Donation to Ravenstahl's campaign sparks self-exam by panel - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review The husband of city Ethics Hearing Board member Penny Zacharias gave $1,200 to Mayor Luke Ravenstahl's election campaign before the mayor nominated her for the post.As I campaign, I don't want $1,200 donations. I don't want $1,200 headaches showing up on my door, unless the donor is Ben Franklin or Tom Paine or someone of similar values and principles.
The donation doesn't violate Pittsburgh's ethical code of conduct, but it has prompted members of the newly seated board to examine prohibiting such gifts to protect their credibility.
Rather than have Luke give back the $1,200, I have another suggestion. One can level the playing field and be "fair" a few different ways. One way is to use subtraction. So, Luke could give the money back. Or, another way to level the playing field -- and one I prefer -- is to use addition, not subtraction.
Why not ask the firm and Penny's pals for an extra $2,400 so as to make an investment into both the Republican and Libertarian opposition. Level the playing field by by addition.
This way the $1,200 that went to Luke's campaign will be 'de-valued' because the same amount goes to the opposition.
Sure, if the Greens and Socialists Parties get their act together and get into the mayor's race, they can seek $1,200 each as well.
Or, another way to make matters 'fair' is for Luke to give back the money but not to Penny and her lawyer buddies. Luke could take the $1,200 and send $500 to the city Republicans, $500 to the Libertarians, and $100 each to the Greens and Socialists.
To be 'fair' it is worthy to note that the city's Republicans had been hammering on the re-creation of the ethics hearing board for many months. They got Bob O'Connor to think again about its operation. For years, and even since I was in that party to lend more opposition to Tom Murphy's ways, Bob Hillen has been talking about the ethics hearing board. It isn't hard to be reminded of it as it is part of the city's charter.
Posts
8 comments:
"Or, another way to make matters 'fair' is for Luke to give back the money but not to Penny and her lawyer buddies. Luke could take the $1,200 and send $500 to the city Republicans, $500 to the Libertarians, and $100 each to the Greens and Socialists."
Who give WHAT to Socialists? "Fair?" Instead of refunding the donation, simply split it up amongst parties that may or may not have a candidate?
That's borderline insanity. Keep the money or give it back, that "drop in the bucket" really doesn't amount to anything.
Point of clarification - you don't have a campaign and never did. You can get $12, yet $1,200 because you have never had an original thought, but merely resort to just attacking others. $1,200, are you kidding? The Mayor raised over $800,000! If you think $1,200 influences who gets on boards, you obviously have NO understanding of politics, which is evidenced by your failure to ever put together anything that even resembles a campaign. If you want some real dirt try looking into the people that donated $10,000 or $20,000. If you follow that trail you'll discover the power players. This crap is nonsense. The Mayor was looking for some diversity on boards and found a young and extremely qualified women who lives in the City. Because of the scrutiny people like you give the administration, a white male like you will NEVER get on a board. Get used to analyzing every women and minority that pops up on a board and commission. How do you think those names get before the Mayor? Obviously it is through some connection. Does that mean the people who chooses aren't qualified? Of course not. The point though is that you have to get names in front of him so he can then choose qualified candidates. Why in the world would he ever choose someone like you or your associates?
This isn't about "ME" -- nor MY ASSOCIATES" -- nor the SOCIALISTS.
This is about Mayor Luke and his donor -- who then became appointed to a board that was dead in the water for more than a decade under D party leadership.
The Ethics Hearing Board has been starved. I don't need new ideas. I only need to follow upon the old ideas that are established as our laws. That's a good place to start. That would be good to have LUKE and his administration follow.
The Ethics Hearing Board isn't an original thought. It is a point of LAW. It is part of the city's charter and should be a body that functions. It isn't.
I'm not attacking Penny. I'm pointing out the obvious. The members of the Ethics Hearing Board should NOT be dropping $1,000 checks into the campaigns of candidates who appoint them to boards. That too is a point of policy that should be minded.
When the Mayor raises $800,000 for a job that pays $90,000 per year and only lasts for 2 years when he doesn't have an D party opponent -- and when he took over the helm of the city due to the death of Bob O'Connor -- that is a sign of trouble.
If you'd like to organize a list of donors who have made those $20,000 donations -- post them, please.
My past campaigns have been worhty. Being outspent by $500 to $1 and only out-voted 5-to-1 was a worthy campaign. Both Michael Diven and Wayne Fontana were worried of my presence on the debate stage -- so much that they were chicken to debate with me on stage after they were blown away the first time.
Scared after the first debate? Wow. I don't remember reading about it in the Post Gazette or Trib.
Who exactly printed those analysis? I want to Google them.
Keep goin' my brotha. Keep goin'!
Google away. The P-G and Trib are not the only trusted sources for political insights.
Paul won the first debate (MSNBC poll) and the second debate (Fox Poll). Each hosted the debate and the debate poll.
Then the nut ball R from Michigan petitioned that Paul not be included in future debates -- a sure sign of fear.
I'm not talking about Ron Paul, Mark you mentioned beating Diven and Fontana in a debate. At that time I was reading both papers. We would have talked about one of the mainstream hometown papers getting behind you.
I couldn't care less about Ron Paul. If it weren't for this board, I would never have heard of him. He's the only third-tier candidate I have heard of.
The press didn't cover the debate. It was on the TV 19 (or something). I have it on video.
That's not the answer to my question. You assert that you mopped the floor with the other canidates at the debate. I guess that it's a self-appointed win.
I guess that's just the journalist in me coming out. I need proof if someone says they won a debate.
If that were the case, I've never lost a debate in my life. LOL
Post a Comment