All this week, we are running the two mayoral candidates' responses to questions on six issues of vital importance to Philadelphia: education, public safety, race and diversity, neighborhoods, government reform and jobs. The questions were developed by participants in the Citizen Voices project. Today's issue is government reform, which spurred this question from the Citizen Voices participants:

"After you've won an election on which so much money was spent that jaws are dropping nationwide, what steps - concrete or symbolic - will you take to show skeptical citizens that your big contributors won't get special treatment in your administration?"

Below are Sam Katz's and John Street's responses.

Sam Katz: We must make every effort to reverse the perception that campaign contributions are given with the expectation of receiving something back. In my administration, quality, performance, commitment to diversity and price will be the factors that determine which companies do business with the city and its agencies. Contributions, whether made to my campaign or Mr. Street's, will not be a factor. We must also ensure a level playing field for those traditionally not among the most frequent recipients of city business: minorities and women.

As mayor, I will advocate for campaign-finance reform in Pennsylvania. Candidates spend too much time asking too many people for too much money. We must reduce the role of money in politics by requiring more frequent disclosure, stronger enforcement measures, and contribution limitations.

We must also encourage debate on whether to restrict business that can be awarded by elected officials to persons who have contributed to their campaigns. But at a minimum, financial disclosure reforms should require naming contributors who have received business from the officeholder to which they are donating money. More sunshine will go a long way toward assuring the public that governmental decisions are looking out for the taxpayers first.

John Street: First, I will promise the citizens of Philadelphia that their government is not for sale and that decisions of my administration will be based on what is best for the City.

Second, I will acknowledge that the cost of political campaigns and the infusion of millions of dollars into political campaigns - often in large contributions - is a problem that must be addressed. The current system of campaign funding creates the impression that government is being bought and sold, breeding unhealthy cynicism among citizens.

When the state election code was enacted in 1937 and amended in 1978, no one envisioned $250,000-a-week television budgets or costly direct-mail campaigns, among other things. I will ask City Council to join me in creating a Campaign Finance Reform Task Force to investigate, propose and work to implement solutions. Examples used across the country range from the New York model, which provides public funding for political campaigns, to caps on the size of contributions.

Third, tools exist that give the public a greater opportunity to monitor political contributions and government contracting. For example, during this election the Daily News published on its Web site details of individual campaign contributions for every mayoral candidate. My campaign provided information to the paper on disk to facilitate its reporting. I will continue to do so. And as mayor, I will make available to the public and the press, on the Internet and in a computer-compatible format, contracting reports, including the names and businesses awarded city contracts. While the City has its own policing mechanism, including the office of the inspector general, the district attorney, and the city controller, the public has its own right to know.