Philadelphians continue to experience democracy in action. After millionaire Tom Knox exposed the foolishness of contribution limits by running a self-financed campaign, independent advocacy organizations quickly stepped in to fill the vacuum left by stringent campaign regulation.
By running ads criticizes Knox, these organizations are doing exactly what the voter needs them to do. In the words of the Philadelphia Inquirer, "the voters are getting more help in sizing up Knox" thanks to the ‘527’ organizations.
The Inquirer, though, also inexplicably asks, "Do 527’s circumvent the spirit of the city’s campaign finance reforms?" But if one of the goals of a "successful" political campaign is a more informed electorate then clearly these organizations are performing a great service. Or, if the goal is a more competitive election then the 527’s are still doing good.
Then, after admitting the 527’s are helping inform the voters, the Inquirer calls for a post-election review to examine whether Philadelphia should impose limits on the groups. Talk about biting of the hand that feeds you: Thanks 527’s for saving us from an uncompetitive election. Now its time to shut you up.
The madness continues.
The Inquirer believes it is vital that the voters know who is funding the 527’s. Often, because of the fear of reprisal, people are only willing to speak if they can do so anonymously. We shouldn’t forget that it was anonymous speech – political pamphleteering – that enable the founding of this nation. A robust democracy is only possible when citizens are able to speak without the fear of retribution.
Political campaigns are about the quality of the arguments, not the names behind them. The Inquirer should trust Philadelphians to weigh the arguments and reach their own conclusions, even when the arguments are spoken anonymously.
Note from Paul Sherman: This is Mike Schrimpf’s first blog post as our Deputy Communications Director. Welcome aboard, Mike.
