About: Jeff Pruitt
- pruitt@fortwaynepolitics.com
- Profile
- I am a lifelong Democrat that likes to call myself a populist Democrat. In this sense I think more power should be shifted to the people and away from politicians and the elitist interests that attempt to control them. Philosophically I suppose I would classify myself (if I must) as a fiscal conservative and a social liberal. In general I believe in ALL of our inalienable rights and thus by definition realize they are not provided or doled out by the government. I'm originally from Kansas and a graduate of Kansas State University with a degree in Physics and I moved to Fort Wayne in the summer of 2000. I don't claim any special expertise in the government arena other than I follow it very closely and always have. In that sense I suppose I'm a pundit - I'll leave it up to others to decide if I'm any good at it...
Posts by Jeff Pruitt:
Election Day - What to Watch
11/4/08 @ 3:20 am
I’ll ignore the obvious here which are clearly the Presidential race as well as the 3rd District congressional race. But there are a few other interesting things to watch:
- Can Gary Snyder break the Republican stranglehold on Huntington politics and win a seat on the county council?
- How many seats will Democrats gain in the state legislature? I posted my thoughts on the top tier races back in mid July.
- How will the township assessor referendum turn out? Are voters ready to do away with township government?
- Will Democrats Susan Hoot and/or Kevin Knuth win a seat on the Allen County council?
- How will the FWCS races play out? Will the Code Blue Schools candidates carry the day or will the status quo win out?
Just a few local items to watch while you’re glued to the TV waiting for the big-ticket races to report…
Filed Under 2008 Local Elections, Featured | 1 Comment
Editorial Staff Refuses To Print Candidate Letter
11/3/08 @ 6:21 pm
An editorial board is supposed to be in the business of opining. However, there should be some basic level of fairness. For example, one local newspaper editorial staff came out against Jon Olinger as a school board candidate but then refused to print his rebuttal letter. (You can read the rebuttal letter here)
This really gets to the heart of what makes the blogosphere so much more interesting than traditional print media. Here at FWP we take on all comers. If you have a dissenting opinion then you are always welcome to post it. If you want to challenge something we write then we would encourage you to do so. We never refuse to post other comments simply because we disagree with them.
In the blogosphere, ideas win out. In print journalism some editor with an ax to grind decides whose thoughts get put into the public domain. They don’t understand free market journalism and frankly they aren’t very good at it - all of the local media blogs are essentially worthless.
The reason is that they want to control the information and moderate the public debate. That’s why they won’t print certain letters or even acknowledge the existence of the blogosphere (and I’m not talking about reporters here - there’s a distinction between them and the editorial staff).
The amount of information available can no longer be easily contained or manipulated. Now even newspapers have to compete just like everyone else. And if you ask me they are woefully behind the curve and losing ground every day…
Filed Under Featured, Local Politics | 10 Comments
3rd District Congressional Debate
11/1/08 @ 11:09 am
I attended yesterday’s debate at IPFW involving the three candidates running for the 3rd District Congressional seat. In general it’s nearly impossible to gain any real information from these debates as the candidates have to sum up their positions in 30 or 90 second soundbites. But I’ll give my general impression of the candidates’ performance. You can follow the link given on the Allen County Democratic Party’s blog if you want to watch it yourself.
Bill Larsen (L) - I’ve spoke with Lasen before and he’s an intelligent guy - he’s an engineer but he’s no politician. He just doesn’t know how to connect with people to get his point across. He was clearly uncomfortable on stage and his closing argument was so statistics-laced that nobody could follow it.
Mark Souder (R) - Souder has come a long ways as a public speaker but his entire message during the debate was an attack on Montagano. He also had the audacity to complain about how negative the campaign has been and how he has been unfairly attacked. Souder’s entire campaign - nay, his entire political existence - has become intellectually bankrupt. He articulated no new ideas or coherent message about why the voters of this district should continue to support him. He has become a career politician who is scared to death that he might have to return to the private sector and earn his keep.
Mike Montagano (D) - Montagano seemed nervous at times but he was able to point to specific votes where he felt Souder had broke with the wishes of his constituents. Montagano is young, ambitious and has relatively little experience but is that such a bad thing in this case? I know what I’m getting with Mark Souder and it ain’t much.
I’ve spoken with Montagano and he’s an extremely intelligent and personable guy who has a good grasp on the issues this country faces. He’s the type of guy that everybody likes and after speaking with him you may not agree with him but you will respect him and his position.
I’ve heard rumblings from people that wished former councilman Tom Hayhurst would’ve ran again this year but I don’t agree with that. Montagano is a better choice and I don’t mean that as a slight to Tom Hayhurst. They both have the intellect but Montagano has the personality that will allow him to succeed in Congress - an area where Souder has been a miserable failure and will continue to be so with the Democratic majority.
I won’t bother to try and analyze who won or lost the debate because the truth is that it doesn’t matter. It all boils down to this - will voters continue to send a sub-par career politician back to DC or take a chance on the young, intelligent yet inexperienced guy?
If you are unhappy with Souder and want to replace him then this is your chance. If not now when? Do you want to be voting for a 36-year incumbent Mark Souder in the future? Don’t fool yourself into thinking the primary process will take him out - it won’t; it rarely ever does. The only way to oust incumbents is to vote for the other party and regroup in two years.
If you’re so inclined then there’s still time to help get rid of Mark Souder. Call (574-971-8708) or e-mail (Jen@montaganoforcongress.com) the Montagano office and ask them what you can do. Or donate to the campaign - think of it as contributing to Mark Souder’s going away party…
Filed Under 2008 Local Elections, Featured | 10 Comments
Polling Data On Fort Wayne Casino
10/29/08 @ 1:24 am
The
Wane/News-Sentinel poll asked residents of the 3rd congressional district about Fort Wayne gambling:
Would you favor or oppose a gaming boat in Fort Wayne as a part of the often discussed North River Project?
| Favor | Oppose | Not Sure | |
|---|---|---|---|
| All | 32% | 36% | 32% |
| Men | 35% | 34% | 31% |
| Women | 29% | 38% | 33% |
| Democrats | 32% | 35% | 33% |
| Republicans | 34% | 34% | 32% |
| Indpendents | 30% | 39% | 31% |
Filed Under Uncategorized | 4 Comments
Mayor and Council Should Work To Reinstate PIO Position
10/29/08 @ 12:20 am
I’ve said for some time that the only way to get to the desired 3% goal was to cut city staff. At tonight’s meeting the city council went through and nixed an extraordinary number of line items to cut $2.4 million from the budget, but they only cut one position from the payroll.
That one position was the mayor’s public information officer. I just cannot believe that of all the city positions the council decided this was the one, and only one, that needed to go. The city’s PIO is an interface to the public and helps answer citizen questions among other things. I have personally seen a dramatic increase in the response and accessibility of this administration when compared to the previous one.
Since the budget ordinance is tabled until November 18 the council has a chance to reconsider this cut. Having said that, this process should be a two-way street. The mayor needs to come up with $54k in cuts to offer as a replacement for this position cut. The vote was close and only passed 5-4 so I think if the mayor comes forward with an alternative cut then he could likely flip one of those votes.
A nice gesture would be for the mayor to forgo the salary increase that he’s due to collect thanks to the previous council. The mayor could cut his own salary from $120k back to the level it was a couple of years ago - $104k. As I warned in a previous post, the mayor should’ve engaged the council in serious budget discussions before it was too late. Now he’s lost a member of his own staff and in the end I believe he’s to blame for that.
But maybe it’s not too late after all. The council and the mayor should find a way to reinstate the PIO position. The idea that the PIO is the most inefficient and pointless position in all of city government and thus is the only one that should be downsized strikes me as ridiculous…
Filed Under City Council | 5 Comments
City Budget Cuts Tabled Until Nov 18 - $2.4 Million Cut So Far
10/28/08 @ 9:17 pm
The city attorney convinced council that they could not legally cut a flat 3% from the budget. As a response the council voted on a motion to cut 3% from every line item. That motion failed by a 5-4 vote with councilmembers Harper, Smith, Brown and Didier voting for it.
From there the council went line by line and voted on each and every proposed cut. The most significant cuts that were passed were a zero salary increase for all employees and the elimination of a public information officer from the mayor’s staff which was the only city position eliminated.
There was also serious discussion about eliminating the entire 911 communications department and forcing the city and county executives to finally consolidate those two departments. The motion failed with councilmen Harper, Hines and Pape voting to eliminate the department. While the vote might have failed, several councilmembers including Goldner, Shoaff and Smith made it quite clear that if this consolidation does not happen by the next budget cycle then they will vote to eliminate it from the city department.
After going through all the proposed cuts councilwoman Liz Brown commented that she was unaware that the 3% flat cut would be illegal until earlier today. Because of that she said that she did not have the opportunity to go through all the department budgets to find the $4.5 million cuts she wanted to find.
She then made a motion to table the budget ordinance until Nov 18. The delay is due to the fact that there will have to be another public notice and public hearing requiring a 10 day lead time. The motion passed 5-4 with Brown, Shoaff, Harper, Didier and Pape voting for it. So the council will reconvene their budget talks on Nov 18 to finalize their cuts.
The itemized cuts the council agreed to thus far are listed below:
Filed Under City Council, Featured | 5 Comments
Administration Sandbags City Council
10/28/08 @ 3:57 pm
Once again the administration will sandbag city council by providing them last minute information the day of the meeting. I’m told the city will be presenting a response from the various department heads that would explain how the individual council cuts would affect their departments.
In general this is a good information. But by handing out the information at the last minute they hope to sandbag the councilmembers so they don’t have time to research the responses and come up with intelligent questions and rebuttals.
As an outsider it seems to me that this is becoming a standard tactic used by the administration…
Filed Under City Council | 1 Comment
Mayor Prepares To Fight Flat Budget Cuts
10/28/08 @ 3:51 pm
Word is the city attorney is coming to city council to inform them that they do not have the statutory authority to cut the budget bottom line by 3% as some councilmembers (and myself) wanted to do. In other words the city attorney is insisting that the council cut the individual line items themselves.
I’m not going to try and play lawyer here and determine who’s right but let me just say that this is going to kick things up a notch. The council could clearly cut 3% from every line item if they chose to and the mayor may be forcing that upon them.
At this point I feel like council should accept the mayor’s legal position and then proceed to cut 5% from the budget item by item. I would also take JQ Taxpayer’s half-serious approach of gutting the entire 9th floor in the process. It would surely be a symbolic vote as undoubtedly the mayor would use his veto power to send it back to council. (Update: Councilman Tom Smith said during the budget meeting that the mayor cannot veto the budget ordinance.)
That’s really the problem here - we’re at gridlock. The mayor is unwilling to cut a single nickel from the budget but council probably doesn’t have the 6 votes to override a veto. Something’s gotta give…
Filed Under City Council, Featured | 2 Comments
Local Paper Defends Quote
10/28/08 @ 8:13 am
In yesterday’s post I said that one local paper’s race-baiting editorial took Evert Mol’s quote out of context. That same local paper did not think that was a fair characterization and sent me the e-mail they lifted the quote from. I’m going to post the timeline leading up to the editorial and readers can judge for themselves whether or not it was taken out of context.
Filed Under 2008 Local Elections | 6 Comments
Corona Updates Illegal Campaign Finance Report
10/28/08 @ 7:54 am
A local paper covered my complaint regarding FWCS board member Steve Corona’s illegal campaign finance report:
After learning of the complaint, Corona said he called his campaign treasurer, Bruce Boxberger, a local attorney, about the omission.
Boxberger filed Corona’s original campaign finance report with the election board and said the omission of itemized expenditures was an oversight.
The correct form was faxed to the election board Friday.
[...]
“I just wanted him to file the page before the election. If he’s filed it, I’m OK with that,” Pruitt said. “I think it’s important to know where everybody’s money comes from and who it goes to.”
I’m glad he corrected the error in an expedited manner. If you are interested about where his money came from then you should know that the vast majority of it came from people who do business with FWCS. Local architect Mike Gouloff gave him $5k of the $8k he raised.
