Today, Lou Barletta confirmed the obvious: he's attempting to raise nearly $250,000 in order to enrich himself at his donors' expense.  You can read the story at his hometown newspaper, The Standard Speaker, but the facts are appalling, and they raise serious doubts about Barletta's ethics and viability.

According to Vince Galko, his 2008 campaign manager, Lou Barletta intends to use any money he raises to retire campaign debts owed to himself.  (Again, according to Mr. Galko, Barletta will use any money he receives from his campaign to repay personal debts he owes to a bank.)  Granting Barletta the benefit of every conceivable doubt, it appears that he incurred these personal debts in order to contribute to his campaign, and, now, he expects his campaign to help him repay those debts.  Even under those generous assumptions, candidates for public office should not expect the public to repay their personal debts - even if those debts were incurred for campaign purposes.  You will notice that I structure all of my contributions to my campaign as contributions, not loans, because you have the right to know that everything you contribute will be used for the campaign.  Sadly, I'm the only candidate in this race who can make that promise.  [I don't expect candidates to self-finance, but I firmly believe that anything a candidate contributes to his or her campaign should be just that - a contribution.  After all, it's not like donors get their money back when candidates lose, so candidates shouldn't either.]

Furthermore, we have to ask: can Barletta win?  Even if we were to assume that he manages to raise money at the same pace he raised money the last time he ran and even if we were to assume that he could raise that money without incurring any expenses whatsoever, he'll need to spend months - months! - raising money to retire this debt, which means he'll enter the general election flat broke with only a few months left to campaign against Cong. Kanjorski.  That's a sure-fire recipe for Barletta's third defeat.  Oh, and the proposition that Barletta can raise money to retire debt at the same rate he raised money to campaign when he was the GOP's only viable challenger is absurd; the reality is that Barletta would likely need the entire year to retire that debt.  In other words, nominating Barletta would be the equivalent of allowing Kanjorski to run unopposed because Barletta can't afford to mount more than token opposition.

Is this what you want?  Do you want yet another politician who takes your money to enrich himself?  Do you want Kanjorski to face only token opposition?  If not, please contribute to my campaign at www.chrispaigeforcongress.com.  After all, I am the only candidate in this race who can promise you that everything you contribute to my campaign will be used for campaign purposes.