Jeffersonville, Indiana campaign-finance ordinance, which took effect with this year’s elections. The ordinance prohibits candidates from accepting more than $100 during a campaign cycle from anyone doing $10,000 or more per year in business with the city or anyone who has engaged in or has threatened litigation against the city. The restrictions cover activities for an eight-year period, including four before the election and four after.
This should be something for the City of Fort Wayne to consider. Maybe the $100 limit could be raised but it should be considered by either Matt Kelty or Tom Henry.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
6 comments:
The only problem is that such a law is a violation of the first amendment. I loose the ability to donate to a candidate if I threaten a lawsuit against the government. What if I was a candidate and sued the city...would I be unable to donate to my own campaign:)
Jon,
I did find that part of the law a little strange. My guess, it was inserted because of some person or event. To an outsider would wonder how that was included?
I posted it as it was part of law. But the concept on the limiting of city vendors from donating to a candidate was interesting.
I would agree, but there are better ways to separate the decision making elected officials from the contractors.
The wrong way to do it is the way the county goes about it. Want to look at the contractors getting business from the city or county, look at campaign donations, attendance at golf outings ECT...
Fort Wayne Community Schools has substantially more money in capital improvements every year than does the county or city, but the bidding process is shielded from the elected board. We don't know who is bidding, or on what. The bids are collected by an employee and the lowest bid meeting specifications is recommended to the board. Unfortunately this makes fundraising for campaigns more difficult, but it looses the perception of political corruption created by high paying donors.
I am always suspect when elected officials propose campaign finance law. It usually eliminates funds going to challengers first and protects incumbents. (I.e. McCain Feingold)
You want to slow down the graft...go to full disclosure. Any donation must be reported within 1 day...1 week, 30 days etc... of the donation.
Make filing easy and online.. access by the public would be immediate.
I agree with you 150%. Like Win Moses was quoted in a story in the paper a couple weeks ago, that powerfull people/companies that donate money, in general want something back.
Look at our Airport Board. Two people from the same Board of Directors one bank. Two members from the same property management company. One attorney, whose law firm does work for the city. Finally, one attorney who appears, and I may be wrong, to have NO ties. Yet, they set out there and set tax rates and control our tax dollars.
Your right. One thing Allen County needs to change is that NO unelected board should have taxing authority. I don't by the argument that "oh each member is appointed to the board by an elected official, thus the electorate is represented". If you have power to levy taxes, then you should be answerable directly to the citizens. The airport authority, Library Board etc... should either be elected, or their budgets voted on and approved by one of the common councils.
Jon,
No arguement from me. We are on the same page and my guess 87% of the people would be. I give 13% to the self serving group!
Post a Comment