How the mayor's race is hurting democracy

THE MAYOR'S race keeps drawing Zzzzs; today we offer Yyyys.

Why have six Democratic candidates for an open seat in a Democratic city been unable to generate voter enthusiasm?

Pollsters could actually change one choice from "undecided" to "uninterested" and run up a pretty big number.

Why is turnout likely to be lower than in the last three open-seat primaries?

(It was 49 percent in 1991 when Ed Rendell won a four-way race; 35 percent in '99 when John Street won a six-way; 33 percent in '07 when Michael Nutter won a five-way.)

Is it an atmospheric thing? A manifestation of the "Philly Shrug"? Related to Phillies attendance, on pace for lowest since Citizens Bank Park opened in '04?

I mean, that could be it. The candidate field is like the Phils: no stars; sloppy play.

Try these three reasons: Nutter, despondency, the candidates themselves.

Face it, Mayor Nutter's done a decent job. The crime rate is down. The graduation rate is up. There's lots of development in the city. He hasn't bombed any neighborhoods. And, as far as we know, there're no FBI bugs in his office.

As a result, and apart from endemic poverty and crappy public schools, there's really no huge issue to fix or fire folks up about.

Put simply, maintenance is no rallying cry.

School-funding? That's an issue of abdication by Congress, City Council and the Legislature.

Despondency is another problem.

In a city with 27 percent poverty, largest among the nation's biggest cities, there are far too many unconnected citizens.

Some of their lives were richly detailed by my colleague Wendy Ruderman in a fine piece of journalism last week about folks who feel forgotten, who are unsure who's running, whose lives don't change no matter who's mayor and who, largely, are unlikely to vote.

Candidates know it. That's why a poverty forum at Broad Street Ministry, which drew 400 people, many homeless, began with just two candidates present: Democrat Jim Kenney and the lone Republican, Melissa Murray Bailey.

Others came late, some not at all.

Add many of the poor to legions of others who long ago lost faith in government and politics, and you can see how numbers of non-voters start to stack up.

This gets us to the candidates themselves.

Not exactly an all-star lineup.

Would Kenney even be running if Ken Trujillo was in the race? Would he have the momentum he has without extensive labor support?

Would Tony Williams be running without the backing of rich, suburban, pro-charter pals spending millions on his behalf?

Lynne Abraham is handcuffed by fundraising limits and having no special-interest sugar daddies.

Nelson Diaz and Doug Oliver never stood a chance. Milton Street is still Milton Street.

And none of these six lit anything more than embers of enthusiasm.

Sam Katz, who late yesterday said he would not run for mayor as an independent this year, blames the process.

He argues that candidates were chained to phones raising money and handicapped by sound bites during countless forums that restricted opportunities to say "here's my vision for the city and these are my plans to get there."

Katz says, "You can't do that in 45 seconds . . . the process beats down candidates."

And that prevents many voters from differentiating among them.

None of this should dissuade voting, but all of it surely will.

Philadelphia deserves better.

While turnout drops across America (last year's was lowest in 72 years) it's a shame the home of the Declaration and the home of the Constitution is also the home of an electorate too willing to forsake it heritage - for whatever reasons.

Blog: ph.ly/BaerGrowls

Columns: ph.ly/JohnBaer