The most attention has been attracted by Al Schmidt, the insurgent candidate for City Commissioner.   Schmidt, who served as director of the Philly GOP and ran unsuccessfully but seriously for city controller, has garnered a raft of endorsements and appears to have a serious chance of beating Joseph Duda, the incumbent, for the position more or less guaranteed to the minority party.   (The city commissioners are largely invisible, but have the role of supervising elections and maintaining voter rolls, never an insignificant one in Philadelphia.)

Somewhat less,  but still unusual attention has been attracted by John Featherman, the insurgent candidate for Mayor against the insiders’ pick Karen Brown, who might politely be called an uninspiring choice.    Unlike Schmidt, Featherman has no real chance of being elected in November, but the very fact of a GOP primary contest is noteworthy in a city where Flyers’ timeouts usually attract more attention than the Republican Party.

The real issue here, of course, is not the elections themselves but what they signify.  Anyone with passing knowledge of Philadephia knows that the Republican Party, under the perennial leadership of the Meehan family, has been noncompetitive in result and attitude for as long as anyone can remember.    What is new is that the State party, together with a group of mostly younger people loosely associated with the Loyal Opposition movement, has gotten tired of it and is finally doing something about it.    New York, Los Angeles. and other cities with equally high registration disadvantages have competitive Republican parties and have elected Republican mayors in the very recent past.   Why not Philadelphia?

According to a summary in the proposed budget, Pennsylvania pays $30,248 per year to lock up an inmate. Health care costs account for $4,505 per inmate per year. In contrast, Pennsylvania spends $13,343 per child in school ($4,952 of that in state funds, the rest from federal sources and local property tax revenue).

And none of those numbers include a proposed new state prison in Fayette County, which was canceled last month. According to a Department of Corrections press release, that can be downloaded here, the state prison population stayed at around 51,000 through 2010. (There are also approximately 36,000 more inmates in county lock-ups in the state.) As a result, acting Secretary John Wetzel said there was no need to spend $200 million on the new facility. He also noted that the state under utilizes a boot camp facility in Clearfield County as well as other community corrections programs.

Still, the budget proposal notes that expansion projects will continue at four facilities at a cost of $68.5 million. Those projects would add another 1,260 beds to the prison system. Corbett’s proposed budget also calls for returning 2,140 inmates who are currently housed in Michigan and Virginia under contracts. Ending those contracts would save $29.5 million.

A major problem, though, is that those inmates from Michigan and Virginia would be rejoining an already overcrowded state prison system. According to the governor’s numbers, there will be an estimated 49,787 inmates in the state prison system at the end of 2011 but the estimated capacity for the end of 2011 will be 44,980. By June, 2012, when the expansions are complete, the state prison system will have a capacity of 45,734.

Assuming no spikes or declines in the prison population, the state prison system will be over capacity by 4,053 inmates in June, 2012. With 26 institutions in operation, that means each institution will be housing an average of 156 people more than capacity, approximately nine percent over capacity. That is the capacity of SCI Camp Hill and SCI Greensburg combined.

In his budget address, Corbett noted that the state prison population in 1993 stood at around 24,000 inmates, meaning the prison population has more than doubled. Between the 1990 and 2010 census, the state’s population grew by about 820,000 people or about 6.5 percent. That means more people are being locked up and for longer periods of time.

Just like with budgeting, the commonwealth will either have to increase the prison capacity or reduce the number of people in the system. Corbett’s budget office is working with a $4 billion deficit and he explicitly said in his address that the state, “can’t afford to ask counties in our state to subsist on a prison-based economy” in reference to ending the Fayette County prison. Therefore, embarking on an ambitious prison-building spree is probably off the table for the foreseeable future. While the state needs jobs, building prisons is probably not the ideal job to create.

Sentencing reform

Corbett alluded to the need for sentencing reform in his address as well as the need for more parole officers to help inmates return to the community and reduce recidivism rates. However, he did not offer many specifics. Other state officials, on the other hand, have some ideas that need to balance effective deterrence with a pragmatic approach to reducing the prison population.

In late January, Auditor General Jack Wagner offered a list of recommendations to reduce the state’s prison population. His recommendations build upon previous reforms passed in 2010. Wagner suggests expanding alternative punishment programs for non-violent offenders such as Community Correction Centers (half-way houses), home-based electronic monitoring and the Quehanna motivational boot camp as well as expanding the types of crimes that qualify for those programs. He also suggests ending the practice of allowing counties to send to the state inmates with less serious offenses and less than one year on their sentences.

The last point may be problematic as is would do little more than shift the financial burden from the state general fund to county budgets. According to the Department of Corrections’ 2009 report available here 2,615 inmates sent to state prisons in 2009, or 24.2 percent of total commitments, had minimum sentences of one year or less. That is the size of one of the state’s larger penitentiaries.

In total, Wagner noted that 19,000 inmates or about 39 percent of the prison population are serving time for non-violent offenses. If even some of those inmates could be transferred to alternative programs such as motivational boot camp, intensive home monitoring and half-way houses, Wagner said that the state could place a moratorium on building new prisons.

One other suggestion Wagner offered is passage of Senate Judiciary Chair Stewart Greenleaf’s (R-Bucks/Montgomery) Criminal Justice Reform Act. The bill is SB 100. In a letter discussing the bill, Greenleaf notes that Act 95, passed last year, included a number of his reform recommendations. Greenleaf’s current bill essentially mirrors Wagner’s recommendations and includes $50 million in appropriations to start and expand these alternative sentencing programs but he notes that they would save money in the long run.

One notable statistic from the 2009 Department of Corrections report is that Community Corrections Centers reported 97 walk-away escapes for the year. That was the lowest number since an increase in the population of Community Corrections Centers in 2006. Typically, escapees, once caught, are returned to prison and charged with escape, adding time to the sentence.

The same set of statistics shows that 3,378 of the 10,783 commitments in 2009 were for drug offenses and another 708 were for driving under the influence. In Pennsylvania, drunk drivers typically do not land in state prison until a third or subsequent conviction, while fatal crashes usually fall under other offenses such as homicide by motor vehicle.

The Philadelphia Experiment

In April, 2010 Philadelphia District Attorney Seth Williams announced a plan to essentially decriminalize possession of a small amount (less than 30 grams or about an ounce) of marijuana. At the time, Williams estimated that such a move could eliminate 3,000 cases from city courts or about five percent of the caseload. Meanwhile, city police said they would continue to make arrests for marijuana possession and leave punishment decisions to the courts.

Eleven months later, the Philadelphia Weekly magazine looked at the new reality for people charged with possession of a small about of marijuana. The city has set up a Small Amounts of Marijuana diversion program. Under the program, offenders are ordered to pay a $200 fine and attend a three-hour treatment class. The defendants do not get legal representation and their records will be expunged within six months. The city diverted about 80 percent of the 1636 arrests for possession of a small amount of pot to the program and was on track to save $3 million to $5 million for the year.

The story also paints a picture of a disproportionate number of African American youths getting caught up in the system even though whites and blacks report comparable rates of marijuana usage. (Incidentally, the state’s prison population was 49 percent African American, 39 percent white and 11 percent Latino in 2009.) The report also discusses people waiting for their turn in court complaining about the government’s war on pot. What is noticeably absent is a quote from any defendant saying that the experience would keep them from smoking marijuana again. Indeed, one young man featured in the article was going through the system for weed – not for the first time and probably not for the last time.

This brings up the question of whether state-wide reforms of marijuana laws would have a significant impact on the state prison system. Granted, most of the focus right now is on the medicinal use of marijuana, but the question of marijuana decriminalization remains on the table. A March, 2011 Pew survey found support for legalization or at least decriminalization nearly tripling from 16 percent to 45 percent since 1990. That’s still not a majority, but support has been steadily rising, primarily driven by younger voters and people who have attended college. Meanwhile, the U.S. Justice Department continues to hold that Congress has found it to be a dangerous drug and contends sales support criminal and terrorist organizations. Of course, DOJ cannot selectively stop enforcing laws passed by Congress, though Democrat Jared Polis of Colorado is pushing for federal decriminalization which would allow states to set their own policies.

However, most drug cases fall under state statute. In most possession cases in Pennsylvania, a defendant is not looking at state prison time unless he or she is in possession of a large amount of the drug and intends to sell it. In most possession cases, the defendant will go through a county court system and serve any prison time or probation there. It is only habitual offenders and repeat probation violators who even see the possibility of serving time in a state prison. Therefore, state-wide decriminalization would also have to give dealers a pass in order to have any appreciable impact on the state prison population. Furthermore, it would also have to offer retroactive immunity to have an immediate impact as those already sentenced would otherwise have to finish their sentences. On the other hand, Philadelphia’s experiment would likely pay the same dividends locally if implemented statewide.

All things considered, Corbett’s prison budget is a necessary expense. It would certainly not be prudent to simply cut the funding and turn those inmates loose. On the other hand, it is an opportunity to revisit the state’s sentencing guidelines and policies to ensure that violators receive appropriate punishment and treatment.

But if there’s one person who has even more riding on that turnout, it’s Senator Arlen Specter.

The Republican-turned-Democrat has long commanded strong support from within the city’s black community. He faces a far closer nominating contest than Williams does—at least for now. And on primary day, the combination of Specter, Williams, and former City Controller Jonathan Saidel—a candidate for Lieutenant Governor who also enjoys solid backing from black voters—just might prove a potent enough combination to boost turnout in the city far beyond what pollsters anticipate.

And Specter will need it—polls increasingly show him tied or trialing primary opponent Joe Sestak, and many of those polls are counting on a relatively low black turnout (the Muhlenberg College tracking poll, for example, predicts low black turnout by not including those who cast ballots for the first time in 2008). That means turning out black voters is a high-stakes proposition for Specter.

“The African-American vote in Philadelphia—it matters,” said one political insider familiar with the history of black voter turnout. “If you’re 10 percent down, it matters. But if you’re 30 percent down, does it really matter? But if Williams can drive up the vote enough to come out for him, and thus drive up the vote for Specter, that could make a difference.”

For Specter, winning the majority of black voters is about as a safe a bet as he has at this moment of political vulnerability. He’s cinched important endorsements from local black leaders, ranging from the Philadelphia Black Clergy to Mayor Michael Michael Nutter and Congressman Chaka Fattah.

“There is a good and strong feeling about Arlen Specter in the African-American community,” said Robert W. Bogle, president and CEO of the Philadelphia Tribune, the region’s largest newspaper catering to a black audience. “Specter is going to have to get this voting block out if he wants to win Philadelphia and win Pennsylvania.”

The stakes have grown larger in recent days as the race has tightened. Black voters make up about a fifth of the Democratic electorate statewide, and about 60 percent of those voters are in Philadelphia. A good turnout in the city could tilt the race in Specter’s favor. The same big turnout could get Williams closer, if not over the edge.

The biggest challenge—for both Specter and Williams—will be physically bringing those voters out to the ballot box. Historically, turnout in Philadelphia has been weak for midterm election years, and even more so in primary elections.

Comparing primary and general election turnouts can lead to misleading conclusions. Nevertheless, data from recent years suggest that voter turnout drops disproportionately more in predominately black neighborhoods in midterm elections. For example, in the 2004 presidential election, John Kerry captured around 540,000 Democratic votes in Philadelphia. More than 53 percent of those—approximately 300,000—came from predominately black wards. But in the 2006 gubernatorial race, the number of Democrats voting for Ed Rendell dropped to 372,000, with less than 48 percent of those votes coming from the same wards.

“The real question that I always have is turnout,” said longtime Franklin & Marshall College pollster G. Terry Madonna. “A larger turnout in the city is more likely to favor Arlen. It would be extraordinarily helpful.”

A solid 40 percent of the state’s Democratic voters reside in the five-county Philadelphia region, so Specter could pull off a win relying on the city and pockets of support from the suburbs, Madonna said. But the city’s turnout in last fall’s judicial elections was a dismal 11 percent. If Williams’ candidacy can ratchet up the excitement, it will surely serve to help Specter.

“I think [Williams] added heartbeat and sizzle to the race,” Madonna said. “Williams could indirectly, by a substantial African-American support, help Specter. That’s not a crazy scenario.”

Both campaigns are doing everything they can to mobilize their constituents in the city. Specter has much more in the way of an institutionalized field operation, but both candidates are counting on local party boss Bob Brady to mobilize voters throughout the seat. Party leaders from disparate factions, including Brady, have been lining up behind Williams. The state Senator has been endorsed by Brady, Nutter, District Attorney Seth Williams and numerous members of City Council. If Williams is known for anything beyond his west Philadelphia district, it’s for his name—he’s the son for the late Hardy Williams, the patriarch of black politics in the city.

But after entering the race late, some are questioning whether Williams has enough time to mobilize black voters.

“Tony Williams has the right message, whether he has the time is the question,” said Bogle, who was pessimistic about seeing a strong turnout this season. “I’m not aware of anything that’s occurred that will energize voters this election cycle, whether they be white, black, green or purple.”

Specter campaign manager manager Christopher Nicholas said the campaign is focused on reaching out to supporters in the city and reminding them of Specter’s long relationships with the black community.

“Now it’s time to really rally the troops,” he said.

Though it became clear this week that President Obama will not make another visit to the city to campaign for Specter before Tuesday, Specter’s campaign has done plenty to pump up the black vote, airing commercials featuring the president on radio stations that target black audiences and a new TV ad that also highlights Obama’s support for Specter.

Williams campaign spokesman Mark Nevins said that while Philadelphia turnout is key, the campaign is not relying on a single demographic.

“Obviously a large Philadelphia turnout operation is important to us, because it’s got the most votes and it’s our hometown,” he said. “We want to create an insurmountable lead there, but we’re also looking to do well in Pittsburgh, Harrisburg and the rest of the state. A large African-American turnout benefits our race, but I don’t think we can rely on that alone.” And while he acknowledged that turnout for Williams might benefit Specter, he said there has not been any formal coordination between the campaigns—shooting down a recent conspiracy theory favored by some political junkies.

Sestak has been tenacious in his efforts to cut into the constituency, but one Philadelphia political insider said that, besides strength in a few of the more independent Center City wards, Sestak has not gained much traction in other parts of the city.

“If I was Sestak,” this insider said, “and I was running against Specter, I would have spent more time early on in the southeast, making inroads.”

Sestak campaign spokesman Jonathon Dworkin said that the Sestak has been working hard to reach out to the black community.

“They’re responding to the same message that Pennsylvanians are responding to across the Commonwealth,” Dworkin said in a statement. “It’s time to move past the failed Republican policies of Arlen Specter and George Bush that say what’s good for those at the top will be best for our country and put our focus back on strengthening our communities and working families.”

But the Philadelphia Republican Party has taken things to a degree I never imagined.

A little background here: the Philly GOP doesn’t win many elections and (in my experience) doesn’t try very hard to do so, either. An outsider faction partly led by former city controller candidate Al Schmidt, and backed by the state party, has been trying to change that by electing insurgent committee people to positions (many of them vacant) in the city party. The insiders, led by perennial party “counsel” Mike Meehan, fought back with dubious petition challenges—at least one of them supposedly filed by someone who died prior to the challenge period (The Inquirer, ever alert to a good story, ran a picture of the individual’s tombstone in a recent edition). Meehan has argued that the dubious petitions resulted from mistakes by local leaders, but it’s not clear how many people are buying that.

One might ask, who cares about control of a party that doesn’t win any elections, anyway? The answer is that an effective minority party is a vital part of any political system. One reason that the city is so ineffectively run—and receives such mediocre representation in Washington—is that it’s effectively a one-party regime, whose political leaders have little if any incentive to make things any better. A potential oppinent to Congressman Bob Brady (D-1) was recently knocked off the ballot in a challenge that, some have suggested, was abetted by Republican collaborators. Beyond the petty corruption represented by, for example, the Philadelphia Parking Authority, the last source of Republican patronage, this ultimately means less efficient government and a weaker, less productive economy for all in the region.

This group of insurgents, also led by Matt Wolfe of the University City area, has mounted a challenge to the petition challenges (got that?) in Republican wards.

Here’s hoping they succeed, and the city begins to move back toward a competitive, two-party system. I wouldn’t hold my breath.

Bucks County Democrats on Wednesday criticized former Congressman Mike Fitzpatrick for claiming he has “no interest in becoming a professional politician,” unveiling a Web video that juxtaposes the comment with 20 years worth of electoral campaigning as both a candidate and a political operative.

“It’s hard to believe, but Congressman Fitzpatrick, a guy who has been running for political office for 20 years, claimed that he has ‘no interest in becoming a professional politician,’” Neil Samuels, deputy chair of the Bucks County Democratic Committee, wrote in an e-mail sharing the video (embedded above) with supporters. “Problem is, Fitzpatrick already is one. In fact, that’s all he’s ever been.”

Fitzpatrick’s original comment was made in pledging to serve only four terms if elected, including the one he served before being unseated by Congressman Patrick Murphy (D-8) in 2006. He told the The Morning Call that it’s “ironic” being called a career politician when Murphy hasn’t made the same term-limit pledge.

As an insider political news Web site, we have absolutely no problem with career politicians here at pa2010.com Central—heck, they make up a big chunk of our readers. But we’ll give the BucksCo Dems this one: It’s tough to think of a guy in his 40′s who’s spent two decades in politics as anything but a professional politician. Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

Meanwhile, we got word that Democratic gubernatorial hopeful Joe Hoeffel—along with Lieutenant Governor candidate Jonathan Saidel—won the endorsement of Philadelphia’s 9th Ward. It’s an area including the Chestnut Hill neighborhood and part of Mt. Airy, one that strays a bit more often from party boss Bob Brady. It’s also one where the turnout is usually high. Our source there told us that Hoeffel’s endorsement was unanimous. And though we’re not positive, we’re pretty sure Saidel’s victory came on the home turf of his only Democratic rival, Mt. Airy’s own Doris Smith-Ribner.

Anyone who follows the news can see why Philadelphia would need an independent controller. What’s impressive is how Schmidt has turned this sentiment into actual support. In an interview last week, he put two Blackberries on the table and checked messages while firing away answers to the usual questions—Can you win?  Are you raising money?  Are the other Republicans doing anything to help you?—and generally giving the sense of someone who was in it to win.

While grateful for all support, he is wisely not depending on help from Republican ward leaders, who have a record of, well, less than enthusiastic support for reform, especially if it affects them. True to his take-no-prisoners approach, Schmidt refused to even consider a question about his post-elections plans.

If Schmidt’s enthusiasm—and the city’s corrupt political culture—give him a chance, a fundraiser that I attended shows what he has to overcome. Although the campaign is aimed at Democrats and independents, most in attendance were the usual Republican stalwarts, albeit perhaps a bit younger and hipper than the average crowd.  Schmidt claims he has other supporters, and The Inquirer‘s endorsement would seem to bear that out.  Win or lose, he has showed that is eminently possible to run a real GOP campaign in Philadelphia: all you have to do is try.

With the Philadelphia budget in shambles and a projected $1-billion dollar deficit over the next five years, Mayor Michael Nutter has proposed payroll changes that city workers are finding tough to swallow.

Nutter will be cutting payroll increases for more than 20,000 city workers, according to The Associated Press. Typically these increases are given to city workers on the anniversary of the worker’s hire.

The change is expected to save $8 million dollars over the course of next year and may save the city $50 million over the course of the next five years.

The Inquirer first picked up the story on March 9th, when it reported that one-year contracts with labor unions were set to expire on June 30th.

Back then, labor unions and city officials sparred publicly over worker pensions and benefits. The Inquirer reported back in March that Nutter repeatedly stressed that employee pension and health care costs consume 21 percent of the city’s $4 billion annual budget.

Now the fire is in full flame, Nutter is taking his first big steps toward restructuring employee payrolls. On July 2, more than a thousand city workers protested outside of City Hall, demanding fair salaries and worker compensation.

But these workers are not likely to see the freeze lifted anytime soon. With payroll increases frozen and city negotiators seeking new contracts that do not include pay increases, city workers, including those backed by labor unions, seem unlikely to see payroll increases anytime soon.

The Daily News reports city officials saying that a Supreme Court ruling makes the payroll freeze legal. The ruling says that the city must maintain the “status quo” of worker compensation. Payroll increases are explicitly stated to not be part of the status quo.

Although this type of action on behalf of the Nutter administration is to be expected when the city faces dire budgetary problems, it leaves us begging for more answers to important questions.

When will the payroll increases be reinstated? How will the city attract qualified, skilled and motivated workers when salary advancement is no longer a motivator? How will the city boost the morale of municipal workers and make Philadelphia a healthy environment for its city workers?

And another question that begs to be answered… will Philadelphia see a strike anytime soon?

“I’m going to get it back,” he told pa2010.com with a smile after entering a crowded ballroom here for the Philadelphia Democratic City Committee’s spring dinner.

In between accepting a slew of warm welcomes, including one from Congresman Bob Brady (D-1), who is the head of the city’s Democratic Party, Specter acknowledged that the party switch has been challenging.

“There are a few bumps in the road,” he said. “But I’ve got good shock absorption.”

Two months ago, a conference at the University of Pennsylvania drew a variety of private and public organizations, who argued that Philadelphia would be the future green jobs hub of the United States. As Washington doles out stimulus money, these organizations hope to take advantage of the boost in revenue in order to train new green consultants and analysts, as well as to develop more service oriented jobs geared towards the maintenance and installation of green technologies. The hope is that, by stimulating investment in the development of clean energy sources, Pennsylvania will also stimulate growth in related job markets such as engineering, carpentry, electrical work, and other sectors.

The opening of the center marks the first real step taken to help grow the green job sector here. The movement is starting small (Mayor Michael Nutter welcomed only 20 students to the new center). But the hope is that the idea will resonate in Philadelphia and throughout Pennsylvania, prompting more industry to come to the Keystone State, while also hepling reduce the state’s energy consumption and carbon footprint. The center was built with a $1.1 million grant from the Knight foundation.

But this small development is part of a much bigger problem. There is some sentiment in Philadelphia that we are better off than many parts of the country and that we have not been hit as hard by the economic recession. Indeed, the large health care and education sectors here typically make it so both the booms and the busts are more modest. So how will the rest of the state cope with the high unemployment rate and will the creation of green jobs be a well-worn line in the upcoming elections? Is the creation of green jobs even a valid answer to Pennsylvania’s unemployment problems or is it just shifting one group of workers to similar lines of employment that are not entirely different from what they are doing now?

This cultural emphasis on green jobs could put Lehigh County Executive Don Cunningham in a good position in the coming gubernatorial race, as he has promoted his environmental credentials heavily. Cunningham was responsible for preventing the development of the Trexler Nature Preserves into an amusement park and has advocated for that space to be “a place for generations to come and enjoy nature, to see and experience land in an unspoiled state.” This all sounds very good, but it is Don Cunninghams’s other projects that reflect the trend towards green collar jobs.

In the a presentation of the county’s fiscal outlook last summer, Cunningham highlighted a series of projects that will renovate facilities and add new technologies to buildings to reduce energy usage and promote more efficient energy consumption. Cunningham has also developed a plan to complete the first $5-million phase of energy savings projects in Lehigh County nursing homes and has done a great deal for farmland preservation in Lehigh County, which has spent more money on farmland preservation in the past three years than in the entire history of the preservation program’s existence.

The creation of the center is one example of how politicians are dealing with the high unemployment rates caused by the economic crisis and is sure to be an issue that will come up in the months ahead.

“The key to economic recovery is the development of the clean energy economy,” Liz Robinson, director of the Energy Coordinating Agency, which helped to build the new training center in Philadelphia, said in a statement. “At this moment in tine, we desperately need many more highly skilled energy efficiency technicians, men and women who really know how to save energy.”

Philadelphia is two-faced. One of its faces is the radiant, cheerful visage of a town that attracts New Yorkers seeking shorter, more manageable commutes, cheaper rent, and lower costs of living. They seek a calmer and smaller city filled with lovely parks, a network of quality private schools, a deep and meaningful history, and plenty of fun activities.

On the other half of that clean-cut image lie the grimy streets of Kensington, the heroine markets, the unbelievably high illiteracy rate, joblessness and poverty. Center City’s parks are ghostly doppelgangers of Strawberry Mansion’s dope-filled playgrounds. Illegal gun sales threaten the safety of communities and gang violence establishes itself insidiously in our neighborhoods

We have only one say in all of this. We vote. Then we hand the work over to someone else.

At first, the politicians that we vote for are mysteries. They are vague forms that make promises on television and accuse each other of hypocrisy, greed and corruption. They paint pretty pictures of themselves and urge us to vote for them, saying that they will impose measures that will bring the city out of its problems.

This endless cycle is one that we are each familiar with in our own way. Some of us turn our cheeks and stand on pedestals and preach about the buried corruption that lies unearthed, corruption cases like the $62,000 in tools given to the disgraced former state Senator Vince Fumo, or the FBI wiretapping of former Mayor John Street’s office. Some of us research our political picks, and through careful deliberation come to rational conclusions, forming a foundation of reasons for why we place our votes. Some of us choose to avoid the mess altogether.

But most of us vote, and we research, and we hope that our vote will be the right one, that the person we are voting for will work hard in office for us and for our neighbors and for our neighborhood’s neighbors, because we, as individuals, are single voices in a collective body of people crying out for something other than this. We must be certain and confident that those we send to office, those politicians, are the ones we want fighting our city’s fight.

This is the View From Philly. It is clouded and hazed but holds promise. It looks deep into the 2010 election cycle and analyzes our city’s needs, desires and critical stake in state governance. It asks what politicians intend to do about those urban and metropolitan issues that are so often ignored in national elections. This blog is your blog, written by someone with a stake in this city, someone who has chosen to make this historic and revered birthplace of a nation his permanent home. Safe, clean, clear and steady, this is the View From Philly.