Silencing of the Lamb, letter to the editor from Dan Sullivan

Letter

Friday, April 29, 2005

Two of the three viable candidates for mayor of Pittsburgh are up to their eyeballs in corporate welfare.

Bob O'Connor always grumbled about Mayor Murphy giving away the treasury before voting Murphy's way, and Bill Peduto, who has called himself "Mr. Development," is more like Murphy than Murphy.

Peduto's the one who got Shadyside declared blighted so poorer taxpayers could subsidize shopping for the trendiest neighborhood in the city and Giant Eagle could impose tax-subsidized dominance over smaller grocers.

As prothonotary, Michael Lamb, the other viable candidate, never had an opportunity to vote for corporate welfare. He could skyrocket in the polls by taking a strong, clear, unequivocal stand against it and pointing out the records of, and campaign contributions to, his opponents.

But the League of Women Voters got everyone to pledge not to be negative, so most voters don't know the facts that would to make them cringe when Lamb's subsidy-sucking opponents point to their "greater experience."

It's not that I care about whether this election takes Lamb to the slaughter in 2005. I'm more worried about the continued slaughter of taxpayers for another four years. Is there a positive way to say that?

Dan Sullivan
Squirrel Hill

Sullivan was treasurer of "Good Sports," which campaigned against the stadium
tax referendum.