Pa. House sets sights on city's campaign law

In what critics deemed a setback for ethics reform, state House lawmakers quietly gave a nod Tuesday to a measure that would make it harder to monitor how much candidates in Philadelphia raise and spend, while also eliminating the online reports that currently disclose such details.

The action, which had drawn little attention until yesterday, elicited sharp rebukes from the city's likely next mayor, good-government proponents, and at least one state lawmaker who said he already regretted his vote.

Pushed by two Philadelphia Democratic state representatives, Rosita Youngblood and John P. Sabatina Jr., the bill would prohibit the city from requiring candidates and political action committees to file electronic versions of their spending reports with the city's Board of Ethics - something that has been required since last year.

Previously, only paper copies of reports had to be filed with the Philadelphia County Board of Elections.

But with the electronic versions more easily searchable, the Board of Ethics has vigorously pursued late filers and worked to ensure that candidates adhered to the city's new campaign-spending limits. As a result, the board issued thousands of dollars in fines, took some candidates to court, and took other punitive actions as well.

In addition, the board - up and running since the winter - also met its mandate to create the city's first online database that allows the public to search for spending information by candidate, political committee, or contributor.

Given the more stringent oversight, some critics wondered about the motives of the bill's backers, whose action, they say, would essentially gut the city law.

"I don't really understand what the point is," said Michael Nutter, a former city councilman who won the Democratic Party's nomination for mayor and is presumed to be Philadelphia's next mayor. "I know the General Assembly has publicly stated that this is an era of reform for the state, that they are operating with openness and transparency . . . so to prevent disclosure just doesn't make any sense."

Sabatina was quick to acknowledge the friction, saying: "I knew this was going to ruffle some feathers. I was just waiting for the shoe to drop."

That happened as word of the bill, which passed the House, 200-1, after only brief debate Tuesday, finally spread yesterday.