The complaint department

I wrote a column for the March 31 edition of the Shopper-News in which I termed Commissioners R. Larry Smith and Greg "Lumpy" Lambert the "New Populists." On Monday afternoon I heard from Lumpy, who complained that I treated him unfairly by quoting him out of context. Here is the offending passage:

Commissioner Lambert works hard in public to establish a reputation as both a friend of the working class and a bred-to-the-bone Conservative (and, yes, that is with a capital “C.”) He is known for delivering passionate monologues on the importance of protecting jobs.

But, Commissioner L has a problem. As a fellow conservative points out, promoting TIFs for developers is hardly a free market, staunchly capitalist position to embrace.

Commissioner L’s response?

“Where are we to get our campaign contributions if not from developers?”

Lumpy says my source for this exchange tied together two distinct discussions, that his comment about campaign contributions was not related to his support for TIFs. The source disagrees.

Lumpy went on to say that it takes about $20,000 to run a campaign for County Commissioner, and that a number of candidates take contributions from developers. We agree on those two points.

Now, what if we accepted the commissioner's contention that his comment about campaign contributions was not linked to a discussion of TIFs? Does that make it less offensive?

I think not.

When I used the term "New Populists" to describe Lambert and Smith I was calling attention to the practice of speaking one way to the electorate and acting in a different manner when it came time to vote on issues such as retail TIF requests, charter amendments, even calls for probes into the operations of the Mayor's office. (Smith and Lambert are not the only commissioners who fit this characterization, by the way. They have company.)

It makes one long for a true "grass roots" campaign, one financed by the "little people" that so many of our legislators profess to care for. I have no grudge against developers, but if the bulk of your campaign war chest is supplied by one sector of industry, how are you to avoid the appearance of bias?

This is a very real problem for candidates, especially incumbents. Voters are becoming more sophisticated in these parts, and you can bet they are increasingly comparing campaign finance disclosures to voting records for those seeking reelection.

And if they aren't, they should be.

Comments

[Powell Poet]

Ahhhhh, Larry. You assume the candidates accurately and completely fill out campaign finance disclosures. Not!

From memory, I recall R. Larry Smith reporting $11,000 from contributors less than $100. That means 111 people gave Smith 99 bucks? Not!

Campaign contributions are not tax deductible anyhow, so developers and others simply provide cash. We will never know how much.