Great Expectations

U.S. Rep. Bob Brady isn't the only one to be caught in the net for failing to fully disclose his assets and income on his state financial disclosure form.

According to The Next Mayor web site, there were nine suits filed in Philadelphia this election season alleging that candidates omitted one item for another. At leat one candidate -- Jacques Whaumbush, a Democrat running for Sheriff -- was thrown off the ballot by a judge for his failure to disclose.

Why the sudden spate of suits? Two reasons: for one thing, the Supreme Court in two recent rulings has taken a hard-line on disclosures. It threw two candidates off the ballot because of failure to list all: John Braxton, a former judge running for City Controller and Vern Anastasio, who was making his first run for City Council.

Here's the editorial running in Tuesday's (4/3) paper on the new electronic market on the mayor's race that starts this week:

If you think you’ve got this crazy Philadelphia mayor’s election figured out, here’s a chance to prove it.

In good news for a struggling concept, election reform in Philadelphia, the state Commonwealth Court today (4/2) ruled that the city does indeed have the right to set its own campaign donation limits.

Whatever flaws there may be in the campaign finance law that's at issue in this case (and the current mayoral race is pointing up some flaws, though perhaps not as many as those who yearn for the bad, old freewheeling days pretend), it's a great precedent that the city does have the right to set its own rules to limit the poison of pay to play.

-- Chris Satullo

Following is the editorial we published on the ruling Tuesday, April 3:

In its landmark decision upholding Philadelphia’s campaign-finance limits, Commonwealth Court yesterday said that the city, in effect, had a perfectly legal right to try to clean up its own mess.

The Editorial Boad of the Inquirer has begun interviewing candidates for Philadelphia City Council for possible endorsement (as well candidates for various suburban offices, Pennsylvania appellate courts and, oh yeah, mayor).

This year we're inviting the candidates for a given Council district seat to come into together, so we can interview them jointly and hear what they have to say to and about each other.

The questions we're asking are based strongly on the comments, hopes and fears we heard from citizens during our Great Expectations forums in January and February.

Today's surprise comes courtesy of the mayoral campaign of U.S. Rep. Chaka Fattah.

The campaign issued a news release listing how much Fattah raised and spent for the period between Jan. 31 and March 26th, under the impression there was a filing deadline that required all candidates to disclose as of yesterday

There is such a deadline, but it applies only to state candidates, not local ones. The local campaign finance disclosure deadline isn't until early next month. The upshot is that Fattah ended up showing his hand weeks before he was required. And what a weak hand it is.

When I read the release, I had a Peggy Lee Moment. You know, the one where she asks: "Is that all there is?"

The Tom Knox campaign for mayor is a beautiful balloon, sailing higher and higher in the estimation of Democratic voters.

The hot-off-the-presses Keystone Poll, done by Terry Madonna and company at Franklin & Marshall College, shows Knox with a clear and commanding lead over his nearest rival in the May 15th primary, U.S. Rep. Chaka Fattah.

To give you the exact numbers it is: Knox 24%, Fattah 17%, U.S. Rep. Bob Brady 16%, former City Councilman Michael Nutter 12% and state Rep. Dwight Evans at 10%. There's still a big block of undecideds, though, at 21%.

The Keystone Poll was in the field between March 28 and April 3, the sample size is small – 362 registered Democrats – and the margin of error is large: plus/minus 5.1%.

With such a small sample size, it's best to concentrate on the trends than the actual numbers and here is what the number show:

Hello everyone. My name is Carolyn Davis and I'm a writer for the Inquirer editorial pages. My beats include education and other issues about children, topics I have covered for longer than I care to remember. This forum, called "The Philadelphia Schools: Progress and Problems, is part of our Great Expectations project on the city's mayoral election.

This gathering is being held in what we call the public room at the Inquirer. If you've ever walked by 400 N. Broad St., it's the room with the giant windows at street level. There probably are about 100 people here now along with the panel members. Our guests are Michael Masch, the Pennsylvania budget director who also used to be on the School Reform Commission; Sharmain Matlock Turner, president of the Greater Philadelphia Urban Affairs Coalition; Michael Casserly who heads the national education group, the Council of Great City Schools; Darlene Callands Curry with the Philadelphia chapter of the Black Alliance for Educational Options; and Jolley Bruce Christman, founder of the group Research for Action, which has done numerous studies on Philadelphia school reforms. Chris Satullo, editorial page editor and my boss, is brilliantly describing this forum and project (I told you he's my boss, didn't I?) Well, I'll let Chris finish with the housekeeping announcements and return with my first report of what the panelists are saying.

Michael Casserly attended Villanova University, so he has that all-important Philly connection. Urban school districts nationwide are under tremendous pressure -- in the court of public opinion and the court of history, to improve the academic progress of students. He is saying that the results across the country are improving, though urban school districts are far from perfect.

"But the trend lines, fragile though they may be," indicate urban education is on the right track, he says.

Casserly is listing the changes that have been put into place in Philadelphia schools, including standardizing curriculum districtwide, increasing the percentage of highly qualified teachers, and longer summer school and school days.

"The reforms the school district is following are consistent and in some ways better than other districts you will see across the country. What sets Philadelphia apart is the many reforms it is doing at once and the diverse provider model," Casserly is saying.

Jolley's first slide shows that more Philadelphia schools are making the Adequate Yearly Progress standard that is required by the federal No Child Left Behind Act with an increase districtwide in proficiency in grades five and eight. High school, including the graduation rate, is still a big problem.

Now she is getting into the instructional management system, which is an unexciting name but has an important function.The system is made up of a core curriculum -- which may itself be responsible for academic gains made -- benchmark assessments, SchoolNet, and something else I didn't catch before she moved on to the next slide.

Michael is recalling the condition of the district before the state takeover. It isn't a pretty stroll down memory lane. There was an acute financial crisis that left the district teetering on bankruptcy and students with scores that were as poor as the district's coffers.

Besides being a founding member of the School Reform Commission (SRC), Michael also was on the old school board. He's describing how Mayor Street and then-Gov. Ridge slowly moved together toward a state takeover. Masch is emphasizing that, originally, Gov. Ridge wanted a full state takeover. But counter to what many people think, what took place was a partnership between the city and the state. The mayor and the governor both appoint members to the SRC. Street helped shape the takeover structure.

Michael is now trying to put the current Philadelphia school money troubles into perspective. He's making the case that the absolute number of dollars spent isn't as important as how they are spent. Actually, I think both are important.

Here's some state context:

Sharmain is talking about how parents hunger for school choices. People who can afford it can select a top-notch public school, private school or religious school for their kids. People with less money rely on the public system yet still want choice.

She's making the interesting point that the Philadelphia public schools has a long history of school choice. Three prestigious magnet schools have been around for decades. Central High was established in 1836 (what do you know, it's the second-oldest public school in the country), Girls' High began in 1848 and Masterman in 1958. But those choices were available mainly to people who had good connections or students who were high achievers.

Today there are 30 special admission high schools with 15,558 kids and six middle with 2,374 students enrolled. Nearly 27,301 students requested transfers and 8,339 of those requests were approved. Sharmain's conclusion is that more choices are needed for all parents. Today, one out of every seven Philadelphia students attends a charter schools. She disagrees with those who say charter schools and the funding directed to them are ruining the district. The public schools are a collection of students and parents -- and many parents are choosing charters and other alternative schools.

Darlene is a product of Philadelphia public schools and now her children are in them. She has made use of choices to put her kids in good schools and now one of her daughters is a blossoming poet.

A lot of parents ask Darlene to explain the district's educational options and how to use them. She hears parents time and again saying, "enough." Enough excuses, enough of a culture of failure. School choice is a road map for academic success.

Kids are still being left behind because of a lack of variety in schools and the possiblity for low-income parents to match their child's abilities with the right school.

"The reality is if you have money in America, you have choice. If you have status in America, you have choice." School choice is widespread unless you're poor. "Who loses and who chooses?" she asks.

Anything other than a quality education is child abuse, Darlene is saying. Her passion for choice in education is obvious; her pulpit-style delivery is stirring.

"We as parents are tired of waiting. And enough is enough."

Amen.

We're back together. After the panelists finished their presentations, the audience split up into small groups to discuss Philadelphia schools. Now we're at the last part of the evening. The audience has submitted questions in writing to the next set of guests, School Reform Commission Chairman Jim Nevels and SRC member Sandra Dungee Glenn.

Question: What is the district doing to counter violence in schools?
Nevels: The SRC worked with district CEO Paul Vallas to draft a tough new code. Large, comprehensive high schools, where much of the violence occurs, are being split into smaller schools. He is working with Vallas to make sure the student conduct and disciplinary codes are enforced fully and consistently.
Glenn: She seconds what Jim said, but adds that kids need stability, not uncertainty. Schools need to have a stable climate -- and that takes action from school administrators, teachers and central office staff.

As my colleague, Larry Eichel, makes clear in a piece that ran in this morning's Inquirer, the candidates for mayor aren't exactly making tax reductions a keystone of their campaigns.

In fact, with the exception of Michael Nutter and (perhaps) Tom Knox, most of them put tax cuts behind -- in some cases far behind -- their ambitious programs for city government intervention in crime, poverty, the schools, etc.

One of the candidates, Chaka Fattah, has even gone so far as proposing a business tax increase, though he doesn't call it that. In order to eliminate the hated Gross Receipts Tax, Fattah has proposed, um, adjusting another business tax -- the net profits tax -- to make up the difference.

In toto, business taxes bring in about $400 million a year into the city's coffers, with 70 percent of that total coming from the city's 6.5% tax on net profits and 30 percent from the 1.5%tax on a company's gross receipts.

A quick round of first thoughts on today's political stories:

Brady says he is against nepotism, but has gotten jobs for most of his family.
First thought: Maybe Bob thought that nepotism meant the hiring of Nepotamians. And he's against that. He wants to hire Americans first.
Second Thought: I'm grateful he doesn't have a larger family.

A judge rules that T. Milton Street can stay on the ballot as a candidate for council-at-large. "I think I made a pretty good argument. I'm thinking maybe I should go to law school," said Street, who represented himself.
FT: His brother and nephew think so, too. They have enrolled him in the Pago Pago School of Law.

The Building Trades decides not to endorse any City Council incumbent for allowing a referendum on the ballot to block construction of two casinos in Philly.
FT: Payback is a female dog.

Tom Knox rejects Committee of Seventy's call for him to voluntarily limit his personal contributions to his campaign.
FT: But first he laughed until he cried.
ST: His opponents say they want to even the playing field. They mean they want him under it.

Evans and Fattah pooh-pooh urban planning at mayoral forum.
FT: Where is the wisdom in belittling people's concerns -- unless you don't give a damn about them and their votes?

Citizens turned out April 9 at Philadelphia's Central Library to hear three of the five Democratic mayoral candidates talk about issues related to the design of the city and the neighborhoods.
People were able to ask questions of candidates Dwight Evans, Chaka Fattah and Michael Nutter about transit, casinos and more. Visit www.planphilly.com for complete coverage.

I'm live blogging from The Enterprise Center in West Philadelphia about issues of poverty and prosperity in Philadelphia. Today's discussion is cosponsored by the Great Expectations project and the Urban Studies program at Penn.

On the schedule is a presentation on New York City’s anti-poverty efforts, a panel discussion on how that approach might translate to Philadelphia, and citizen dialogues aimed at sketching out an anti-poverty agenda for our city and region. Things should be getting underway momentarily, as the lights have dimmed.

One of the challenges for today, according to the opening speaker from the Urban Studies group, is for participants to come up with specific ideas for the next mayor to build on. This format is similar to that used during the community forums held earlier this year to discuss leadership in Philadelphia and what characteristics citizens want in the next mayor.

Today's first speaker is Veronica White, executive director of New York City's Center for Economic Opportunity. She says the mayor often says "Prepare New Yorkers to work and make work pay." The city comissioned a report that recommended focusing on three groups: The working poor, young adults 16-24 and young children, 0-5. Since 1990 the percetage of working families living in poverity in NYC has grown from 29 to 46 percent.

Some examples of efforts under way:
- providing a local child care tax credit;
- trying to help families claim their Earned Income Tax Credit;
- creating an Office of Financial Empowerment to help empower low-income people to protect their assets
- working with the City University of New York to increase graduation from community colleges;
- implementing nurse-family partnerships to provide regular home visits to first-time mothers. (Although expensive, this plan pays off in the long run.);
- funding condidtional cash transfers, which means providing money to families to do certain things, like going to the doctor or getting preventive care, that might fall through the cracks for people working multiple jobs. This last program has been success in other countries, she says.

Today's panel, introduced and moderated by Chris Satullo, is made up of four members: Sharmain Matlock Turner, president of the Greater Philadelphia Urban Affairs Coalition;
Gloria Guard; president of the People’s Emergency Center and the PEC's Community Development Center;
Michael Katz, a historian of poverty from the University of Pennsylvania;
and Willie Baptist, of the Kensington Welfare Rights Union

First question: What struck you as something from Veronica's presentation on NYC that Philly could do, or something that seemed a little off?

Gloria: New York has actual hard information, which for a long time we've been lacking.
Sharmain: New York is putting its money where its mouth is. They're going to make an investment.The best ideas: Having an actual strategy of how to eliminate poverty. Next mayor must come up with a strategy.
Michael: That NYC actually formed a committee and is willing to put poverty at the forefront of the political agenda. How much can other cities accomplish?
Willie: This is not an issue of just poor people. This issue is cutting across racial and gender lines, and this problem is going to require a social movement beyond just the individual cities.

2. What in Philly is trapping people in poverty?
Sharmain: We're trying to find opportunities for young people to work during the summer. In Philly, we're seeing a change in the economy. The kind of factory jobs that we had 20 years ago are no longer here. We're getting people into the workforce, but we're not seeing them move up.
Gloria: If there's no way for people to move up, those entry-level jobs aren't there for others who need them. Also, as housing becomes less affordable, it's harder for people to pay market-rate rent. Interested to see how the cash-incentive program works out in NY. Commending the GUAC for taking on predatory lenders.
Michael: Real wages have been going down since the 1970s and the protections people once had have also been eroded. The only reason family income has remained stable is because so many women have gone to work. It's astounding that poverty has been missing from the political agenda. What are we going to do about low wages? So far, we've all agreed to subsidize people rather than raising the minimum wage.
Willie: Each of us has a sense of responsibility to come up with creative solutions so that we can draw from diversity of experiences. My situation, being poor with diabetes and formerly homeless, is one that faces so many people in this country. We're talking about America, and people are dying in the streets while houses sit empty. Poverty is tomorrow's slavery.

The crowd of about 85 people responded to Willie's passionate answer with a round of applause.

The panel moves on to discuss predatory lending and how immigration plays into issues of poverty.

Sharmain's group is trying to address the predatory lending issue. An important point, she says, is not to throw the baby out with the bathwater: While trying to remove predatory lenders, we must make sure that not all the money is taken out of the low-income community.

On the issue of immigration, Michael points out that not all immigrants are poor, so it necessary to pinpoint where the povery is within the immigrant community. A large part of Philadelphia's growth recently has come from immigration.

Last question for the panel:

Imagine that it's Nov. 10, 2007, and you're in the elevator with the city's new mayor. The elevator gets stuck. Now's your chance to tell him what needs to be done about poverty. What do you say?

Willie: We need to study Chicago's experience, and invite the people who are affected by this to be part of the conversation. We should also look at successful programs, such as HeadStart. We need to get the people who are involved in the issue, who feel the pain of the issue, to participate in discussions on how to address the problem. People are not poor because they're stupid. They're poor because of a certain set of circumstances that could happen to anyone.
Michael: We need a broadly based commission to make poverty a priority. We need to set up an office of immigration. We need to enact a living-wage ordinance. We need to fund community organizing; and we need to remember that social change has always been started by people outside the government. The mayor shouldn't be afraid of that.
Gloria: Two thoughts: Philly has no place where you can go an get information about poverty. We can't make informed decisions without information. We wouldn't know what to focus on if we had a commission, because we don't have that information. Also, replicate a program we're doing to get children who are failing in sixth grade to work on computers.
Sharmain: What happens to our poor is what happens to our entire city economy. And it's about the region as well. Many of the jobs are in the suburbs. School choice is a critical part of our education strategy, and we need to ensure people are graduating from high school and community college. We must end the isolation of the poor. Where are the incentives and disincentives in our system to help boys and men, esp. those of color, to bring them into the mainstream as a way to address violence?
Veronica: All politics is local. It's fine to look to another city, but for example, transportation is not an issue in New York.

Now, it's time for the attendees to get involved. Harris Sokoloff from Penn and the Great Expectations project explains that everyone is going to break into small groups to talk about the following questions:

What does it take for a neighborhood to work so that residents can flourish and thrive?

What actions can groups - residents, businesses, community groups, government - can take to strengthen and create those characteristics in neighborhoods?

Each group will spend about 30 minutes on the questions and then everyone will come back together to share their group's ideas. The goal here is a conversation, not a debate, that will come up with some specific ideas.

To wrap up today's event at the Enterprise Center in West Philadelphia about issues of poverty and prosperity in Philadelphia, each of the break-out groups are going to share one idea that they found exciting, interesting or novel.

If Paul Vallas were a movie star, he would be Jackie Chan.

He has the same furious energy as the action flick actor, whether swatting down enemies or running into walls.

Lately, Vallas has been running into a lot of walls.

Let me name a few. He has clearly lost support on the School Reform Commission, the state-run board that hired Vallas to come to Philly from Chicago. He has been taking a lot of hits on the discipline and school violence issue. His rep as a manager was slammed by the sudden appearance of a deficit last year and the continuing red ink at the district.

Vallas always planned to depart sometime after the new mayor was sworn in in 2008. What circumstances led him to change that timetable, I cannot say. Vallas, who is part pol and part reformer, knows how to count votes and he knew it was time to leave.

Now that the king is dead, I am sure we are going to hear a lot of spin -- from Vallas and his detractors -- about his reign as the district's CEO. I'll give you the anti-Vallas side: the guy is an egomaniac and a publicity-hound who was 2/3rds show and 1/3rds substance and who couldn't sit still long enough to focus on running the lumbering bureaucracy that is the district's central administration. That $70 million deficit that came out of nowhere last October is an example.

Commonwealth Court has come to the rescue of Bob Brady and ruled that he can stay on the Democratic ballot for mayor in the May 15 primary in Philadelphia.

The court ruled that although the candidate should have listed state and city pensions he receives and payments made to his union pension fund on his state ethics disclosure form, the instructions on the form are so confusing who can blame him for omitting them.

To me, it is a weak ruling that smells of politics and uses tortured logic. It puts the onus for Brady's failure to report on the State Ethics Commission, which devised the disclosure form. That may hold water if this was a new law with new requirements. But this form and this language have been in use since 1978, for gosh sakes.

For those of you who missed it, here is a five-second summary of Saturday's first televised debate among the Democratic candidates for mayor in Philly.

Dwight Evans: I am a leader. I am a leader. I am a leader.
Chaka Fattah: I am Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
Tom Knox: I am nervous as hell.
Michael Nutter: I am as smart as I sound.
Bob Brady: I'm a regular guy, not like these other stiffs.

Here is a link to CBS3, which carried the debate and offers excerpts and other coverage.

The Mayoral Traveling Road Show and Three-Ring Wonk Circus made a stop at the Four Seasons hotel this afternoon, as three candidates showed up to pay homage to the Center Philadelphia Development Corp./Center City District.

The CCD issued its new report on how to plan for a more vibrant Center City on Friday, which I wrote about in Currents Sunday. (http://go.philly.com/Satullo)

CCD head Paul Levy is an evangelistic as his ancient namesake when it comes to the issue of Philly's ancient Center City vs. the Neighborhoods quarrel. He thinks that supposed opposition is bunk, and he will recite statistics until your eyes cross to prove that Center City jobs, in particular Center City office jobs, are the great bulwark of income security and household stability out in the sainted 'hoods.

As a public service and to better inform the process of making newspaper endorsements in the May 15 Pennsylvania Primary, the Committee of Seventy and the editorial boards of the Philadelphia Daily News and Philadelphia Inquirer are holding a public forum for Philadelphia Common Pleas Court candidates on Friday, April 27.

The Philadelphia Bar Association is serving as a community partner in this effort, and will help publicize the forum.

Candidates for Common Pleas Court have been invited to appear before the editorial boards and members of the public at the forum.

The forum details are as follows:

Date: Friday, April 27, 2007

Time: 8:30 a.m. – 10 a.m. [Room opens at 8 a.m., program starts promptly at 8:30 a.m.]

Location: Pennsylvania Convention Center, Room 303 [enter at 12th and Arch Streets]

The event will be moderated by Lynn A. Marks, executive director of Pennsylvanians for Modern Courts, who will coordinate questioning by members of the newspapers’ editorial boards and audience members, time permitting. Candidates will be invited to present a two-minute summary of their credentials, after which the panel members will pose questions. Light refreshments will be provided.

The event is open to the public, but attendees are requested to pre-register by sending a brief message to judge@phillynews.com , or by calling 215-854-4542.

The city's newly reconstituted Board of Ethics has taken its first bite out of a candidate and it turns out to be U.S. Rep. Chaka Fattah.

The board decided, in effect, that there wasn't anything explorary about Fattah's "exploratory" political action committee he created last year and ordered him to return $36,767 it raised to individual donors. Another $20,000 must go back to a post-announcement donor because it exceeds the cap.

It warms my heart to see the Ethics Board act. Non-enforcement of the campaign finance laws has been the order of the day locally (not to mention statewide) and it looks as if this Ethics Board is trying to change that. The action Tuesday puts other candidates on notice that we now have a dog that will bite.

Here's The Inquirer editorial on the board of ethics, and the state Supreme Court ruling on the city campaign finance law; it will be on the printed page tomorrow (Thursday).

The new, independent Philadelphia Board of Ethics lived up to its promise this week, bravely putting muscle behind the city's campaign-finance rules. At the same time, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court wisely postponed a challenge to the donor limits until after the May 15 primary. The court’s decision Tuesday means there will be no return to no-holds-barred fund-raising by candidates for mayor and City Council. As the election watchdog group Committee of Seventy noted, the campaign limits are “a critical safeguard against a return to the city’s time-honored pay-to-play culture.” The ethics board this week required U.S. Rep. Chaka Fattah (D., Pa.) to refund more than $56,000 in campaign funds. That sends the right signal about complying with the law.

http://greatexpectations07.com/endorsement_interviewsThe candidates.

For mayor.

And for City Council.

The editorial board of The Inquirer is conducting its endorsement interviews for the May primary. They're conducted in the board meeting room, nicknamed the Fishbowl (we're Pisces, working for scale.)

And we're taping them for you to listen in at your convenience via podcast.

A dozen Philadelphia Common Pleas Court candidates will be there, duking it out for the endorsement of the city's major newspapers. What about you?

The April 27 judicial candidate forum at the Convention Center (Room 303 - follow the smell of fresh coffee) has room for plenty of spectators. The event starts next Friday at 8:30 a.m.

To help planners of the event, please e-mail a note with your interest in attending. Send it to judge@phillynews.com.

Meantime, you can assess the field by reading up about all the statewide and local judicial candidates at go.philly.com/judges.

Mayor Knox
Sorry, I couldn't help myself.
Democratic Tom Knox has gone from something of a joke -- at least in the eyes of the professional politicians -- to someone who has them trembling with fear that he may actually, factually, really take over City Hall.
As my colleague, Tom Fitzgerald, pointed out this weekend Knox has become the candidate to beat in the Democratic primary. With about three weeks left until the May 15th primary no one -- not his opponents, not their consultants, not the ward leaders, not nobody it seems -- has figured out yet his to derail him.
Who would have thunk it three months ago? Not me. I remember having lunch with a bunch of politicos at (of course) The Palm in January and each was asked to name the candidate they thought was most likely to win the primary for mayor. None of us picked Knox.
That said, I always thought the professional pols were too quick to dismiss him. After all, you can't dismiss a guy willing to spend $5 million,
But I had no idea the rest of the contenders -- all strong candidates in their own right -- would do so poorly against the guy. Obviously, the fact that the field is so crowded has helped the candidate who has stood out above the din of messages. And Knox, a steady presence on television for two months, with a clear and compelling message, has done just that.

Philadelphia judicial candidate Gerard P. Shotzbarger had a problem: He was seated among 14 other Common Pleas Court candidates at a public forum early Friday as the only one given the Bar Association’s “not recommended” rating. That could be embarrassing if anybody brought it up.

But Shotzbarger – who shouldn’t be all that worried about May 15, since he has a great ballot position – confronted the issue head-on himself, and with a quirky sense of humor.

In his closing remarks at the Inquirer / Daily News judicial forum, the candidate said he had two hopes for his candidacy: one was to get the bar’s rating and, two, was to get Democratic City Committee’s endorsement. He got neither.

So, Shotzbarger told the audience, we should think of the old David Ruffin hit “Statue of a Fool” when we look at him. The song talks of a man “who let love slip through his hands” and cried a “million tears.”

That’s me, said Shotzbarger. And in terms of an unusual fessin’ up by a candidate, this was one for the charts.

By the way, here are all the judicial candidates' answers to questions from the two papers' editorial boards, along with more closing statements: Sandy Shea, editorial page editor at the Daily News, opens the session on this audio clip.. Questioning by Daily News columnist Elmer Smith, followed by Inquirer editorial writer Russell Cooke, continues on this clip. You'll also hear the voice of Lynn Marks, head of Pennsylvanians for Modern Courts, who ably moderated a forum that, in less skilled hands, could have become a food fight.

What a surprise.
It turns out there is a link between the anti-Tom Knox 527 committee and the Bob Brady campaign -- or at least there was until yesterday.
Ken Smuckler, an aide to the Brady campaign, fessed up to trying to organize a 527 earlier this year. His admission led to Smuckler's dismissal from the Brady campaign.
These 527 committees are all the rage in federal elections. They are (supposedly) independent committees which raise money to espouse a candidate's election. Usually, they do not run positive ads about their favored candidate, but to do toxic hit ads and mailers against his opponent.
The 527 committees have two advantages. They are not bound by the campaigning spending limits imposed by law. and they get to do the dirty work of doing hits on an opponent, while the candidate they support gets to act upbeat, positive and pure as virgin snow.
You can expect a lot of this stuff in the weeks to come: 527-hit ads, mailers, robocalls -- all of them either anonymous or from some front group.
When it comes to this stuff, my advice is to follow the Napoleonic Code: Guilty until proven innocent. If you are on the receiving end of one of these messages, ask yourself this question: Who is this designed to help?
Once you figure that out, you can safely assume that candidate is behind the attack -- despite denials.
-- Tom Ferrick

Tom Knox courting Jannie Blackwell and Johnny Dougherty?
Hmmm.
Whatever happened to Mr. Outsider?
There are two reports today indicate that Knox is making a play for their support.
The Inquirer's Patrick Kerkstra reports that Knox told a meeting in West Philly this week that he would support Blackwell for City Council president.
Meanwhile, Gar Joseph reports in Clout that there is word of a Knox-Doc (or does Doc-Knox sound better?) alliance.
Asked about that possibility, Knox spokesman Josh Morrow said: "We're welcoming anyone who wants to come into our tent."
Not that's odd. I thought the whole idea behind the Knox candidacy was not to welcome the usual suspects into his tent.
Blackwell and Johnny Doc are the ultimate insiders/powerbrokers.
They aren't supporting Knox because he's Mr. Outside. They want something from the guy.
In Blackwell's case, it's the Council presidency (and I'm going to ask all of your to head to the church of your choice this weekend and pray that it doesn't come to pass.)
For Doc, it's to get juice for him and his IBEW Local 98, his electricians union.
Plus, there's the revenge factor. Brady deposed Doc as Democratic party treasurer. The two are feuding.
Wouldn't it be sweet revenge if Knox got elected with Doc's help, deposed Brady as chair and put in his place either Doc or someone allied to Doc? Yes, indeed, it would.
-- Tom Ferrick

Inquirer-endorsed candidate Michael Nutter launched another crisp, clear ad over the weekend - one that gives voters a 30-second primer in his accomplishments and his ambitions for City Hall.

It also bests mayor-naire wannabe Tom Knox's 'For Sale' sign on City Hall, by showing an image of the City Hall Tower being cracked off by a giant hand, Godzilla-style. The rallying cry is that Nutter will "throw out the bums" who have been taking advantage of citizens.

Take a look at the ad here

It's a strong follow to the charming ad featuring the candidate's daughter, Olivia.

I've got to give KYW reporters Steve Tawa and Mike Dunn a lot of credit.
They had the five Democrats running for mayor in their radio station this morning for a live debate and they made the most of the 60 minutes.
No softballs here. In the first round of questioning, they pounced on each with a pointed question that had some of the candidates sputtering in protest.
First victim: Bob Brady. Brady was asked about his role in 2003 in blaming the Bush White House and Justice Department for the federal probe into the Street administration.
Brady and the Democratic political apparatus (including Chaka Fattah) saved John Street's bacon in that election by making it a referendum on the much-hated Bush. Later, Brady said the allegations of a political probe were B.S.
Tawa asked Brady is he had 2nd thoughts about using that tactic, especially given his later statements. He had Brady sputtering, making a nondenial about the B.S. quote. (Cue up boos here over Brady's less than credible answer.)
Later, it was Tom Knox's turn. The novice has a thin skin and a tendency never to take blame. He did it again on the issue of his involvement in payday loans. Knox said he didn't. By the way, he doesn't call them payday loans. He calls them "micro loans." Also, when asked about the Committee of Seventy's call for Knox to voluntarily cap his spending in the mayor's race, Knox said he had never heard of the demand.
It was in the papers, Tawa said.
I don't have time to read the papers, the candidate replied. (Cue up the sound of laughter on that one.)
Similar dart were aimed at the others, though Fattah, Nutter and Evans proved more adept at ducking them.But, Fattah did complain about the questions at one point, saying he wished the radio guys would focus more on the issues facing the city.
"I'm sure youo can find something to pick apart with any of us," he scolded.
You can listen to the 60-minute debate at KYW's web site.