City Council Bans Political Poles-

Councilman Mariano and eleven other City Council members have come out swinging against political discourse and free speech recently with the passage of City Council bill # 000657. This bill, which has yet to receive the mayor’s signature, will ban the ability of political candidates to put political posters on utility poles in Philadelphia. Only Councilors Reynolds-Brown, Cohen, Ortiz and Clark voted against this bill.

In a September 14th City Council hearing, Councilman DiCicco described driving into Philadelphia by saying, “…you know you've arrived in Philadelphia by the proliferation of political signs.” One might imagine entering a city that abounds in civic life, where Socratic tradition fosters vibrant and vigorous public engagement. Councilman DiCicco’s description, however, was not meant as praise.

When elected officials express such disregard for our most precious constitutional right of free political speech, we are in trouble. The debate on this matter during the September 14 City Council hearing illustrates the lackadaisical attitude of our elected officials about our civil rights.

By banning this legal form of political speech in public space, while not cracking down on unauthorized commercial speech on public property, city council only removes one more avenue of political education and infringes on the public right to free speech.

Several of our elected officials supporting the proposal pointed out that the political posters, currently on utility poles, could be moved to the realm of private citizens. Once removed from the utility poles, candidates would have to rely on Philadelphians to put up political signs in their yards or windows. However, as a feature of our political system, we have the liberty to wear our politics on our sleeves, but also the right of anonymity for our political preferences.

The banning of this public space for the free, anonymous, exchange of ideas could put a chilling effect on unpopular ideas. Philadelphians may support a pro-gun control candidate or a pro-life candidate, but should not be required to publicly announce this position from their front window and therefore, identify themselves with a position. The free speech rights of the candidates should not depend on the personal advertisements of otherwise-anonymous voters. City Council Bill #00657 clearly undercuts this right. Just as it is our right to have our vote cast by secret ballot, so it is our right to get the ideas of our preferred candidate out before the public without having to put their poster in our front yard.

Even if, as the supporters of this bill imagine, all voters want to relinquish their right to a secret ballot and announce their political preference beforehand, a large percentage of Philadelphians will be stripped of their political voice by this law. Those of us who rent, do not live on the ground floor or in front facing properties are now silenced from public political expression.

Both Councilman Mariano and DiCicco mistakenly compare permitted, political posters to illegal advertising by TV/computer repair, handyman services and diet pills. Political posters are one way that voters can become educated about candidates and issues. Perhaps the most ironic result of this proposed legislation is that it will likely do nothing to stop the “visual pollution” of illegal advertisements. The proposed ban may remove public political speech and silence the political voice of Philadelphians, but don’t expect the diet pill posters to decrease.

Current legislation demands that political posters be taken down shortly after an election. If this law was seriously enforced, the problem would be solved with no harm to our civil liberties.

I hope that citizens will contact Mayor Street and encourage him to veto this law (before Dec. 4). It is an unconstitutional abridgement of the rights of all Philadelphians to free speech, and yes, Mariano, the right word is “draconian.*”


Fabricio Rodriguez, Executive Director
Jobs with Justice

* Councilman Mariano joked with other city councilors as to whether “draconian” described his proposal. Political censorship favoring the current administration was a tactic used by Draco.