I think this is an interesting conversation and lies at the heart of what we expect from government, what role we think government should play. What is the economic impact that back room deals and corruption have on our city (and City budget)? Are the non-profits and other recipients of the millions (or billions) of dollars more capable of addressing the challenges we are facing as a city and state? Do we stop ourselves, as a citizenry, from playing a meaningful role in government because of the money that we may receive from those that are there to represent us? These are questions that I take very seriously and have encountered a great deal, there are no easy answers but it does seem to come down to what we expect of government.

I feel that money that comes with strings attached-regardless of whether the donor is the State, City or an individual (in the case of electeds like Fumo it sometimes feels like the money is coming from a private person despite the fact that these are public resources)-is money that often leads to mission creep, to a loss of independence and to ineffective interventions in the challenges we are trying to collectively address. And overall the amount of resources that are delivered to an elite group of political donors in Philadelphia and surrounding area far outweighs the benefits gained by the have nots in this city-a city where one third of households earns less than $20,000 a year and a city which is currently leading the way in gun violence. I am all for a discussion on what Fumo, Rendell and other state electeds have delivered, right now it seems like after decades of more of the same we are creating more drop-outs in our high schools, a completely ineffective plan to develop our economy and a loss of tens of thousands of jobs and an overall reduction in our population. Is this what it means to deliver?

Yeesh. Am I reading this correctly? Are we reform minded are not? Ben-I respect your right to have an opinion and encourage debate, but are you actually advocating a deal with the devil-i.e. that we should consider accepting a politician, who if these allegations are true (which IMHO they are), is clearly a corrupt individual who has no respect for the public, because he "delivers" for Philly? No offense, but that disturbs me. We either have to be true reformers or not. The kind of corruption detailed in that indictment, if true, cannot be tolerated under any circumstances.

And my guess is that the "bacon" that Fumo brought home to his district went only to people whom he favored, and in some cases may have been used against his opponents. Agreed that he has accomplishments he can be proud of, but the facts in this indictment are so offensive they outweigh even his great accomplishments.