The Daily Pennsylvanian is a student-run nonprofit.

Please support us by disabling your ad blocker on our site.

Mayoral campaign

Our Endorsement: Michael Nutter (D)

This past May, we supported Michael Nutter in the Democratic primaries because he had the experience and vision necessary to tackle the city's rising crime rate and corruption in City Hall. Although we commend Republican candidate Al Taubenberger for running an honest and civil campaign, Nutter would do the best job as mayor in helping Philadelphia fulfill its role as America's next great city. Our original endorsement stands.

Shall the Philadelphia Home Rule Charter be amended to require councilmembers to be residents of the districts from which they were elected for at least one year prior to their election?

Yes. It only makes sense that the people who represent us in City Hall also live in our communities. Such common-sense electoral reforms already exist for many other state and local positions across the country. While this amendment may limit the pool of eligible candidates, it would also prevent party machines from assigning candidates to run in random districts, just to maintain political power. In short, effective government requires that representatives are invested in the neighborhoods they serve. This amendment is the first step.

Shall the Philadelphia Home Rule Charter be amended to create a Public School Family and Child Advocate who will act as an advocate for public school children and their families with respect to all educational and related matters?

No. City Hall already has a secretary of education, and there are many existing organizations that represent public-school children and their families. Instead of creating new positions and expanding opportunities for bureaucratic waste, the government needs to focus on making existing services more effective. Bigger isn't always better.

Shall the Philadelphia Home Rule Charter be amended to create a Handicapped and Disabled Advocate who will act as an advocate for all Philadelphians with respect to all matters affecting handicapped and disabled people?

No. Once again, the proposal proves redundant. Philadelphia already has the Mayor's Commission on People with Disabilities, which accomplishes the same goals as the proposed advocate would. Voters need to reject this proposal, which is, at its heart, just another way to expand government bureaucracy.

Should the City of Philadelphia borrow $55,090,000 to be spent for and toward capital purposes as follows: Transit; Streets and Sanitation; Municipal Buildings; Parks, Recreation and Museums; and Economic and Community Development?

No. This proposal would allow the city to borrow $55 million to finance various capital and community-development projects, including transportation and recreational services. At first glance, this extremely broad proposal may seem like a great way to inject a little public investment into the city's economy. But the city's mediocre bond rating and looming pension crisis make current fiscal responsibility a necessity. Voters need to send a message to the city that going deeper into debt isn't the path to long-term economic vitality.

Comments powered by Disqus

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.