Del Gallo Challenges Democratic Candidates to Spending Limits

Campaign StatementPrint Story | Email Story

The following is an open letter from Rinaldo Del Gallo III, candidate for the Democratic nomination for state Senate:

During the first week of April, I sent my fellow candidates an email asking them to agree to voluntary spending limits.  Many progressives I have spoken to feel it is an excellent idea. I herein resubmit an open letter on the subject of spending limits, debates, and columns in local papers. This offer, previously submitted in early April, I offer for 10 days after publication of this letter by The Berkshire Eagle (on June 22).
 
Spending Limits

In early April, I was at an event with state Rep. Smitty Pignatelli and the subject of money and campaigns came up. He said that state Sen. Ben Downing spent $100,000 to get elected when he first ran for office in 2006. I also confirmed that Andrea Nuciforo spent similar amounts.
 
Please sit with that colossal dollar figure: $100,000. It is this daunting amount of money that has caused me to hesitate about throwing my hat into the ring.
 
There are several problems with raising such an astronomical sum to run for office.
 
First, potentially good candidates are not entering the race. Rep. Pignatelli openly stated that these huge figures are keeping people from running.
 
Second, when we raise such vast amounts of money, we owe people favors. Politics becomes less about people and more about campaign donors, especially large campaign donors. We all want to represent the poor and the diminishing middle class — not just people that can make campaign donations. I am campaigning as a "Bernie Sanders progressive." [Vermont's U.S. Sen.] Bernie Sanders has talked at great length about the evils of money and politics. But is my hope that getting money out of politics is something that all of us as Democrats can agree is not only a laudable goal but is essential to the body politic. If our government is going to be what Lincoln described as being "of the people, by the people, for the people," we need to get money out of politics. This is especially true of a state senate race which should be all about personal conversations, debates, and expression of views in local media.
 
Third, I want to spend from now until Thursday, Sept. 8, 2016, looking a voter in the eye and having a real conversation, not raising campaign donations. It represents too much of a theft of time. Politics should be about time with people, not raising money.
 
I propose a limit of around $20,000 but would entertain and even prefer lower amounts. I would entertain higher ones if you would not agree to a $20,000 campaign spending limit. But I want to know if you agree to any campaign spending limits of any kind or nature. It is the first policy decision you will have to make.
 
Here would be the parameters:
 
1. Both state senate candidates Adam Hinds and Andrea Harrington would have to agree for this agreement to apply to the Democratic primary.
 
2. There would be a limit on campaign contributions, but there would also be a limit on "independent" expenditures. Best faith efforts would have to be made to discourage such expenditures. The purpose would be to remove hard money and soft money.
 


3. The spending limit would be just that — a spending limit. We could agree to raise funds for the general campaign should the sole Republican challenger not agree to this agreement. (If the sole Republican does not agree to these terms, it would even enhance the Democrats chance at victory, since we would not expend money fighting each other in our primary.)
 
4. If I can get all other candidates on board that could appear in the general election, this agreement of spending limits would apply to the general election as well.
 
5.  Acceptance of this offer pertaining to campaign spending limits must be made in the next week after publication by The Berkshire Eagle.
 
When I first drafted this letter in early April and sent it to all my opponents (Democrat and Republican), I had not asked for one cent in a campaign contribution. The point is, progressives believe we need to take money out of politics and return it to the people. I hope you agree.
 
I believe that we as Democrats can make history and return democracy (with the little "d") to the people. Please join me in what could be a historic moment for democracy and its return to the people.
 
Debates
 
This should be an issues-driven race. I would also like to have debates or forums once per week until the election. There are numerous local organizations that would like to sponsor such debates and forums, and I am sure the media would cover it. I ask your express agreement to this offer.
 
Newspaper Columns
 
We would agree to ask to have local newspapers carry columns by all of us.
 
While I believe that we have a good group of Democratic candidates in Adams Hinds and Andrea Harrington, this open letter is extended to the Republican challenger, Chistine Canning.
 
Please accept this challenge in the upbeat, respectful and positive manner in which it is made. Let us change the face of democracy and give it back to the people.

Editor's note: iBerkshires publishes campaign statements and letters that adhere to our policies. All submissions are subject to editing for style, clarity and content.
 


Tags: campaign statements,   election 2016,   letters to the editor,   


If you would like to contribute information on this article, contact us at info@iberkshires.com.

MassDOT Project Will Affect Traffic Near BMC

By Brittany PolitoiBerkshires Staff

PITTSFIELD, Mass. — Prepare for traffic impacts around Berkshire Medical Center through May for a state Department of Transportation project to improve situations and intersections on North Street and First Street.

Because of this, traffic will be reduced to one lane of travel on First Street (U.S. Route 7) and North Street between Burbank Street and Abbott Street from 7 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday through at least May 6.

BMC and Medical Arts Complex parking areas remain open and detours may be in place at certain times. The city will provide additional updates on changes to traffic patterns in the area as construction progresses.

The project has been a few years in the making, with a public hearing dating back to 2021. It aims to increase safety for all modes of transportation and improve intersection operation.

It consists of intersection widening and signalization improvements at First and Tyler streets, the conversion of North Street between Tyler and Stoddard Avenue to serve one-way southbound traffic only, intersection improvements at Charles Street and North Street, intersection improvements at Springside Avenue and North Street, and the construction of a roundabout at the intersection of First Street, North Street, Stoddard Avenue, and the Berkshire Medical Center entrance.

Work also includes the construction of 5-foot bike lanes and 5-foot sidewalks with ADA-compliant curb ramps.  

Last year, the City Council approved multiple orders for the state project: five orders of takings for intersection and signal improvements at First Street and North Street. 

The total amount identified for permanent and temporary takings is $397,200, with $200,000 allocated by the council and the additional monies coming from carryover Chapter 90 funding. The state Transportation Improvement Plan is paying for the project and the city is responsible for 20 percent of the design cost and rights-of-way takings.

View Full Story

More Pittsfield Stories