own campaign in order to gain authority over 100s of city contracts?

Posted by Eric | February 3, 2007 12:04 PM

It's not "pay-to-play" as the term is generally used because there's no quid pro quo between a donor who expects something, contributes to a candidate, and the candidate delivers what's expected. I don't get the logic of your point...is it that everything is pay-to-play?

Posted by Friedman | February 3, 2007 1:13 PM

Dave

I asked this question a few entries down, but I'll ask it again here, since it seems applicable.

If the various unions and PACS that are drooling to contribute huge sums over the current limit, should the Kenney bills pass, really want to support a certain candidate, wouldn't they be allowed to mount their own independent media campaign where they tell voters that they support that candidate and why? Wouldn't Tom Knox, if he wasn't running for office himself, also be free to mount a media campaign and spend $15 million in support of one of the other candidates? I would think the 1st amendment would support this, probably with the requirement that they identify the source of the advertising.

P.S. Sounds like Brady's playing the "class card"

Posted by Dave | February 3, 2007 1:43 PM

Adam B

Dave, I would guess the answer to that is that the unions want to be able to coordinate with the campaigns when it comes to street effort and GOTV, and that if the Phila system is like the federal, you can't really do both.

Posted by Adam B | February 3, 2007 4:04 PM

I'm not sure I agree with that. As far as I can tell, there's nothing to keep them from coordinating. They'd probably just be required to put their mouth where their money is and label the advertising as coming from them and not the candidate's campaign. If this is the case, it sounds like a more transparent way of doing things.

Posted by Dave | February 3, 2007 4:14 PM

Jim:

This whole thing is simply absurd. Does anyone in this city care that its government is fillied with a bunch of cronies who consistently act in the best interest of themselves? Bob Brady is a joke - and this whole action is nothing other than an attempt by his buddies to advance his chances to buy, er win, the mayoral race. These guys are foul enough to almost turn me into a Republican.

Posted by Jim | February 3, 2007 8:51 PM

Wendy:

Dave: Actually, I believe buying airtime for messages supporting one candidate would be considered a donation.

The law defines a campaign contribution as:

"Money, gifts, forgiveness of debts, loans, or things of monetary value incurred or received by a candidate or his/her agent for use in advocating or influencing the election of the candidate.”

So it sounds like the kind of present you are describing would be a donation.

However, all of our campaign finance laws are untested, so the situation you describe would certainly result in a legal challenge.

Posted by Wendy | February 3, 2007 11:53 PM

Andy Daven:

To the fellow who said Bob Brady is a joke, you clearly have no clue what you're talking about. Bob Brady has been head of the Democratic Party for 21 years, and in Congress for 8 years. He is the senior majority whip. When Bill Clinton came to town, his first visit was always to Bob Brady (not Rendell by the way).

It's fair to agree or disagree with his politics, but Brady has a strong track-record of being in the community. He's also one of the few leaders in this city with bi-racial appeal. He's the only Congressman *in the country* with a majority minority district, and his ward is largely African American.

Brady has a compelling personal story of struggle and then success through the trades. He worked for City Council as a young man and was a Deputy Mayor under Wilson Goode.

When no one could end the SEPTA strike, Brady was called in. When no one could solve the teacher's strike, Brady was called in. He's been a hero in many times of crisis.

I'm sorry, but I don't know that anyone's record stacks up to him right now. He also leads the pack in resources brought into Philadelphia, from lighting the Platt Bridge (which was a big issue) to getting funding for the landmark Proton Therapy facility at Penn.

When you call Brady a joke, it speaks more about you than it does him...maybe you should do a little research before you speak.

Also, for the record, if people ran effective political organizations in other city's like Brady, perhaps it would be President Kerry now, or would have been President Gore. The margins of victory for the Democrats in Philly aren't by chance...it comes from hard work in the community by committed volunteers in the the party structure.

In terms of Kenney's bill, which is clearly the right thing to do, yes Fattah may be grinning, but he won't be when Knox comes for him. If the election were held today, it would be between Fattah and Knox. When he figures that out, he'll probably go negative on Fattah to try and damage him. I don't know what he'll say, but he'll probably focus on Chaka failing out of Overbrook and Community College. Chaka's never had to deal with $5 Million in ads about how he's a high school drop out, or what he does when he's down in D.C.

Anyway, it will be an interesting race!

Posted by Andy Daven | February 4, 2007 2:28 AM

From what I remember, the septa strike was resolved when a Rendell staffer found a way for septa to re-negotiate its contract in such a way that it was able to afford to provide union members with the (in my opinion, unreasonable) level of health coverage they were demanding.

Furthermore, septa ended up caving in and agreeing to a union contract that, arguably, heavily favored the union, at the expense of the transit system's riders. For instance, under the current union contract, septa isn't allowed to hire part-time or contract employees (all employees must be full-time salaries, I think).

And the Kenney bill apparently would allow unions to give lots of money to the candidate of their choosing...

As far as Brady's popularity in a "majority minority district" is it possible that this phenomenon is the result of the control over Democratic party funds that the party chairmanship gives him? After all, according to a recent article the party just donated a bunch of money to Brady and he's seeking their endorsement. Furthermore, Brady has long counted on the endorsement of influential African American political figures like current 4th district councilwoman Carol Campbell (who Brady pretty much appointed to that position... maybe because he owed her something?). Brady also donated $10,000 (the limit under the current campaign finance law) to Carol Campbell's city council re-election campaign (see the campaign finance report on the city controller's website -- Campbell also received $10,000 from her own Genesis IV "consulting" organization, so who knows where that money came from).

http://www.philadelphiacontroller.org/cfr.asp

Posted by Dave | February 4, 2007 1:00 PM

BTW, the re-negotiated contract I mentioned in the first paragraph of my previous post is related to health insurance and not the transit workers union.

Posted by Dave | February 4, 2007 1:02 PM

Dave, why do I think you've never belonged to a union? Maybe you never had to??

Also, your facts are just wrong about the SETPA strike and Brady. Look them up on Lexis/Nexis, and get back to us with your correction if you care to.

Finally, enough of the theories that minorities don't support Brady. I'm not sure what your involvment in the minority or African-American communities are, but pretty much anyone involed in Philly knows that Brady has some of the most support of any white elected officals in the black neighborhoods.

And not because of some cosmic scheme. Because he's spend a career being in those communities and helping people. That's not something that money can buy (like TV ads), it's real, and people in Philly don't forget that stuff.

Unfortunately, a lot of the electorate is unengaged in the community, and just watches TV, and for them (unlike the community leaders) TV can make all the difference.

Posted by Andy Daven | February 4, 2007 5:34 PM

If Brady is so popular and well-known and he's been keeping it real for 20-30 years, why are his poll numbers so low? Is it just because he hasn't been on TV?

Posted by Friedman | February 4, 2007 5:46 PM

Dave, relax, I know you don't like the guy. He only got in the race one week ago, and he's neck and neck with Nutter and Evans who have been pounding away for a while.

And yes, Knox, as the other white candidate, was the only guy declared and was blasting TV every 10 minutes. It does make a difference.

I think in the end, it's probably going to be Chaka, who is always in first place in the polls, but don't rule Brady out.

He has a loyal following and organization, because he has been loyal to all of those volunteers and party workers. He has also been there for so many people that I think you'll see endorsements from all different types and kinds.

I think people in Philadelphia are just starting to focus on the race, and getting to know the candidates. With Brady, the more they get to know him, the more they will like him. Reverse with Knox.

Nutter's holding his ground as the outsider trying to create a base, and Evans needs Chaka to implode in order to pick up steam.

It's still open. My main point is, it just doesn't seem you have done your homework to know who the players really are. Maybe you've been reading YPP too much, in which case you'd think the only two candidates were Michael Nutter and Michael Nutter.

By the way, I hope someone starts a blog for all the people who were kicked off of YPP because they disagreed with their endorsements.

Posted by Andy Daven | February 4, 2007 5:54 PM

Andy - you haven't read YPP much. I'm a Mike Nutter supporter and I don't think that YPP is exactly Mike Nutter central, although a bunch of poster do support him. I think it's going to be an interesting race, and I wouldn't rule anybody out just yet. My candidate has the most money raised from the most contributors...not too shabby. I of course, don't get Knox here because most of his money is his own. How do you think the Fumo indictment will play out for Brady?

Posted by Friedman | February 4, 2007 8:06 PM

I don't think a Fumo indictment has anything to do with Brady. If Senator Fumo is indicted, it will probably be a pretty lame charge, like erasing emails or something like that.

Senator Fumo has been a strong advocate for his communities for many years, and is always re-elected overwhelmingly -- even when contested. I think most of his constituents are pretty happy with his leadership. Just ask the people in the Art Museum area, where he has been a champion for economic development and community renewal.

I think Fumo has been targeted by a Republican administration. But don't think that Fumo has done anything that any other elected official hasn't done.

I think the inpact will be as great as Bill Clinton's impeachment hearings on Hillary's chances of the Presidency -- immaterial.

Posted by Andy Daven | February 4, 2007 9:08 PM

Richard Chaiit:

Brady suggestion makes common sense. There should be no difference between public and private money to finance a campaign. Transparency is the important feature of Brady's comments.

Posted by Richard Chaiit | February 4, 2007 9:15 PM

Agreed...and remember, Brady was the first of all the candidates to embrase the Committee of 70's Ethics platform.

Posted by Andy Daven | February 4, 2007 9:21 PM

Wow, why would you skip the big game to post here? ;-)

No, I've never been a member of a union. My dad's a member of a union, though, if that makes any difference. As far as my "involvement" with minority communities, I live in one -- not that it gives me any more or less credibility.

It's been a while since I used Lexis/Nexis. Maybe you can look up those facts and set me straight? Which facts did I get wrong? I tend to trust my memory, since I rode my bike to work every day during that strike and was following it pretty closely.

Posted by Dave | February 4, 2007 10:30 PM

Knox more sinister than I thought!

I just heard some inside information from a reliable source...

Apparently, Knox thinks he can really win, but he is concerned that if he rocks the boat, how will he govern City Council.

So, he's working out the final details of running a slate of both at-large candidates, and targeted district candidates.

He thinks that with $500,000 per seat, he can bring in, or bring to his side permanently, a majority vote in council, so he alone can push his agenda though.

Apparently, he was going to release this plan sooner, but they've put it under wraps because they're concerned about the Kenney bill. They're waiting (and hoping) for the bill to fail, so they can move forward.

I doubt anyone else had heard about this, because it's really under wraps, but if you have, let me know.

This is madness! And this is what campaign finance reform has brought us??

Posted by Andy Daven | February 5, 2007 10:12 AM

sheth

I dont think Brady is a joke at all, but I do wonder why he wants to be mayor. It seems like other people told him he should run for mayor and he is doing so. I dont get the impression this was something he always wanted to do. I also dont like the fact that he is so dismissive of policy papers and what not. It's like he is saying there are simple solutions to Philly's problems and he is too good to be bogged down with policy papers. I mean what is he saying? It appears that he is suggesting the average, uneducated Philadelphian cant understand any detailed policy paper and other candidates are wasting their time while he is going dumb everything down and just keep promising "leadership" on every issue.

Posted by sheth | February 5, 2007 11:29 AM

Hey Andy,

You get that rumor about Knox buying city council out of Lexis/Nexis?

Posted by Dave | February 5, 2007 11:46 AM

I don't think Brady has said what you're saying at all! But you really raised two questions...why is he running and what is his leadership style.

In terms of running, I think it's probably because he's been in the support role for so long, working for City Council, working as a Deputy Mayor, building consensus in the political structure, coming in during crises to resolve them (SEPTA, PFT/Teachers), or just stopping political fueds so people focus on government and not politics.

I guess now he is tired of this, and tired of the lack of leadership. I think I saw somewhere that he said he was very concerened about the crime problem so he held his summit, and got everyone to the table. Good ideas came out, and yet nothing got done. So he held it a second time. Again, nothing. So, rather than keep pushing that boulder up the hill, he said it was time for someone to step forward and do it, and he was willing to be that person.

I would actually think folks would commend him for this. Certainly, of all the candidates, he has the most extensive record, from local government, to national politics, to grass-roots organization. He also has bi-racial appeal, which in this city is huge.

In terms of policy, I never heard Brady say anything like that. What I heard him say is that his management style has always been a team based approach, often where he's the coach. So, rather than make a bunch of campaign promises that may or may not happen, he would chart out the general direction, and bring together the all-star team to do it. So, on police for instance, rather than bog down a new commissioner in campaign motivated promises, why not recruit the #1 crime fighter in the country, and then give him the political support to get the job done!?!

Seems to me that we shouldn't want a candidate who promises to micro-manage every city department. We saw how well that worked when Wilson Goode became mayor (after being a good managing director).

That's not what Mayor's should do.

So, I don't think this is *about* policy, per se, but management style.

And quite honestly, right now, our city government needs a really good talent scout and a really good coach. Not someone promising to be the pitcher, the catcher, the runner, and the organ player. That's unrealistic.

If you really drill into what the city needs, it's probably what Brady brings to the table.

Chaka may have this ability too, and I've been leaning towards him, but the more I learn about Brady the more I like him.

The biggest difference I can see is that Chaka talks a big game, but the substance isn't always there. Brady is just straight forward.

One thing I liked about Chaka was I think he has a great story about having dropped out of high school and community college, but then turned around his life to go on to Congress and fight for education. I think that resonates. However, I was doing some digging and saw some stuff where he was talking about going to Penn and Harvard, etc., and I don't think he's pitching his story the right way. Anyway, that's a digression.

Posted by Andy Daven | February 5, 2007 11:57 AM

Are there any particular ideas from Brady's crime summit that he wants implemented? I seem to remember that while Brady was bringing people together for a summit that didn't produce any results, Michael Nutter was in city council getting more police on the streets over the mayor's objections. The latter sounds a little closer to my definition of "leadership."

Posted by Dave | February 5, 2007 12:10 PM

I think Brady called everyone together for a summit from the police commissioner to the Speaker of the House to the Cardinal. Ideas went around, but when nothing happened, he called them back for a second summit. When there was still a lack of progress, my understanding was that this was one of the real motivators for Brady to run. The old "if you want something done, do it yourself".

As for your Nutter comment, I don't recall him doing *anything* to get more cops on the street. Can you please cite what you're talking about? Or are you just referring to the budget negotiations?

Again, I think the issue on this campaign will not be who can promise the world, but who will be the best talent scout and coach as mayor. That will probably be Chaka or Brady.

Posted by Andy Daven | February 5, 2007 1:35 PM

Anonymous:

I dont think Brady has done nearly as much as some people like to believe. I sense that he is an honest guy but I dont see much in the way of innovation from Brady. It's great to say we need action and not policy papers but I have to wonder HOW Brady plans to get all these things done if elected. You can bring people together all day long but that isnt the same as actually solving problems.

BTW, Brady isnt the only guy in this race with cross racial appeal so I dont see why that needs to be mentioned repeatedly. I think they all have some degree of cross racial appeal, especially Nutter.

Posted by Anonymous | February 5, 2007 1:44 PM

I don't know how long you've lived in Philly, but bringing people together is usually the biggest part of problem solving!

Look, Brady's been teaching at Penn for 11 years in Organizational Dynamics. He was teaching there before he was in congress. I'm sure he knows a little bit about complex systems, and how to manage the polics and get the delivery.

As for biracial appeal, you're wrong, and Nutter is the worst example. Nutter appeals to a small part of the minority vote along City Ave, and then white yuppies in center city and chestnut hill. The people that vote for Jannie Blackwell or Darryl Clark have to time for Nutter. He, of every candidate, has the least political base.

Look, this guy can't even hang onto his own ward. How do you think he'll be able to work with City Council or anyone else in this city?

Posted by Andy Daven | February 5, 2007 1:52 PM

Yes, the budget negotiations that resulted in the city hiring more police officers is one of the things I'm talking about. I think the ball's now in Mayor Street's court on actually approving funding for that (the mayor's office, as I understand it, has the final say on what actually gets funded in this city).

He also seems to have been working on the issue for a while, given this bill from February 2006 that would've shifted money to the P.D.'s budget to hire more police officers:

http://webapps.phila.gov/council/detailreport/?key=5998

He also introduced this bill that would allow Police Offices and Fire Fighters in the city's DROP program to stay on the force for another year (this would slow the rate at which the police department is shrinking through retirement, while keeping more experienced officers on the force):

http://webapps.phila.gov/council/detailreport/?key=6412

I don't think the bill ultimately passed in that from, though. I think I read somewhere that it was sponsored by Councilman Ramos after Nutter resigned from city council and passed under Ramos' sponsorship.

Posted by Dave | February 5, 2007 1:55 PM

So, really all your saying is that he talked alot about crime, and put up bills that couldn't get passed.

I think we need someone who can do more than talk a good game, and showboat, don't you?

Posted by Andy Daven | February 5, 2007 2:11 PM

Those bills passed. Take a look for yourself. Like I said, though, just because it passes in city council doesn't mean the mayor has to fund it (Philadelphia has a "strong mayor" government structure). I believe the extra police had to be secured during budget negotiations because only Mayor Street can actually get them funded.

Posted by Dave | February 5, 2007 2:43 PM

You're right that only the Mayor can make that happen. I'm glad Nutter is on board with the more cops issue. I'm still pretty shaky on his plan to revoke civil rights in minority neighborhoods and put cameras everywhere. 1984 anyone? And add a little Animal Farm too, where some animals are more equal than others. They won't be stopping and frisking some boy in Chestnut Hill to find out if he was the guy buying the drugs in North Philly, and causing the problem!

Posted by Andy Daven | February 5, 2007 2:47 PM

davekopps

seems like mr. andy daven needs to reveal that he is on the payroll of bob "spinning the sh**" brady about now.

Posted by davekopps | February 5, 2007 3:05 PM

What is with you guys. I've said before than I'm leaning towards Chaka, but open to Brady. How come when someone says something positive about Brady they must be on the payroll?? No one accuses the Nutter cronies of being on his payroll, or Evans. Of course, Knox's only friends are on his payroll.

It's getting tiresome. Can't we talk about the issues, and stop with the attacks?

Posted by Andy Daven | February 5, 2007 3:11 PM

Check out the WHYY radio show I'm linking to below. Does that sound like 1984 and huge civil rights violations? Are Kansas City, Pittsburgh, Prince George's County, MD, etc guilty of being oppressive police states? Is the United States supreme court wrong for upholding the constitutionality of what Nutter is proposing?

http://www.whyy.org/podcast/121406_100630.mp3

Posted by Dave | February 5, 2007 3:24 PM

You know what, those places aren't Philly. Law aside, do you want to be the Nutter spokesman who gets to go to K&A and tell them that they just took away their rights??

I mean, can't we try normal police work first, and make this a last resort?

Posted by Andy Daven | February 5, 2007 3:26 PM

What, you don't think Philadelphia's populated by reasonable human beings? Have you ever been to K&A? There are quite a few people living around there who see violence out their windows pretty regularly and would love to be able to go outside without fearing for their lives.

Posted by Dave | February 5, 2007 10:07 PM

Comments (38)

Post a comment