The Pennsylvania Attorney General's Office sent a startling message to the city's Democratic political apparatus this week:
Election fraud is a crime, punishable by imprisonment, fines or both.
Attorney General Jerry Pappert found a way to make sure the message got through to Democratic bigwigs:
A veteran ward leader and two of his committee people were indicted on multiple counts of forgery, fraud and perjury in connection with an alleged election scheme.
They are charged with forging more than 240 signatures on the nominating petitions of a City Council candidate in last year's election.
Among those named was Michael Stack Jr., longtime leader of the 58th Ward in Northeast Philly.
Stack, 76, has an impeccable political pedigree. He is a lawyer, the son of a congressman, the father of a state senator, and the husband of a judge.
He was also the patron of a would-be candidate named John Farley.
Farley is a hero of this tale because he had the moxie to press his complaints against the elder Stack with law enforcement officials.
I offer a bow of thanks to the Attorney General's Office because it took Farley's complaints seriously.
A grand jury was impaneled in Harrisburg. Justice Department agents were dispatched to the 58th Ward to question voters. A lot of field work was done to yield the charges against the three politicos. (The others charged were James McGinley and Arline Petroff, Stack minions in the 58th.)
Winking at fraud
The case is significant because, for too long, the city's political elite has treated these types of shenanigans as the equivalent of a prank. Just harmless fun. Something to wink at.
It's nice to know that outside this La La Land of One-Party Rule, people still take election fraud seriously.
The back story here deals with Farley, 37, a post office employee and father of two.
It was his desire to run against Republican City Councilman Brian J. O'Neill in the city's 10th District. He knew his odds of winning were slim, but he wanted to try - and also establish his bona fides for later elections.
In this ambition, Farley was encouraged by the elder Stack and his son, State Sen. Michael Stack 3d.
Up to a point.
He began to suspect the Stacks were using him as a pawn, seeking political concessions from O'Neill in exchange for removing Farley from the ballot so the councilman could run for reelection unopposed.
His tip-off that something was amiss: While Farley and a friend circulated nominating petitions to get a portion of the 750 signatures needed, they heard of no one else in the district doing the same.
Off the ballot
He turned his petitions over to the elder Stack. They were later filed, along with other petitions gathered by the ward leader. Soon, however, word got back that O'Neill allies were going to challenge the validity of the signatures in court.
Stack pressed Farley to withdraw as a candidate before the legal challenge could go forward. At first, he agreed. Then he changed his mind.
He showed up for his hearing. The judge ruled that a number of signatures on the petitions were invalid. He was removed from the ballot.
Farley had quit his job with the post office to run against O'Neill. Now he was out of work and off the ballot, and he felt tainted by all the talk about phony signatures.
He complained to the District Attorney's Office, which passed the case off to the attorney general.
According to the grand jury report, the petitions handled by the elder Stack were a "kitchen-table job," to use political jargon.
They were allegedly filled out by the accused, sitting around a table, forging the signatures of registered voters from voting lists. Three out of 10 of the signatures on the Farley petitions were fraudulent, the attorney general said.
Pappert said the prosecution was significant because "... when you corrupt the very beginning of the election process, you corrupt the entire process."
Somebody say amen.
Tom Ferrick's column runs Wednesday, Friday and Sunday. Contact him at 215-854-2714 or tferrick@phillynews.com.