Opposition has grown all day to Councilman James Kenney's idea to lift campaign limits for mayoral candidates. So far today, Michael Nutter held a press conference and issued a statement to condemn the idea; Evans put out a statement opposing it (and suggesting an alternative) and Tom Knox, the guy who got this all started, put out a one-paragraph statement that...well, I'm not sure what it actually means, except obviously he's above the fray.
The issue is this: Tom Knox spent $2 million in ads, bought himself a big jump in the polls, and got everyone (particularly those who back Bob Brady) a bit freaked out and looking for ways to raise more money faster.
I've posted the candidates' responses all day. I also reached out to the Committee of 70, our partner in The Next Mayor and people who understand campaign finance well.
President and Chief Executive Officer Zack Stalberg said Seventy "believes the bill is extremely bad" and added that the good-government group "will oppose it when it comes to a hearing."
He's also sent letters to each of the candidates asking them to declare how they feel about the bill.
"Prior to the establishment of the donation limits Philadelphia was in a situation where public officials were bought and sold routinely," Zack said. "The current system may have some flaws. But it definitely reduced the size of a permissiable donation to a level where you can no longer buy influence. And that's good."
Zack said he wished it were possible to limit how much a candidate can spend of his or her own money, but the U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled that's not possible. But, in a case like Knox's, he pointed out: "At least it's his own money, and no one is buying him."
"Each of these candidates have gotten name recognition in their own way," he pointed out. Knox may have bought his, but he didn't have a high-profile public position where he could generate it for years before running for Mayor.
I asked Zack to explain how Kenney's bill, if it passed, would work with the pay-to-play legislation that is already in place. Which groups would be allowed unrestricted donations if Kenney's bill passed, and which wouldn't?
"My quick reading of this is that outfits or individuals that want city contracts would still be limited," Zack said. "But that leaves a world of idiots out there who are still trying to buy influence and favors."
He also pointed out that Kenney's bill would change the rules of this race in the middle of it, which has been enough of a problem with the campaign finance limits already.
"All of the candidates agreed to the ethics agenda," Zack reminded them, "which called for a review of of the rules after this election." Any candidate who supports the Kenney bill is "violating the spirit of the ethics agenda that they already agreed to."
Not to mention violating the spirit of reform that this city wants and has voted for, he added.