As the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette has reported, on Tuesday, Pittsburgh City Councilman Ricky Burgess introduced legislation to repeal the city’s campaign finance law. Following is a press statement and memo from Councilman Bill Peduto on Burgess’ efforts to renew the old ”pay to play” system. Peduto calls Burgess’ attacks against the law “hollow and wrong” and a “bow to the pressure of big money interests.” He also details exactly what the law is in order to combat dishonest statements made to the media.
Burgess Campaign Finance Reform Statement
May 10, 2011
“In 2009, City Council passed campaign finance reform legislation – a reform that was long overdue for the City of Pittsburgh. It is disappointing to learn that Councilman Burgess would bow to the pressure of big money interests and reverse the reforms that Pittsburgh fought so hard to enact. Councilman Burgess’ attacks against the law are hollow and wrong. He is simply giving in to special interests and working to hide who is funding his campaign. The voters deserve to know who is pay-rolling this effort before they vote – and state law requires he tell them.
The City’s laws on acceptance and disclosure of contributions follow the federal rules and this was clearly discussed during Council’s debate in 2009. These efforts to rewrite history and create turmoil for political gain right before an election are being done at the expense of good government and transparency.
I look forward to the debate on this issue. It is further regrettable that Councilman Burgess would try to waive the rules of Council to vote on this bill tomorrow even further taking away the public’s ability to voice their position on this matter. I am dismayed that Council Members Lavelle, Dowd and Smith would support the waiver of rules to bring this up for a vote before the public has an opportunity to comment.
The people of Pittsburgh should be vigilant. Those who favor a “pay to play” government have given their orders and Councilman Burgess is working to deliver a gift for them – at the public’s expense.”
To: Pittsburgh City Council
From: William Peduto, Author/Sponsor of Campaign Finance Reform Act
Date: May 13, 2011
Re: Dishonest Statements Regarding Campaign Finance Reform Act
During the past few weeks, the public has been barraged with unethical and illegitimate statements regarding the Campaign Finance Reform Act of 2009. I spent five years working to pass legislation that would limit the undue influence of those who believe that our local government should operate under a “pay to play” system. During those years at least four versions of campaign limits were debated. Finally, on May 5, 2009, Pittsburgh joined the ranks of most other cities and established rules on campaign contributions. Now with the 2011 primary just days away, a Mayor-backed faction supported by Pittsburgh’s version of the classic political machine has launched a campaign to twist the language and intent of this bill in order to damage their opponents. It is critical that the attempt by Councilman Ricky Burgess to rescind the Campaign Finance Reform Act under these reprehensible tactics be dismissed immediately and that the public be given a full understanding of the legislation and the process.
As you all know, in 2009 we debated two proposals regarding campaign finance limits. After vetoing the original bill, Mayor Ravenstahl and County Executive Onorato offered a modest proposal to set limits–these limits would have been some of the highest in the country and did not address the important issues included in earlier versions. The Mayor’s bill would have set limits for contributions to Council candidates at $4,600 per individual per election cycle and $10,000 per Political Action Committee per election cycle. Under the bill finally approved and passed by City Council and signed by the Mayor, these monetary limits and campaign periods were changed.
The Campaign Finance Reform Act set limits at $1,000 per individual per covered election and $2,000 per PAC per covered election. As was discussed during the debate and contained within the legislation, a covered election is any primary, general, or special election. Therefore a contribution of $1,000 could be made by an individual, or $2,000 could be made by a PAC to a candidate in both the primary and the general election.
“COVERED ELECTION – Every primary, general or special election for City Elected Office” – 2009-1039, §198.01 Definitions
Read the rest of the memo here.
This entry was posted on Saturday, May 14th, 2011 at 8:49 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.