http://www.ctmirror.org/page/guide-connecticut-politics-government
Please
remember that this is not in any way an official website; please
also note that the layout on the "About Weston" website is arranged to
look best for overall effect.
CT
DEMOCRATS STILL CONTROL LEGISLATURE AFTER 2012 ELECTION
- RORSCHACH TEST: DARK INKBLOTS (r) LOOK STRESSED
Occhiogrosso departs at mid-term
Mark Pazniokas, CT MIRROR
December 10, 2012
Gov. Dannel P. Malloy today announced the long-planned departure of his
senior adviser, Roy Occhiogrosso, a move that deprives Malloy of his
public voice and closest confidant as he begins the two-year march
towards the 2014 campaign.
Occhiogrosso, 47, who has been framing issues and political messages
for Malloy since the governor's first unsuccessful run for governor in
2006, left open the question of formal or informal involvement in the
2014 campaign.
With the governor preparing to nominate to two justices to the
Connecticut Supreme Court and at least 10 Superior Court judges, his
general counsel, Andrew McDonald, is expected by court watchers to soon
be leaving for the bench.
Malloy has signaled to his senior staff at the approach of the
mid-point in his four-year term that now is the time for departures;
anyone staying past January is seen as signing on the for the remainder
of the term.
Occhiogrosso has played a unique role in the quartet of advisers
generally seen as Malloy's inner circle: He often is the public face of
the administration, especially on matters of political controversy; in
private, Occhiogrosso is probably the adviser is bluntest with the
governor.
"We've been at this together for a long time, almost on a daily basis
for 6 years," Malloy said at his regular press conference after the
monthly Bond Commission meeting. "He is someone that I have relied on,
the lieutenant govenor has relied on, and he will be greatly missed."
Occhigrosso is a symbol of the Malloy administration's unending
campaign. He is the point man who hectors and cajoles the press and
engages the administration's critics with emails, phone calls and, more
recently, in exchanges on Twitter.
"You know of his dedication," Malloy told reporters at a press
conference following the State Bond Commission, when he announced
Occhiogrosso would leave by month's end. "Some of you have even been
witness to his passion."
The divorced father of young twin sons, Occhiogrosso originally planned
to depart a year ago and step back from a job that respects few
boundaries between work and home.
"About a year ago, I approached him with the idea of staying yet
another year. It took him 30 days to give me an answer, but I did get a
year," Malloy said. "I've appreciated every moment of that year."
"I personally think people tend to stay in these jobs too long some
times," Occhiogrosso said.
The governor's original inner circle already has changed with the
resignation after one year of Tim Bannon, the governor's first chief of
staff. He was succeeded by Mark Ojakian, a deputy budget director who
was Lt. Gov. Nancy Wyman's top aide during her time as state
comptroller.
As recently as last week, Occhiogrosso was coy when asked by the Mirror
if he was ready to leave. Today, he shrugged and noted, "Eventually,
the answer was going to be yes. What can I say?"
DEFEATED BY GOV. MALLOY
Lamont lost in Democrat primary, Foley, Republican, in general election.
Foley, Lamont find fault with Malloy's budget tactics
Ken Dixon, Staff Writer, CT POST
Updated 08:19 a.m., Tuesday, April 5, 2011
NEW HAVEN -- The two runners-up for governor criticized Gov. Dannel P.
Malloy on Monday for raising spending and asking for higher taxes from
recession-wracked state residents. During an hourlong
head-to-head at
the Yale Law School, Tom Foley, the Republican gubernatorial candidate,
charged that Malloy should be following the example of New York Gov.
Andrew Cuomo, who made big cuts in that state's operating budget while
holding the line on new taxes.
"I thought they said they were cutting spending," said Foley, who lost
to Malloy in November by 6,404 votes. "Are you confused, too? This is
snake-oil stuff." He said Malloy's budget is "a cynical deception"
that's full of "gimmicks and head fakes," while actually raising
spending levels.
Lamont, who lost the Democratic primary by 103,154 votes to 77,772,
wasn't as critical as Foley, calling Malloy's two-year proposal
"relatively honest," including billions of dollars in anticipated
concessions from state unions and $2.5 billion in new taxes, a full $1
billion more than Malloy has portrayed.
He said Malloy's budget would hit the middle class very hard and that
the governor and his agency commissioners should accept pay cuts to at
least symbolically align themselves with "shared sacrifice."
Lamont said Malloy should be more aggressive in reducing health-care
costs and harnessing the expertise of the nonprofit provider community,
while reforming the tax structure, including the termination of
corporate taxes.
"We need a real sea change if we're going to turn around the ship of
state," Lamont said, adding that Malloy's budget may be "a good start."
He said that Malloy is asking state employees to offer major givebacks,
including $1 billion a year in unspecified savings. "What we need is
more taxpayers in this state," he said.
Foley said that if he had won the election, he'd be "in a better
position" to leverage concessions from state unions, who supported
Malloy.
Lamont challenged Foley's assessment, describing Malloy as "a bull in a
china shop" while he's seeking his bottom line. He blasted John G.
Rowland, the former Republican governor, who gave unions a 20-year
fringe benefits deal in 1997.
Foley said nationwide movements against union rights should be taken up
in Connecticut to stop taxpayers from "being held hostage." The state
was in jeopardy well before the nationwide recession, said Foley, a
private investor who recently started the nonprofit Connecticut Policy
Institute.
"We have a very different economy from what we had," he said, noting
that while the service economy has emerged throughout most of the
state, high value-added jobs, including financial services, have been
fostered primarily in southwestern Connecticut.
Lamont, a telecommunications executive, who like Foley lives in
Greenwich, said that Connecticut has been lacking the kind of
creativity exemplified by New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who
recently announced plans to start a new university focused on 21st
century jobs in the sciences. Lamont said if he were governor he
would
have required local school boards to agree to major reforms if they
were to get larger amounts of state aid. About 90 people attended
the
early evening event, sponsored by various law school organizations.
"The action right now is in the state capitals," Lamont said, asking
the law students to stay in the state, after a show of hands indicated
that most of the 20 or so are planning to move when they gain their
degrees.
"Please do stay in Connecticut," Foley concluded. "We will fix these
problems."
Flatto now a Bridgeporter after sale of
Fairfield home
Andrew Brophy, CT POST
Updated 11:59 p.m., Tuesday, May 29, 2012
FAIRFIELD -- The man who served as Fairfield's top elected official
longer than anyone else in the last three decades is now a resident of
Bridgeport. And he also will be making another career change.
Kenneth Flatto, who was first selectman for nearly 12 of the last 14
years before stepping down last year, moved to the Park City this month
after receiving what he termed "a really fair offer" for the Fairfield
house that he and his wife owned on Orchard Hill Lane for about 20
years. Flatto now owns a condominium at 3200 Park Ave. in
Bridgeport, just over Fairfield's eastern border. Flatto said he's not
sure yet whether the condominium will be a short- or long-term home.
"We only had a month between when the offer came and the move so we had
a very short window to find a place," Flat said Monday. "We're happy to
find a place fast and happy to sell the house fast. "
According to Fairfield land records, Flatto and his wife, Liz, sold
their Fairfield home at 136 Orchard Hill Lane for $520,000 to Sylvia
Vermeer and Jarrid A. Hall. The house most recently was appraised
at $543,300, so the sales price nearly matched the appraised value in a
difficult real estate market for sellers. The Flattos bought the house
in April 1993 for $261,000. Three of the Flattos' four children
are living on their own and the fourth is in college, so Flatto said he
and his wife decided to downsize.
"We were interested in condo-style living, and the only one we found
that fit our criteria was along Park Avenue," Flatto said. "There were
really no comparable units in the Fairfield area."
Flatto added that he and his wife also thought this is a good time to
invest in the Park City because of "a lot of positive things happening
on the development front."
"We didn't want to rent and thought it was a great time for an
investment," he said.
Flatto declined to specify what he and his wife paid for the condo,
though he said it was a "very good investment price."
"The condo market is pretty challenged right now so the prices are very
reasonable," he said.
The Flattos won't have to walk or drive far to be back in Fairfield.
The condo they own is in a complex about 50 feet from the border and
across the street from Toilsome Hill Road in Fairfield, Flatto said.
"We feel like it's kind of straddling both communities," he said. "I've
always been a big believer in Fairfield and Bridgeport. Many people
living in the (condo) complexes are former Fairfielders."
Flatto said it was difficult to leave Fairfield, but he thought it
would be exciting to become familiar with the North End of Bridgeport
and a new section of Fairfield after living near the geographic center
of Fairfield for so long. Flatto, who was still a District 4
member of Fairfield's Democratic Town Committee after leaving office,
said he has emailed other District 4 representatives to say he would be
stepping down from his post at the end of the month.
The move to Park Avenue happened so quickly that Flatto said he still
needs to change his voter registration and half of the addresses on
bills. Flatto said he does not foresee entering politics in
Bridgeport, and envisions his role in Fairfield as that of a booster
for the town and "kind of an emeritus first selectman."
"My thought is just to help where I can," in Fairfield and Bridgeport
he said. "I'm looking to just be a supporter and a booster."
He added that may be able to help the communities in "a big-picture
way," without getting involved "in an overly political fashion."
Flatto also said he is transitioning away from his job at the Jewish
Home for the Elderly and had a future career in mind, though he said it
would take a week to 10 days before he would be able to discuss it. "It
just didn't end up being the right fit," Flatto said of his job at the
JHE. "I'm going to be helping, but it's pretty much finishing soon."
The Flattos attended Monday's Memorial Day parade, standing next to
other town dignitaries on the reviewing stand on Town Hall Green.
The former first selectman said he was pleased to be at the annual
event and to see many familiar faces.
He couldn't say if he might return to living in Fairfield, but said he
has "a lot of allegiance and love for Fairfield."
"I and my family have a strong love of Fairfield and an attachment, and
we're always going to be involved, whether we're living there or not,"
Flatto said.
Flatto was elected a member of Fairfield's Board of Selectmen in 1995,
and then won election to the office of first selectman in 1997, serving
in the town's top job for one term before losing it in 1999. He
then was elected first selectman again in 2001 and served until May
2011, when he resigned to accept a job in Gov. Dannel P. Malloy's
administration.
He left that job in January to become vice president for community
services and business development for the Jewish Home.
NOW FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF
SPECIAL
REVENUE - CT GAMBLING "OVERLORD"
Soon to be Former First Selectman Ken Flatto
Ken Flatto to join Malloy
administration
CT POST
Published 10:25 a.m., Tuesday, March 22, 2011
FAIRFIELD -- First Selectman Ken Flatto is joining the Malloy
administration as the Executive Director of the Division of Special
Revenue.
The division is responsible for managing various special revenues and
for regulating legalized gaming in the State of Connecticut, including
the Lottery and Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun.
"Ken will bring his 30 years of experience as a financial and
accounting manager to this integral position," said Governor Malloy.
"Although we are trying to maximize revenue that comes into the state,
we always need to be mindful that it does not come at the expense of
our state's citizens."
"I am truly looking forward to helping Governor Malloy and his
administration account for additional revenue and improve services for
Connecticut citizens," said Flatto. "I thank the Governor for his
confidence and I intend to achieve solid results in this position."
With
taxes the issue, GOP gets a do-over in
special elections
Mark Pazniokas and Arielle Levin Becker, CT MIRROR
February 21, 2011
With Gov. Dannel P. Malloy's proposed $1.5 billion tax increase still
dominating the headlines, Republicans get a do-over Tuesday in special
elections to fill six House and three Senate seats left vacant by
Democrats who won in November, only to resign before the legislature
convened Jan. 5.
On WFSB's "Face the State" on Sunday, Malloy was unsure if the nine
state legislative races will be interpreted as an early referendum on
one of the state's biggest tax increases, but the Democratic governor
seemed resigned to seeing his party's substantial legislative
majorities shrink.
"I think we'll probably lose some seats," he said. "We'll win some
seats."
The balance of power cannot shift in a significant way Tuesday, since
Democrats are guaranteed to end the day still holding at least 20 of 36
seats in the Senate. In the House, the GOP is seriously contesting only
in four races, meaning that Democrats will end up with at least 96 of
151 seats in the House.
But a Republican sweep of the four House and three Senate races they
are targeting could rattle Democrats about the wisdom of the largest
tax increase since another new governor, Lowell P. Weicker Jr.,
responded to another inherited fiscal crisis in 1991 with Connecticut's
first broad-based tax on income.
Taxes have been a common theme in most
of the races, but the abolition of the death penalty -- an issue whose
fate could be settled Tuesday -- was introduced as an issue in one race
over the weekend with an endorsement by Johanna Petit Chapman, the
sister of Dr. William Petit, the survivor of the Cheshire home invasion.
New Britain Mayor Tim Stewart, the Republican candidate trying to
succeed Democrat Donald DeFronzo in the 6th Senate District, said
automated calls went out over the weekend with an endorsement message
from Chapman, whom he called a friend.
"I am a strong advocate for the death penalty, always have been,"
Stewart said.
His Democratic opponent, former Rep. Terry Gerratana, D-New Britain,
said she was unsure how she would vote on a bill Gov. M. Jodi Rell
vetoed in 2009 that would have abolished the death penalty for future
cases. She is the only Senate candidate not on record as opposing
repeal.
The repeal bill passed two years ago in the Senate, 19 to 17. After the
November election, the Senate appeared to be evenly divided, 18 to 18.
Of the three senators who resigned, Andrew McDonald of Stamford favored
repeal and the other two, DeFronzo and Thomas P. Gaffey of Meriden,
voted against repeal.
Democrat Thomas Bruenn and Republican Leonard Suzio, the two candidates
seeking Gaffey's seat in the 13th District, oppose repeal.
"I happen to believe that with the DNA evidence that we present that it
is almost impossible for an innocent person to be on death row," Bruenn
said.
In Stamford, Republican Bob Kolenberg is opposed, and Democrat Carlo
Leone voted against repeal in 2009 as a member of the state House of
Representatives.
The death penalty has not been a major issue in any of the House races,
according to strategists in both parties.
Bruenn said when he goes door to door voters want to talk about taxes,
jobs and the cost of health care.
Voters have told him that Malloy's tax increases are too heavily
weighted toward the middle class, and Bruenn said he agrees with them.
He would like to see higher taxes on couples making more than $500,000
a year and lower the tax rates for the poor and middle class.
Suzio could not be reached for comment, but he has campaigned against
taxes. He signed a pledge last month saying he would vote against any
effort to raise taxes, and said during a debate the same day Malloy
presented his budget, "I don't like the tax increases. Not a penny. No
new taxes. No more taxes. No way."
In New Britain, Gerratana distanced herself from Malloy's tax plan,
saying it wasn't "appropriate" for the district.
"I think people are a little bit outraged what they saw the other day,"
Stewart said. "I would say taxation is a huge issue for every person in
the district."
Stewart's refusal to say when he would resign as mayor if he wins has
been an issue. Stewart said he would perform both jobs during a
transition period.
"His approach is it is OK to do both," Gerratana said. "I would be a
full-time senator."
Gerrantana is one of two former House members on the ballot Tuesday. In
West Hartford, Republican Allen Hoffman is competing with Democratic
Councilman Joe Verrengia for the seat vacated by David McCluskey.
Hoffman was a one-term representative in the 1990s.
Four Republicans running Tuesday were on the ballot in November.
In East Haven, Republican Linda Monaco is making a second try for the
99th House District seat. Janet Peckinpaugh, the former TV anchorwoman
who was the GOP nominee for congress in the 2nd District, is running
Tuesday in the 36th House District.
Kolenberg was the GOP nominee in the 27th Senate District in November,
losing to McDonald, who quit to become Malloy's top legal adviser.
Suzio was the GOP nominee in the 13th, losing to Gaffey, who resigned
after pleading guilty to double billing for legislative travel.
Republicans have given the 27th
District special attention, drawing campaign stops over the
weekend by former Lt. Gov. Michael C. Fedele, who once challenged
McDonald for the seat, as well as the GOP's gubernatorial and U.S.
Senate nominees, Tom Foley and Linda McMahon.
Malloy had no scheduled campaign appearances over the weekend, though
he has helped raise money for a couple of candidates, said his staff.
Malloy, the former mayor of Stamford, did make a pitch on "Face the
State" on behalf of Leone.
"He'd be a great state senator," Malloy said.
The GOP did not nominate a candidate in the 25th House District, ceding
the seat to Democrat Robert Sanchez.
In Bridgeport's 126th House District,
the state GOP is putting no resources in the race to succeed Democrat
Chris Caruso, but a Republican, James Keyser, is on a crowded ballot.
Joining Keyser and Democrat Charlie Stallworth are five petitioning
candidates, including former Rep. Robert Keeley, a Democrat trying to
make his second comeback.
Senate 6 - Berlin, Farmington and New
Britain
(Vacancy: resignation of Sen. Donald J. DeFronzo, D-New Britain)
Terry Bielinski Gerratana (D)
Timothy T. Stewart (R)
Terry Bielinski Gerratana (WF)
Senate 13 - Cheshire, Meriden,
Middlefield, and Middletown
(Vacancy: resignation of Sen. Thomas Gaffey, D-Meriden)
Thomas E. Bruenn (D)
Len Suzio (R)
Thomas E. Bruenn (WF)
Len Suzio (Independent Party)
Senate 27 - Darien and Stamford
(Vacancy: resignation of Sen. Andrew J. McDonald, D-Stamford)
Carlo Leone (D)
Bob Kolenberg (R)
House 20 - West Hartford
(Vacancy: resignation of Rep. David McCluskey, D-West Hartford)
Joe Verrengia (D)
Allen Hoffman (R)
Allen Hoffman (Connecticut for Lieberman)
House 25 - New Britain
(Vacancy: resignation of Rep. John Geragosian, D-New Britain)
Robert Sanchez (D)
Robert Sanchez (WF)
Richard Marzi (Write-In)
House 36 - Chester, Deep River, Essex,
and Haddam
(Vacancy: resignation of Rep. James F. Spallone, D-Essex)
Philip J. Miller (D)
Janet Peckinpaugh (R)
House 99 - East Haven
(Vacancy: resignation of Rep. Michael P. Lawlor, D-East Haven)
James M. Albis (D)
Linda Monaco (R)
James M. Albis (WF)
House 101 - Guilford and Madison
(Vacancy: resignation of Rep. Deborah Heinrich, D-Madison)
Joan M. Walker (D)
Noreen S. Kokoruda (R)
House 126 - Bridgeport
(Vacancy: resignation of Rep. Christopher Caruso, D-Bridgeport)
Charlie L. Stallworth (D)
James Keyser (R)
Mark P. Trojanowski (Petitioning Candidate)
Carlos Silva (Petitioning Candidate)
Robert T. Keeley, Jr. (Petitioning Candidate)
Thomas R. Lombard (Petitioning Candidate)
Verna Kearney (Petitioning Candidate)
List:
Connecticut Special
Elections (as a result of Election 2010 in almost all cases)
Special
elections will be held Feb. 22 to fill nine state legislative seats.
Hartford Courant
January 24, 2011
House
20th District: part of West Hartford. Reason for vacancy: David
McCluskey left to join the state Board of Pardons and Paroles.
25th District: part of New Britain. Reason for vacancy: John Geragosian
left to become the legislature's Democratic auditor.
36th District: Chester, Deep River, Essex, Haddam. Reason for vacancy:
James Spallone left to become deputy secretary of the state.
99th District: part of East Haven. Reason for vacancy: Mike Lawlor left
to join Gov. Dannel P. Malloy's budget office as the undersecretary for
criminal justice policy and planning.
101st District: Madison, part of Guilford. Reason for vacancy: Deb
Heinrich left to take a Malloy cabinet-left position advocating on
behalf of nonprofit providers.
126th District: part of Bridgeport. Reason for vacancy: Christopher
Caruso left to join the state Department of Economic and Community
Development as an urban policy adviser.
Senate (see Senate Circle above)
6th District: New Britain, Berlin, part of Farmington. Reason for
vacancy: Donald DeFronzo left to become head of the state Department of
Administrative Services..
13th District: Meriden, Middlefied, part of Cheshire, part of
Middletown. Reason for vacancy: Thomas Gaffey resigned after pleading
guilty to larceny charges.
27th District: part of Darien, part of Stamford. Reason for vacancy:
Andrew McDonald left to become Malloy's chief budget counsel.
LEADERSHIP:
Stretching the bounderies...do Westonites work with legislators from
neighboring towns on environmental issues? Gail
Lavielle is listening!
Will we have a one-Party government in the buildings shown above
November 3? Where will Weston's
voice be heard in the building to the left? Try
working, for example, with Wilton! CT Legislature: 2010 totals
from Hartford Courant here.
And an unofficial recount going on the week of November 29 - December 3
in Bridgeport...
NEW REPUBLICAN
MAJORITY IN HOUSE (l)
Congressman Himes re-elected (r); Dan
Malloy most likely will be declared the next Governor, if votes in
Bridgeport cast between 8pm and 10pm by judge's order, are
allowed. And make that Senator
Blumenthal now! Weston has all-G.O.P. legislative team,
continuing a tradition
established so long ago I can't remember when it started...plus now we
can call on the new 143rd District rep from Wilton, who knows
transportation and education and has been to Weston and likes our
town!
Incoming DSS commissioner: 'We have a complete system to overhaul'
Arielle Levin Becker, CT MIRROR
April 20, 2011
The barriers state residents face in reaching the state Department of
Social Services are unacceptable, and the options they have for
accessing services are "woefully inadequate," incoming commissioner
Roderick L. Bremby told lawmakers at his confirmation hearing.
Department workers want to improve the situation, he said, but they're
limited by an obsolete phone system and a computer network so outdated
it uses a programming language Bremby said was antiquated when he
learned it in the late 1970s.
Addressing the legislature's Executive and Legislative Nominations
Committee Tuesday, Bremby, in his 16th day on the job, spoke of the
need to overhaul the systems the department uses and improve the
service residents receive.
Bremby, who previously served as secretary of the Kansas Department of
Health and Environment, also spoke of the need to transform the
fragmented health care services Medicaid clients receive into a
coordinated system of care, and to plan for succession because a large
portion of the department's workforce is eligible for retirement.
With a budget of more than $5 billion, DSS is responsible for a wide
range of safety net programs that serve more than 750,000 people,
including close to 600,000 in Medicaid. In recent months, the
department has come under criticism for its handling of the food stamp
program, which has among the worst rates in the nation for providing
benefits on time and accurately. Bremby's predecessor, Michael P.
Starkowski, attributed the problems to outdated technology and not
having enough staff to handle skyrocketing caseloads.
Bremby offered a similar assessment Tuesday, saying that the
department's front line workers need better tools to keep up with
record demand for assistance.
"We pledge to meet requests for help respectfully, while assuring our
clients the maintenance of their dignity," he said.
Bremby spent much of his confirmation hearing addressing problems that
clients face, several brought up by lawmakers.
Senate Majority Leader Martin M. Looney, D-New Haven, told Bremby he
heard from a constituent who spent weeks trying to reach a DSS worker,
then turned to a legal aid attorney, who also had trouble getting calls
returned for a week.
"Unfortunately, that is a complaint that I've heard repeatedly since
I've arrived," Bremby said. "It's not acceptable."
Then he explained why it happens: When the phone system is busy, calls
go into a voice mail box, which fills up.
"When that mail box fills up, people start calling our HR function,
they start calling the secretary's office, they call the governor's
office, I'm sure they call your offices, and they call any and
everywhere they can," he said. "They're looking for contact with a
human to provide the services that they're desperately looking for."
Bremby said there should be "no wrong door" for accessing department
services.
"I'm sad to say that at this point in time, the service levels that are
being provided are woefully inadequate," he said.
A modernization effort meant to update the phone and computer systems
could help. The full modernization is expected to take several years,
but Bremby said the department doesn't have that long to address direct
service requests, and said the department could make some changes
sooner. One option could be to devise a way for people to use
smartphones to check the status of their applications, he said.
The department is also expected to get an interactive voice recognition
program that could ease some of the phone congestion by providing
automated responses to people calling to check on the status of their
applications or other information that a computer could verify. Bremby
said the system could be available by late spring or early summer.
The department's communications with clients also needs work, he said.
Currently, clients receive notices for meetings and hearings after the
scheduled date. Bremby said the mail room that sends out the notices is
backlogged.
"We have a complete system to overhaul," he said.
Bremby has experience with updating technology systems. In Kansas, he
oversaw the implementation of an immunization registry, a web-based
system to report birth and death records, and the introduction of
paperless systems for purchasing, personnel and document routing. As
assistant to the city manager in Fort Worth, Texas, he directed the
implementation of an enhanced 911 system.
Rep. Marie L. Kirkley-Bey, D-Hartford, said she wondered why DSS'
outdated systems weren't addressed before.
"I think that there was a lack of investment, clearly, in trying to
keep our systems current," Bremby said. "I know that people want to do
better, they just didn't. Why the resources didn't come, I don't know."
He added that the federal government can provide a significant portion
of the funding for a new eligibility management system and that "we
have a commitment of staff who really want this system to be better."
Rep. John E. Piscopo, R-Thomaston, relayed a different sort of
constituent complaint, saying he hears from people who believe the
safety net system might make people too comfortable and serve as a
disincentive to work.
"Sometimes we look at a neighbor and we have questions why that
neighbor might be getting assistance, because they don't look like they
might need assistance," Bremby said. "But we may not know the whole
story."
Regardless, he said, "We each have a responsibility to try to make sure
that the safety net fabric is broad enough so that those who need the
service the most actually get those services, and they're not consumed
by people or others who don't really have that great a need."
Asked about his priorities for the department, Bremby said making sure
that department workers have the right tools is "job one right now."
A second priority, he said, is transitioning from a fragmented medical
care system to one that focuses on patients, in which health care
providers work as a team and address preventive care and the patient's
overall health needs, not just the particular issue that brought the
patient into the office.
A third, Bremby said, will be succession in the department.
"We have a large number of staff who are eligible for retirement, but
yet the bench is not deep," he said.
Beyond those three, he said, there are many other items he plans to
focus on.
"I daresay that I won't be bored at all," he said.
Malloy picks Kansas man to lead DSS
Arielle Levin Becker, CT MIRROR
March 8, 2011
Gov. Dannel P. Malloy will appoint a former Kansas health and
environmental official to lead the state Department of Social Services,
according to a source in the governor's office.
Roderick Bremby served as secretary of the Kansas Department of Health
and Environment for seven years, the longest-serving secretary in the
department's history. He was appointed in 2003 by then-governor and
current U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen
Sebelius.
If confirmed by the legislature, Bremby will take the helm of a
department with a budget of more than $5 billion and responsibility for
serving more than 750,000 people who rely on its safety net programs.
The department will play a key role in implementing federal health care
reform, which is expected to add more than 100,000 people to the
Medicaid program DSS runs in 2014.
Bremby's relationship with Sebelius, the top U.S. health official,
could prove useful as the state implements the health reform law and
competes for federal dollars. Many of the programs DSS administers
receive federal funding, and changes to some, including Medicaid, often
require federal approval.
In Kansas, Bremby was responsible for a department with an operating
budget of more than $230 million and more than 1,000 full time staff.
He oversaw the implementation of several changes aimed at improving
efficiency, including an immunization registry with more than 9 million
records, a web-based system to report birth and death records, and the
introduction of paperless systems for purchasing, personnel and
document routing.
He left the job in November after being dismissed by then-Gov. Mark
Parkinson. News accounts have pointed to speculation that Bremby's
dismissal was linked to a pending permit application for a
controversial coal-fired power plant. Bremby had previously denied the
company's application for a permit because of concerns about the
effects of carbon dioxide emissions, becoming the first official in the
U.S. to do so. His successor later approved the application.
Before working in state government, Bremby worked as an assistant
research professor at the University of Kansas, where he led a work
group on health promotion and community development. He spent 10 years
as assistant city manager and chief operating officer of Lawrence,
Kansas, and four years as assistant to the city manager in Fort Worth,
Texas, where he directed the implementation of an enhanced 911 system
and an accounting and management reporting system.
Bremby was an appealing candidate for the Malloy administration in part
because of his tenure in the Kansas state agency and his experience
streamlining services and implementing web-based systems, the source
said. He has the ability to make tough decisions at DSS and the skills
and experience to oversee the administration of benefits to some of the
state's most vulnerable residents, the source added.
Overhauling the technology DSS uses will likely be a major priority for
the next commissioner. The current eligibility management system, a
mainframe computer system, was developed in 1989 and was one factor
federal officials cited last month as a barrier to improving the
performance of the state's food stamp program, one of the worst in the
nation. Malloy's proposed budget includes money for beginning the
process of replacing the eligibility management system, which is
expected to take several years and could cost between $120 million and
$150 million. Much of the cost could be reimbursed by the federal
government.
The department has also struggled with a surge in demand for services
as its staffing levels have fallen. The current staffing level--1,962
people--is down 20 percent from 2001.
The food stamp program, in particular, has drawn attention after
federal officials warned that the state could face financial sanctions
if the program's performance does not improve significantly. The
program ranks worst in the nation in the rate of wrongly denying or
terminating food stamps, and among the worst in paying inaccurate
benefit levels and missing deadlines for processing applications.
Commissioner Michael P. Starkowski has attributed the problems largely
to having too few staff and outdated technology while demand for
services rises. The department recently received approval to fill
vacant positions for handling program eligibility and hire retired
eligibility workers on a temporary basis to handle food stamp
applications.
The new commissioner will also oversee major changes to the way the
Medicaid programs, which together serve nearly 600,000 people, are
administered. The HUSKY program, which serves close to 400,000 mostly
low-income children and their families, will be moved out of managed
care, and other Medicaid programs for low-income adults and people with
disabilities will be moved into a system in which care is more
coordinated than it is now. The new system is expected to be in place
by Jan. 1, 2012.
DSS also administers programs including cash assistance, child care
subsidies, elderly prescription assistance, winter heating aid and some
employment services.
Bremby graduated from the University of Kansas in 1982 and received a
master of public administration degree from the university in 1984. He
served on the board of Kansas Action for Children and the Kansas Health
Policy Authority, and founded the Lawrence Partnership for Children and
Youth. He also served as president of the Lawrence, Kansas, branch of
the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.
In 2007, Bremby and his then-wife filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy, the
result of health problems that required her to stop working. The source
said they are repaying their debts and will be done repaying them next
January. They are now divorced and Bremby is remarried.
Malloy reappoints Leo Arnone as Dept.
of Corrections chief
Stamford ADVOCATE
Published 01:40 p.m., Friday, March 4, 2011
HARTFORD -- A 22-year-veteran of the Conn. Department of Corrections
will be staying there for a little while longer. Gov. Dannel P. Malloy
reappointed DOC Commissioner Leo Arnone of Somers to the position on
Friday.
In addition to his 22 years at the DOC, he also spent 12 years working
for the state Judicial Branch and for three years at the Department of
Children and Families. An interim commissioner prior to his
reappointment, Arnone was initially put into the position by former
Gov. M. Jodi Rell.
"Leo is well-liked by staff at the department and well-respected by
members of his peer community," said Malloy in a statement. "He
believes, as I do, that public safety comes first, but we also need to
spend less and find ways to reduce recidivism in our inmate population.
His ties to community-based providers and his special insight into
early intervention and juvenile justice programs are also of particular
interest to me as we find ways to reform our criminal justice system."
Arnone was appointed to be the commissioner of the Department of
Corrections in 2010.
"I'm looking forward to working with Gov. Malloy - a former prosecutor
and someone who deeply believes in the reformation of our current
system," said Arnone in a statement. "With my career spanning two
branches and as many departments, I have a broad understanding of the
ways in which we can better address the needs of our criminal justice
system."
Arnone began his career at DOC in 1974, starting as a Correctional
Officer and rising to the position of Correctional Captain. He then
served as Deputy Warden and Warden at the Hartford Correctional Center
from 1988 to 1993, a high security, 1,000 bed pre-trial facility. Then
from 1993 to 1995 he was a regional director with the department and
oversaw six correctional facilities in the Enfield and Somers area. He
supervised 1,800 employees on 1,700 acres of property and over 100
buildings. There were 4,000 inmates in his control.
Arnone then moved into the Judicial Branch, working there from 1995 to
2007 as Superintendent of the Hartford Juvenile Detention Center. He
became the Deputy Director of Operations for Juvenile Detention
Services. He last served from 2007 to 2010 he was the Bureau Chief at
the Bureau of Juvenile Services within the Department of Children and
Families where he oversaw the Conn. Juvenile Training School, five
privately-owned residential training schools, parole and reentry
programs for children and specialized community mental health
programming.
Malloy names ING executive to oversee economic development
Mark Pazniokas, CT MIRROR
March 3, 2011
Gov. Dannel P. Malloy today named a top insurance executive, Catherine
H. Smith of ING, to oversee economic development, a recruiting coup and
a sign of his desire to grow one of the state's best-known industries.
Smith, 58, the chief executive of ING U.S. Retirement Services and a
former high-ranking executive at Aetna Financial Services, brings
corporate star power to the administration's economic development
efforts, a top priority in a state with nearly flat job growth over the
past 20 years.
"I'm thrilled that Catherine has agreed to take on the immense task -
and I do mean it's immense," Malloy said. "We've got to reverse a
22-year history of failing to grow jobs, and do it as quickly as we
can."
In Smith, Malloy has hired an executive with experience in operations
and marketing. She helped streamline operations in ING during the
recession, consolidating 14 service centers into four and cutting costs
for those services by 30 percent over three years, Malloy said.
Her salary at ING is not public record, but she smiled during the press
conference when asked about her $170,000 state salary. "Let me put this
way, I'm taking a big pay cut, and I believe it's the right thing to do
for me," she said. "My husband and I are financially able to do this,
but we are very committed to helping the state."
Smith, who worked for a non-profit environmental organization in
Washington after graduating from Hampshire College in Amherst, Mass.,
said she always planned to eventually work in the public sector. Her
graduate degree from the Yale School of Management is in public and
private management.
"Under the leadership of the governor the lieutenant governor, I think
we're finally putting the spotlight back on creating jobs in the
state," Smith said.
Smith said the state has high costs, but a good system of higher
education, a skilled work force and a great quality of life. "I'm very
much looking forward to getting those strengths out into the
marketplace," Smith said.
The potential market for employers who should be recruited to expand or
relocate here must be viewed broadly, she sad.
"I'm not just talking about great start up in biotech or bio medical.
I'm talking about looking at other, more mature industries as well,"
she said.
Malloy said she will have a free hand in remaking the state's
economic-development bureaucracy.
"Catherine will be fully empowered to create a new organization,"
Malloy said.
Smith's last day at ING is March 31. She begins her new job the next
day.
"This is great," said an insurance industry source before Malloy's
announcement. "He is taking very calculated steps to show the industry
they are not a punching bag any more." Last month, Malloy chose Thomas
Leonardi, a venture capitalist and not a consumer advocate, as his
insurance commissioner.
Smith was a top executive at Aetna Financial Services when the unit was
obtained by the Dutch financial services giant, ING. Her tenure at
Aetna overlapped with Timothy Bannon, the governor's chief of staff and
co-chairman of Malloy's transition team.
Bannon said Smith initially was invited to help with the transition,
but the administration then began to recruit her, a process that took
months to complete. "This is a great outcome, well worth the wait,"
Bannon said.
ING is preparing an initial public offering for its U.S. insurance
business, a project that makes leaving the company difficult. "That
would have been fun," she said.
Smith worked at Aetna from 1983 through 2000, when ING purchased its
financial services business. She has been chief executive of the
retirement unit, which has 3,000 employees and oversees $285 billion in
assets, since 2008.
"Throughout her career, Catherine has modeled community service,
community involvement, and community leadership," said Rob Leary, the
chief executive officer of ING Insurance U.S. "Therefore, this next
step in her career is a natural extension of her life-long passion for
public service.
Her name was 9th on American Banker and U.S. Banker's 2009 list of the
25 most powerful women in insurance, asset management and other areas
of finance outside banking.
In 2005, InformationWeek named her as most influential in the
information-technology field Smith, then the chief operating officer of
ING, took over the financial -services company's IT operations.
According to her ING bio, she serves on the board of Outward Bound,
Connecticut Fund for the Environment and the Trust for Public Land's
Connecticut Advisory Council.
Smith is married and lives in North Branford. She and her husband,
Peter, are the parents of two children.
Conn. Gov. names Palmer labor
commissioner
DAY
29 August 2012
HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) -- Gov. Dannel P. Malloy has named Sharon Palmer,
the longtime teachers' union president, his new commissioner of the
Department of Labor.
Malloy, who announced the appointment on Tuesday, said he reached out
to Palmer in recent weeks to fill the job held previously by former
union president Glenn Marshall. He called her "a tireless advocate for
working people from all walks of life."
The 68-year-old Palmer has been president of the Connecticut chapter of
the American Federation of Teachers since 2003. The union represents
28,000 teachers and other employees in the state.
Palmer's union and Malloy were at odds at times during the last
legislative session when lawmakers considered a massive education
overhaul bill. Palmer said she and the governor gained a healthy
respect for one another during that process.
Her nomination requires legislative approval.
Malloy to name Carpenters' official as
labor commissioner
Mark Pazniokas, CT MIRROR
January 24, 2011
Gov. Dannel P. Malloy has settled on a Fairfield County carpenters'
union official as his choice for labor commissioner, despite a push by
another of his labor backers, the Service Employees International
Union, for one its top executives.
Glenn Marshall, the president of Carpenters Local 210, which endorsed
Malloy in April, is the governor's choice from a field of candidates
that included Kurt Westby, the state director of the SEIU affiliate,
32BJ, according to political sources.
In Marshall, whose appointment is expected to be made Wednesday, Malloy
is selecting a down-state union leader he knows well over an executive
from SEIU, a union that endorsed him in May and made more than $270,000
in independent expenditures on his behalf.
The labor job is one of special interest to the construction trades,
who often look to the state for enforcement of labor laws and funding
of training programs.
The Malloy administration declined to comment on the selection of
Marshall, but one union leader said that the appointment of either
Marshall or Westby would be welcomed by organized labor.
"Kurt and Glenn are pretty well-known in the labor movement," said John
Olsen, the president of the Connecticut AFL-CIO. "They are seasoned.
They are tested. They have been around the block. They both have good
political skills."
Olsen, a former Democratic state chairman, said he was not informed by
the Malloy administration if the governor had a made a choice. Both
Marshall and Westby are on the executive board of the Connecticut
AFL-CIO, which endorsed Malloy after he won the Democratic primary.
Marshall, who also is the district business manager for New England
Regional Council of Carpenters and the treasurer of its political
action committee, testified last year at the General Assembly in favor
of legislation increasing fines on employers who misclassify employees
as subcontractors to avoid paying workers' compensation and
unemployment compensation.
Gov. M. Jodi Rell signed the bill.
The carpenters' PAC last year contributed $10,000 each to the campaigns
of U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal and U.S. Reps. Joe Courtney, Chris
Murphy and Rosa DeLauro and $8,000 to U.S. Rep. Jim Himes.
Marshall was at Murphy's announcement last week for U.S. Senate.
He did not return a call seeking comment Monday.
Malloy names Big Tobacco foe to head
Consumer Protection
Keith M. Phaneuf, CT MIRROR
January 24, 2011
Gov. Dannel P. Malloy tapped a member of the legal team that helped
bring Connecticut a multi-billion settlement against the tobacco
industry one decade ago to become the new head of the Department of
Consumer Protection.
Malloy, who announced his selection of Hartford attorney William M.
Rubenstein, 59, Monday morning in the Legislative Office Building,
charged his new commissioner with keeping a close watch on the
"charlatans" that are bilking consumers on ever-growing Internet
markets.
"The Department of Consumer Protection has a broad mandate -
spanning a range of marketplace regulation - from keeping the public
safe from nefarious business practices and ensuring that professional
licensure standards are maintained," Malloy said. "Bill's exhaustive
experience in public service ... leave me with no doubt that we have a
commissioner who will be a diligent and thoughtful protector of, and
advocate for, Connecticut residents.
Rubenstein, who will serve on an interim basis while his nomination is
considered by the General Assembly, pledged that those who perpetrate
fraud on consumers "deserve no quarter, and get no quarter on our
watch."
Though fraud isn't limited to the Web, Rubenstein said the relative
distance between merchant and consumer, and--in some instances--the
speed with which transactions occur, make it easier for consumers to be
mistreated.
For example, customers who used to be handled a paper contract or other
type of formal agreement that they read carefully in front of a clerk
or salesman now make purchases online through sites that allow them to
swiftly "click through all of the 'yes' boxes," without actually
reading terms of sale.
But while the new commissioner said he wants to use department rules,
consumer information, and new regulations and laws developed in
cooperation with the legislature to better protect Internet customers,
he also wants to department that fosters online commerce.
"I think we're a far ways away from when most retailing was done by
brick and mortar," he said, adding that the efficiency of online
purchasing does offer benefits to consumers.
As commissioner, Rubenstein will lead an agency with an $11 million
annual budget and nearly 130 employees. His salary was not immediately
available from the Malloy administration.
Rubenstein served in the Antitrust and Consumer Protection units within
the Attorney General's Office from 1986 through 1997. As an assistant
attorney general in 1996, Rubenstein served on the legal team that
represented Connecticut in a landmark lawsuit against five major
tobacco companies, largely in response to marketing efforts aimed at
teen smokers.
Connecticut was one of 46 states that participated in that case, which
led to a 1998 settlement that awarded $246 billion settlement to the
states, and dramatic new restrictions on how tobacco companies could
market their products.
Connecticut was guaranteed between $3.6 billion and $5 billion of that
settlement over 25 years. Since payments began in 2000, the state has
received nearly $1.3 billion.
Prior to his service in the attorney general's office, Rubenstein was
counsel for the Federal Trade Commission. Most recently he has led the
antitrust division at Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider in Hartford, where
he is a partner, and also has served as an adjunct professor at the
University of Connecticut School of Law.
Rubenstein and his wife, Judith Eisenberg, live in West Hartford.
Malloy taps hospital association
executive to take the lead on health reform
Arielle Levin Becker, CT MIRROR
January 4, 2011
Gov.-elect Dan Malloy has appointed a Connecticut Hospital Association
executive and former head of the Hispanic Health Council to lead state
efforts to implement federal health care reform.
As a deputy health commissioner and special advisor to Malloy, Jeanette
DeJesús will oversee a wide range of efforts intended to prepare
the state for an expansion of health care coverage. Although the
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act does not fully roll out
until 2014, it leaves considerable responsibility to the states.
By 2014, each state must have a health insurance exchange, a
marketplace for purchasing coverage that will also be charged with
collecting data, reporting to the federal government, certifying and
rating insurance plans, and tracking which employers do not offer
insurance to their workers. By 2015, the exchanges must be financially
self-sustaining.
In addition, states must prepare to ramp up their Medicaid eligibility
by 2014. Connecticut is projected to have 114,000 new Medicaid
enrollees, which will likely require additional staff to process
applications.
DeJesús will succeed Cristine Vogel, who led health reform
implementation efforts as a special advisor to Gov. M. Jodi Rell. Vogel
has also led a Health Care Reform Cabinet, which includes the
commissioners of 11 agencies.
As a newcomer to the health reform role, DeJesús won't be alone.
Many states have political appointees leading health reform
implementation efforts, and with more than two dozen states
inaugurating new governors, many of those positions are likely to
change hands.
But DeJesús already has been involved in efforts to promote
health reform on the state and federal levels. She co-chaired a task
force on tobacco and smoking cessation for the SustiNet Health
Partnership board, which designed a proposal for a state public health
insurance option. In 2009, she spoke as part of U.S. Sen. Christopher
Dodd's "Prescriptions for Change" health care listening tour, and
described working daily with people who had no health insurance and
often worked two or three jobs.
DeJesús, who has a degree social work from New York University
and a degree in public administration from Harvard, currently works as
vice president for strategic alliances at the Connecticut Hospital
Association. She previously served as president and CEO of the Hispanic
Health Council.
She also previously served as executive vice president of the National
Conference for Community and Justice, and managed a rape crisis program
at St. Vincent's Hospital in New York.
She also is a member of the Board of Directors of The Connecticut News
Project, publisher of The Connecticut Mirror. She will resign from that
position.
Heinrich to quit House for new
post in Malloy administration
By Mark Pazniokas, CT MIRROR
Jan 04, 2011 1:31pm
Rep. Deborah W. Heinrich, D-Madison, who was an early supporter of Dan
Malloy's campaign for governor, was named today by the governor-elect
to a cabinet-level position that doesn't yet exist -- to lead a
Community Nonprofit Human Services Cabinet.
"I have been clear that getting our fiscal house in order will require
a shared sacrifice on all our parts, but I've been equally clear that I
will not cut the safety net," Malloy said in an emailed press release.
"Engaging the nonprofit community in a concerted, strategic way to
maximize services and minimize cost will be a large part of the way in
which we do this."
The new position runs counter to Malloy's campaign pledge to cut
gubernatorial appointments by 15 percent, but Malloy cast the job as a
potential money-saver.
"Representative Heinrich has been an advocate for those who need our
help the most and I'll be looking to her to find ways in which the
services people need can be provided at a lower cost to taxpayers," he
said.
Heinrich was elected to the legislature in 2004 from a
Republican district that the GOP will have hopes of recapturing. The
seat will be filled by one of eight special elections likely to be held
in March.
She is the fifth legislator tapped by Malloy to join his
administration. In addition, two others are quitting for other jobs and
Sen. Thomas Gaffey announced yesterday he is resigning in the wake of
facing misdemeanor larceny charges.
Malloy's window for hiring legislators is fast closing. Once they take
the oath of office for their new terms tomorrow, they are barred from
taking a job in another branch of government for two years.
East Hartford mayor to take over DMV
Jacqueline Rabe, CT MIRROR
December 30, 2010
East Hartford Mayor Melody A. Currey, Gov.-elect Dan Malloy's choice to
head the state Department of Motor Vehicles, said Thursday she is
taking over with the goal of making the much-maligned agency more
streamlined and efficient.
"My marching orders are very direct: Make sure the customer is taken
care of and make sure we do it in an efficient and effective manner and
as fiscally conservative as possible," Currey said after Malloy
announced her appointment.
Malloy said he would like Currey to help move the DMV in a direction
that would allow state residents to be able to do more online at home
or at more convenient locations.
"In a perfect world she would put herself out of business," he said,
adding it's a "real possibility" that the agency could be merged with
another state agency down the road.
The DMV's budget has remained almost unchanged over the last decade,
with the state spending $53 million from the general and transportation
funds in both fiscal 2003 and in the current year. However, the number
of employees has been drastically reduced during that same time -- from
883 to 768 people this year.
Currey, who served as a legislator for 16 years before becoming mayor,
said during an interview following the announcement that while she
intends to streamline the DMV, it is too early to tell if that will
mean a further reduction in the number of employees at the agency.
"We are looking for savings and that may mean using technology and the
Internet to our advantage," she said.
The DMV also will face numerous management challenges. Earlier this
month, an investigation by the attorney general's office concluded that
agency officials were lax in investigating apparent violations by one
of the state's largest driving schools.
A recent state audit also found problems such double payment of bonuses
to employees and failure to suspend licenses or registrations paid for
with a bad check. The auditors also said the agency was slow to look
into complaints from the public, police agencies and local tax
authorities.
In response, the agency announced this week it will start notifying
cities and towns when it receives complaints that a resident has
registered a vehicle out-of-state to avoid local property taxes.
Currey said cracking down on improper registrations will be a priority.
She is currently president of CCM, and has fought at the Capitol
against state mandates on cities and towns and to preserve state
funding.
Jim Finley, executive director of CCM, said out-of-state registrations
are a significant problem. Better enforcement of the current law --
which requires people to register their car after 60 days of moving to
the state or if they spend more than six months in the state each year
- could bring towns millions in additional revenue, he said.
Finley, who has worked with Currey for years, said has what it takes to
transform the DMV.
"She's good at reinventing government and she has a history of
convincing other state legislators to jump on board," he said.
A good choice, "About Town" thinks, by Gov.-elect Malloy: Sullivan's has the heft to get the job
done!
Sullivan returns to state government as
tax chief
Keith M. Phaneuf, CT MIRROR
December 29, 2010
Gov.-elect Dan Malloy tapped West Hartford Democrat Kevin B. Sullivan,
a former longtime state Senate leader and lieutenant governor, to lead
the state's tax agency.
Sullivan, 61, will assume control of the Department of Revenue Services
as the new Malloy administration prepares to address what effectively
amounts to the largest budget shortfall in state history--a gap Malloy
concedes cannot be closed without tax hikes.
"I've known Kevin for years and while he's no longer a public official,
that's never stopped his commitment to public service," Malloy said.
"As commissioner, Kevin will draw upon his experiences and
relationships born out of his time in the legislature to help
Connecticut find new and innovative ways in which to collect the money
it is due."
The department oversees collection of nearly $13 billion in tax
revenues from the General and Transportation funds and processes nearly
$1 billion in refunds. With an annual budget of $66.9 million and
a staff about 730 employees, the department also includes Division of
Special Revenue, which oversees Indian gaming and the Connecticut
Lottery Corp. More recently the state's tax system has come under
scrutiny because of the increasing problems that Connecticut--like most
states--is facing collecting taxes tied to Internet transactions.
Though state law requires residents to report on their state income tax
returns any sales taxes owed from online transactions, legislators and
other state officials have long conceded most residents do not abide by
this requirement, either through ignorance or indifference.
Estimates for revenue losses tied to this problem have ranged from $10
million to more than $60 million, though nearly all analyses agree that
this problem is growing as online shopping increases in popularity.
Malloy said Connecticut can't afford not to properly enforce all of its
existing tax laws, though he declined to discuss any specific proposals
to bolster collections. Malloy must submit a plan in mid-February
to close a projected $3.67 billion deficit built into the 2011-12
fiscal year, a gap that is equal to nearly one-fifth of all current
state spending.
"We need to collect all of the money that is rightfully owed to the
people of Connecticut," he said, adding that the problem was getting a
serious review by his staff. "I think what we're looking for is a
department that is very proactive but also works with people."
Sullivan quipped that "I do not intend to be the tax man" known only
for enforcing tax codes, adding that he also hoped to contribute to be
"part of the economic development, job development, jobs creation
agenda" of the new Malloy administration."
Malloy praised Sullivan for bringing a wealth of experience to his
administration, and predicted he would call upon the new commissioner
to assist with other projects "above and beyond the traditional role of
commissioner of revenue services."
First elected to the state Senate in 1986, Sullivan served for 18
years, including four terms as president pro tem. A former assistant to
the state commissioner of education, Sullivan also served as vice
president of Trinity College in Hartford during much of his Senate
career. He had to leave his Senate leadership role in July 2004
when then-Gov. John G. Rowland resigned amid an impeachment inquiry.
In accordance with the state Constitution, Rowland's lieutenant, M.
Jodi Rell, became governor, and Sullivan, as president pro tem of the
Senate, became her lieutenant. That created an odd dynamic for 18
months as a Republican governor was forced to share an administration
with a Democratic lieutenant governor who also was one of the prior
administration's most vocal critics. When Rell was re-elected for
a full term in November 2006, her running mate was Stamford Republican
Michael Fedele, while Sullivan became president of The Children's
Museum in West Hartford.
"I'm honored that Governor-elect Malloy believes my skills and
experience will be of use to him in his administration," Sullivan said.
"I'm looking forward to stepping back into public service on behalf of
the people of the state of Connecticut."
Sullivan is married to Dr. Carolyn Thornberry, a former West Hartford
town councilor who was recently elected that community's Democratic
registrar of voters.
Geragosian and Ward named new state
auditors
Keith M. Phaneuf, CT MIRROR
December 28, 2010
For the first time in nearly two decades, state government will start
the year with a new team of fiscal and programmatic watchdogs with
Tuesday's naming of Democrat John C. Geragosian and Republican Robert
M. Ward as the auditors of public accounts.
Geragosian's appointment also opens another key position in the
legislature: The New Britain lawmaker currently serves as co-chairman
of the budget-writing Appropriations Committee. Sources said the post
will go to veteran Rep. Toni Walker, D-New Haven.
The new auditors, who still must be confirmed by the full legislature,
will replace the retiring Robert G. Jaekle and Kevin P. Johnston, who
have served as the Republican and Democratic auditors, respectively,
since 1993.
Though Ward's endorsement as the new GOP auditor had leaked out earlier
this month, Democrats had been quiet as sources said both Geragosian -
an eight-term representative and co-chairman of appropriations for the
last two years - and Senate President Pro Tem Donald E. Williams Jr. of
Brooklyn both were rumored to be interested in the Democratic slot.
Williams and House Speaker Christopher G. Donovan, D-Meriden, announced
the new auditors today in a joint statement also issued by the House
and Senate Minority Leaders, Republicans Lawrence F. Cafero of Norwalk
and John McKinney of Fairfield.
"The auditor's position requires individuals of high integrity and a
thorough understanding of financial matters," Donovan said. "I can't
think of a person who better exhibits those characteristics than John
Geragosian, who served the General Assembly with distinction for many
years."
"John has always been a fair-minded legislator and he will make an
excellent state auditor," Williams said. "I'd also like to thank
outgoing state auditors Kevin Johnston and Robert Jaekle for their
years of fair-minded and dedicated service."
Geragosian said he hopes to place a strong emphasis on performing
additional programmatic audits and on attacking a growing backlog of
state employee whistleblower complaints.
The legislature's Program Review and Investigations Committee reported
in December 2009 that the whistleblower process is inefficient and
unable to handle an annual caseload that more than doubled between 2002
and 2008.
The auditors' office routinely processes between 80 and 90 cases each
year of corrupt and illegal practices, mismanagement, and dangers to
public safety, the report found. But nearly 200 cases were backlogged
when the December 2009 report was issued, including 29 that were more
than two years old.
"I think fiscal constraints have diminished the auditors' ability to
deal with these areas over time," Geragosian said, adding that these
priorities would mesh well with Gov.-elect Dan Malloy's stated desire
to enhance government transparency.
The auditors currently oversee an annual budget of $13.4 million and a
staff of 117 employees.
Cafero called Ward "the consummate public servant who over the years
gained the trust and confidence on both sides of the aisle. Bob has
always commanded the utmost respect from his colleagues. He will prove
to be a great choice for this critical position."
"Bob's record of public service and reputation for fairness and hard
work are beyond reproach," McKinney added. "He will be an effective
watchdog for Connecticut's taxpayers, helping to assure sound fiscal
management of all state agencies and assets at this critical time when
we all must work to reduce the size and cost of state government to
close our budget deficits."
The longest-serving Republican House leader in Connecticut history,
Ward retired from the legislature after 22 years in 2006 and was named
commissioner of the Department of Motor Vehicles by Gov. M. Jodi Rell
in January 2007.
"I'm honored by this and I take it very seriously," Ward said Tuesday,
adding that in tough fiscal times "it is increasingly important that
the auditors look for issues of waste, fraud and inappropriate
spending."
The auditors' posts are two of Connecticut's oldest, dating back over
200 years. A relatively small office within the legislative branch, the
auditors review the books and accounts for state agencies, boards,
commissions, state-supported institutions and quasi-public entities
created by the legislature.
The General Assembly passed an amendment in 1895 requiring that the
auditors be from separate political parties. Their compensation is set
by the legislature. Jaekle and Johnston earned $219,978 and $216,648,
respectively, last year.
But other than the bipartisan rule regarding the two auditors, the
statutes are relatively silent on any minimum qualifications the
auditors must possess.
Connecticut's auditors have come from a wide variety of backgrounds.
According to legislative researchers, Robert Claffey, who served from
1959 to 1965, owned a store. Raymond Thatcher, who served from 1956 to
1958, was a pharmacist, while Leo Donohue, auditor from 1967 to 1992,
was a career state employee.
Though Jaekle and Johnston both were state legislators, Jaekle also is
an attorney and Johnston was a banker.
Geragosian has been a Realtor in New Britain for the past 26 years.
Ward is an attorney.
Malloy reappoints Pitkin as banking
commissioner
Political Mirror
Keith M. Phaneuf
Gov.-elect Dan Malloy reappointed state Banking Commissioner Howard
Pitkin on Tuesday to serve in his administration.
A 30-year veteran of the Department of Banking, Pitkin has lead the
agency for the past five years.
"Howard Pitkin has had a long, successful tenure ... and I've been
impressed with his leadership since becoming commissioner five years
ago," Malloy said. "The Connecticut Department of Banking will play a
large part in our state's economic recovery and I'm pleased he will
continue in this role."
The commissioner administers state laws governing commercial and
savings banks, savings and loan associations, credit unions, consumer
credit, broker-dealers, investment advisers, securities, tender offers
and business opportunities.
Pitkin also will continue to oversee the supervision of 40
state-chartered banks and thrifts and 34 state-chartered credit unions.
The Banking department has a $20.6 million annual budget and nearly 120
employees.
"I appreciate Governor-elect Malloy's confidence in me, and I'm looking
forward to continuing on in my current role under his leadership,"
Pitkin said. "Connecticut consumers need to have confidence in their
banking institutions as we begin to reemerge from the recession and
move toward recovery."
Prior to serving as commissioner, Pitkin was chief of administration,
which included overseeing the agency's technological initiatives, and
restructuring the bank examination and credit union divisions into the
financial institutions division.
Pitkin had served on the Conference of State Bank Supervisors and the
board of the National Association of State Credit Union Supervisors.
A graduate of the Stonier Graduate School of Banking at Rutgers
University, Pitkin also is a veteran of the United States Army Reserve.
A resident of South Windsor, Pitkin has two children and three
grandchildren.
Also Tuesday, Malloy named three commissioners from Gov. M. Jodi Rell's
administration to serve on an interim basis while his staff continues
with national job searches.
Peter O'Meara of Developmental Services, Jeffrey Parker of
Transportation and Michael Starkowski of Social Services will continue
to head their respective departments when Malloy takes office on Jan.
5.
Malloy names Farm Bureau head as agriculture commissioner
Jacqueline Rabe, CT MIRROR
December 28, 2010
Gov.-elect Dan Malloy has selected Steven K. Reviczky, who has been the
voice for Connecticut's 4,000 farmers for the last five years at the
Capitol, as the state's commissioner of agriculture.
Currently the executive director of the Connecticut Farm Bureau and a
farmer in Coventry himself, Reviczky is versed in the issues facing the
state's agriculture community, including attempts to ban outdoor wood
furnaces, regulating water-flow for reservoir owners and the severe
drop in the number of dairy farmers in the state.
Lawmakers are gearing up now to propose once again banning outdoor
wood-burning furnaces statewide, but Reviczky opposes a ban. He says
wood harvesting is a form of farming and a ban would eliminate the
market.
As agriculture commissioner, Reviczky will also be at the center of
brokering a compromise on water flow rules. Earlier this month the
state Department of Environmental Protection proposed requiring dam
operators to release water to maintain river and stream water levels.
But agriculture interests are among those opposing the DEP's rules,
saying they would prevent farmers from being able to draw water for
their crops during the summer months when water levels are low.
Also at the top of Reviczky's agenda in the continuing months is
renewing a state subsidy given to dairy farmers in the state to help
them pay their bills. That subsidy is set to expire in July.
Prior to his time at the non-profit farm bureau, Reviczky led the state
agriculture department's review of applications for grants through the
Farmland Preservation Program. He also led the drafting of
Connecticut's proposals for funding under the U.S. Department of
Agriculture Farm and Ranch Lands Protection Program. Reviczky is a
former First Selectman in Ashford. He graduated from Eastern
Connecticut State University with a degree in Public Policy and
Government.
George Jepsen, AG-elect in CT - former State
Senator from Stamford-Darien
Jepsen Sees AG Job As Ally Of Business
By Greg Bordonaro, gbordonaro@HartfordBusiness.com
27 December 2010
When Attorney General-Elect George Jepsen takes office next month he
knows he won’t have a direct role in job creation.
But that doesn’t mean the 56-year-old former state lawmaker can’t help
improve Connecticut’s business climate. And that’s exactly what he said
he intends to do.
Attorney General-elect George Jepsen says his approach won’t be to
“shoot first and ask questions later.” In an interview with the
Hartford Business Journal, Jepsen said one of his top priorities when
he’s sworn into office Jan. 5 will be opening up a direct line of
communication with the business community. He said his office needs to
better educate businesses on where the lines in the legal sand will be
drawn.
And taking businesses to court won’t be his first priority.
“I’m not a person who is going to shoot first and ask questions later,”
said Jepsen, who describes himself as a problem solver by nature. “I’m
not a litigator of first resort; I’m a litigator of last resort. While
there are some moral and civil rights issues where I take a very hard
stance and see things in very stark terms of right and wrong, I find in
the real world — and especially the business world — most of the issues
aren’t black and white. I try to understand all sides of the issues and
get all stakeholders to the table to figure out how to solve the
problem.”
During the campaign, Jepsen said he heard a lot of frustrations from
the business community, including that businesses often learn they are
on the wrong side of the law only after an enforcement action is taken
against them. He wants to change that.
He also wants his office to better distinguish between businesses that
inadvertently step over that line and the business that has a culture
of playing close to the line, and going over it whenever it can get
away with it.
“Businesses want the bad guys put away because they can’t compete with
cheats,” Jepsen said.
Some critics, including Jepsen’s Republican campaign opponent Martha
Dean, have accused the attorney general’s office of being business
unfriendly and overly litigious in recent years.
Jepsen said that perception is overblown, and that outgoing Attorney
General Richard Blumenthal did a lot to protect consumers and
businesses. He noted that 97 percent of the 54,000 cases the AG’s
office deals with annually are nondiscretionary, where the state is
playing defense. Only 3 percent of cases involve the state proactively
suing someone, and most of those cases are initiated by executive
branch agencies.
Still, Jepsen said, he will bring his own style and approach to the job.
When asked how he will be different than Blumenthal, Jepsen said his
background as a lawmaker and lawyer has made him more of a negotiator
and mediator than a litigator. He said he’s not afraid to litigate if
he has to, but his general approach is “to try to understand the nuance
of why a problem exists and work it out.”
And although he shares many of Blumenthal’s values, he’s not as likely
to seek the spotlight as much as his predecessor either. One early
example of that: he’s reducing the size of the office’s press staff.
“I would make as a matter of confident prediction that you will see a
lot less of me in the press,” Jepsen said.
Jepsen’s tone demonstrates just how far Connecticut’s public figures —
even those with limited roles in economic development or job creation —
are going to help reverse the perception that the state is
anti-business.
Although new to the attorney general’s office, Jepsen is a household
name in Connecticut’s legal and political landscape. George Jepsen is
credited with helping reform the state’s workers comp system.He is a
Harvard Law grad and served 16 years in the state legislature
representing Stamford, first as a state representative, and then as a
state senator. He spent six years as the majority leader.
John Rathgeber, the CEO of the Connecticut Business & Industry
Association, said Jepsen has always taken a balanced approach when it
comes to working with the business community. He remembers, for
example, the role Jepsen played as a state lawmaker in helping pass
sweeping workers compensation reform in 1993, a measure that helped to
reduce costs for employers.
Democrats including Jespen, who used to work as a lawyer for the
carpenters’ union, took heat from organized labor as a result of their
support for the law.
“George understands the importance of private sector investment,”
Rathgeber said. “He sees himself as a problem solver and someone who
can bring people together.”
In terms of policy issues, Jepsen said implementing the Dodd — Frank
Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act will be among his top
priorities. He said attorneys general are going to be deputized to
enforce many of the consumer protections under the law, especially
related to predatory lending and mortgage fraud.
And he wants to move aggressively in both of those problem areas.
He also said the state needs to be more aggressive in helping
homeowners who face foreclosure, including strengthening loan
modification programs. If that means making more banks take a hair cut
on a loan, rather than absorb a foreclosed property that will likely be
sold below market value, he’s open to the idea.
“The quicker we can sensibly move our way through homes that are
underwater or are being foreclosed, the sooner property values will
once again rise, which will have a positive impact on the economy,”
Jepsen said.
Working with the Department of Public Utility Control, the attorney
general also has a direct role in prompting energy conversation,
something Jepsen said he will push extremely hard. He said there are
several conversation programs that need to be expanded, including
initiatives that help individuals and businesses underwrite efforts
like insulating a facility or weather-stripping doors.
Jepsen also wants to crack down on businesses that misclassify
employees as independent contractors, and speed up the time it takes
for the state to issue permits and contracts.
“I think I want the public faces of Connecticut to be welcoming to
businesses and I’m going to look for ways to work with them,” Jepsen
said.
Malloy reappoints Rehmer to lead DMHAS
By Arielle Levin Becker, CT MIRROR
Dec 23, 2010 4:57pm
Gov.-elect Dan Malloy has reappointed Patricia Rehmer to serve as
commissioner of the state Department of Mental Health and Addiction
Services, a post she has held since last year.
Rehmer joined the agency in 1999 and served as deputy commissioner from
2004 to 2009. A nurse by training, Rehmer has also worked at the
Institute of Living and served as CEO of the Capitol Region Mental
Health Center.
"Commissioner Rehmer has been a leader in the fields of mental health
and addiction services throughout her career, and I'm pleased that she
and I will be working together to help those citizens in Connecticut
who need our help the most," Malloy said in a statement released by his
transition team. "Particularly because the population she serves relies
on the continuity of service and programs DMHAS provides, I'm glad that
she and I have a shared vision for the department and will continue her
tenure uninterrupted."
In a statement, Rehmer said, "I appreciate Governor-Elect Malloy's
confidence in me as he takes office and begins to implement his own
vision and ideas for the state. Working together I believe that we will
continue to provide these essential services for those in our state
very much in need. In these difficult times, we cannot forget those who
need our help the most."
News of Rehmer's reappointment drew praise from advocates for people
the department serves.
"We're more than pleased," said Alicia Woodsby, public policy director
for the National Alliance on Mental Illness, Connecticut. "People feel
comfortable with her and they really feel like she's listening and
cares about our needs."
Terry Edelstein, CEO of the Connecticut Community Providers
Association, which represents groups that serve people with
disabilities, substance abuse, mental illness, and disabilities, called
Rehmer "a responsive and conscientious partner with community providers
and the people they serve."
"Some of the things that have happened in the past year are very
promising," Edelstein said.
Those include converting state-administered general assistance, which
served many people with addictions, into a Medicaid program, allowing
the state to receive federal reimbursement and more people to enroll.
Edelstein also cited DMHAS' role in the state's highly regarded
behavioral health partnership.
In announcing Rehmer's reappointment, the Malloy transition team noted
Rehmer's effort to maximize federal resources. That's something she
will likely need to do more of as the state grapples with a massive
budget deficit, said Sheila Amdur, a National Alliance on Mental
Illness board member and a former member of the DMHAS state advisory
board.
Mental health departments across the country are facing the prospect of
budget cuts, but Amdur said DMHAS has some advantages because
Connecticut has not used Medicaid to finance all the services it could.
Making better use of Medicaid program options could bring the state
more federal funds, she said.
Amdur praised Rehmer for embracing community-based services and
focusing on program outcomes.
"She has really continued to try to move the department to much more
accountable services, more outcome-driven services," she said.
Connecticut has a "pretty well-run" mental health system, but it has
holes, including money being spent on prisons and nursing homes for
people who could be cared for in the community, Amdur said.
"Pat knows this," Amdur said. "She's open, she's I think very eager to
work with a broad range of stakeholders, and that to me is very
encouraging."
Malloy taps DeFronzo for DAS
commissioner
Ted Mann, NLDAY
Article published Dec 22, 2010
Hartford — Gov.-elect Dan Malloy announced Wednesday that he will make
state Sen. Donald DeFronzo, D-New Britain, the new commissioner of the
Department of Administrative Services.
DeFronzo will lead an agency that is at the center of some of the
structural reforms that Malloy's transition team is contemplating for
the state government, the governor-elect said at a news conference at
the Legislative Office Building.
"I need his expertise," Malloy said of DeFronzo, who won reelection to
a fifth Senate term in November, but will not be sworn in and will join
the Malloy administration instead.
Malloy highlighted DeFronzo's previous experience, in addition to his
tenure in the legislature, where he has served as co-chairman of the
Transportation Committee.
Before serving in the Senate, DeFronzo was the mayor of New Britain,
worked for 10 years in the Office of Policy and Management, overseeing
federal block grants for human service programs in Connecticut, and
later was the executive director of the Human Services Agency of New
Britain, the Malloy team said.
"He knows how to stretch a dollar," Malloy said at the news conference,
going on to confirm that he and his advisors are considering a number
of possible agency consolidations. Those could include merging the
Department of Administrative Services with another agency, like the
Department of Public Works, or the Department of Information
Technology, Malloy said, though final decisions on those discussions
have not been announced.
DeFronzo said he was excited by a chance to "reshape and restructure
state government."
"I think we've all come to the conclusion that Connecticut can do
better, that we need to do better, and that we will do better,"
DeFronzo said.
In addition to DeFronzo, Malloy has selected two powerful legislators —
Judiciary Committee co-chairs Sen. Andrew McDonald, D-Stamford, and
Rep. Michael Lawlor, D-East Haven — to join his administration.
McDonald who was corporation counsel for the city of Stamford when
Malloy was mayor, will serve as legal counsel to the governor. Lawlor,
a former state prosecutor and the longtime House chairman of the
Judiciary Committee, will become a deputy secretary of the Office of
Policy and Management, with a focus on criminal justice and corrections
issues.
And contacts.
New Public Health Commissioner
Puts An Emphasis On Prevention
Three Months Into The Job, Jewel
Mullen Discusses Vision For Public Health
The Hartford Courant
BY WILLIAM WEIR, bweir@courant.com
9:00 PM EDT, May 26, 2011
When the Department of Public Health is working well, its new
commissioner said, you probably won't notice it.
"When public health is really successful, people don't realize that
public health is at work — because we're in the background," said Dr.
Jewel Mullen. "I say that public health is like one of our vital
organs. It's like your heart: Unless it skips a beat, you don't notice
it."
With that philosophy, she took over in February from Dr. J. Robert
Galvin, health commissioner since 2003. Mullen, 56, previously was with
the Massachusetts Department of Public Health, serving as the director
of the Bureau of Community Health and Prevention.
She brings with her the same focus on prevention.
"Investing in prevention and public health upfront does a lot more to
keep us healthy than intervening after people are sick," she said.
"It's one thing for anybody to do smoking cessation, but it's another
thing to keep people from smoking in the first place. It's one thing to
address all the needs of a low-birthweight child, but it's another
thing to address the factors that lead to pre-term deliveries and
low-birthweight babies."
To some extent, she said, this effort involves educational programs.
But it also involves looking directly at what she calls the "social
determinants of health."
"Where people live, their education and their access to services," she
said. "All those determinants have a big influence on what their health
and well-being are. Public health is increasingly about looking at
social determinants and how to address those."
Among those determinants are so-called "food deserts" — low-income
areas that don't have a full-service grocery store. All the educational
programs about healthy eating aren't going to help if people don't have
a place to get food that meets their basic nutritional needs.
"We want to help towns figure out ways to get a supermarket in their
community," she said.
During Mullen's tenure in Massachusetts, the public health department
faced steep budget cuts, so she braced herself for a difficult state
budget in Connecticut, as well. The proposed budget for 2011-12 was a
pleasant surprise, she said.
"I felt really fortunate, given the constraints of this budget, that we
were not really cut," she said. "If the budget is passed, we will
actually have a bit of an increase, so I see that as a commitment both
from the executive branch and legislative to public health."
That doesn't mean her department will have an easy time of it
financially.
"In general, these are really hard times for public health across the
county," she said. "We stand the chance of losing a lot of federal
dollars. … The department's funding for public health comes much more
from federal monies than from state monies."
Among the most pressing concerns, Mullen said, is the reduction of
funds in the Preventive Health and Health Services Block Grant, which
pays for programs that address chronic disease, environmental health
and preventive screenings and services. It also funds programs for
emergency preparedness.
The state currently receives $1.1 million from the grant program, a
$300,000 reduction from the previous fiscal year. And when the new
fiscal year begins, she said, "This has the potential to be zeroed out."
She's also crossing her fingers that Connecticut's share of the Special
Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children, better
known as WIC, won't be hit too hard. Connecticut now gets $45 million
for it, a $3 million reduction from the previous year. Mullen said the
amount of the upcoming grant is uncertain.
Mullen, whose annual salary is $170,000, lives in Guilford with her
husband, and has two adult children. She is still getting to know the
workings of the department, so it's been a lot of meetings since
February.
Mullen received her bachelor's degree and master of public health
degree from Yale University. Specializing in internal medicine, Mullen
began her clinical career with the National Health Service Corps at
Bellevue Hospital in New York. She also has been on the medical staffs
at the Hospital of St. Raphael and Yale-New Haven Hospital.
It was only a few years ago that she decided to give government work a
try. In 2008, she accepted a position in Massachusetts.
"As somebody who looks at systems and tries to figure out how they can
serve people, I decided that from the health care delivery side and
public side, if I really wanted those systems to work better for
people, I should work in government."
It can be difficult, she said.
"When you look at it from the outside, you're really only looking at it
from your perspective, but once you start doing the work from the
inside, you have a much stronger appreciation for how many different
perspectives inform a policy or law," she said. "People criticize
government all the time. It's not easy work."
Copyright © 2011, The Hartford Courant
Malloy picks Mass. health
official to head state DPH
Mark Pazniokas, CT MIRROR
December 17, 2010
Gov.-elect Dan Malloy has selected Dr. Jewel Mullen, a Massachusetts
public-health official and a lecturer at Yale University, as the
state's commissioner of public health, according to sources. She will
be the second woman and second African American selected by Malloy to
lead a state agency.
Mullen, the fourth agency head selected so far by Malloy, oversees
community health and prevention for the Department of Public Health in
Massachusetts, where she also serves as the chronic disease director.
Mullen has bachelor and master of public health degrees from Yale
University, a medical degree from the Mount Sinai School of Medicine,
and a master of public administration from the Kennedy School of
Government at Harvard. Malloy is expected to announce her
appointment Monday. Malloy had pledged during the campaign to
promote diversity and increase the number of women in the top ranks of
state government.
"I said I would do that," Malloy said earlier this week, as he named
Reuben Bradford as the first black commissioner of public safety. "I am
doing that."
Teresa Younger, the executive director of the Permanent Commission on
the Status of Women, said she Malloy's transition team is committed to
assembling a diverse, qualified administration.
"They are very conscious of this," she said.
Younger said the public should resist keeping score on gender and race
until the administration takes form. An NAACP official objected to the
racial makeup of Malloy's transition team, even before the names were
announced.
"Sometimes people are looking for controversy. They are ready to jump
on things that aren't there yet," Younger said.
But the commission will issue a gender and diversity scorecard in
March, seeing if Malloy was able to match or exceed his predecessor's
success in bringing women in government. Gov. M. Jodi Rell, only
the second woman to become governor in the state, filled 37 percent of
her top executive posts with women, including the first woman to
oversee the Department of Correction. Younger said that percentage put
Connecticut among the top ten states with women in the upper levels of
government.
To assist Malloy, the commission solicited resumes from women
interested in joing state government and forward the names of 61 female
candidates for executive-level positions.
"They are out there," Younger said.
Malloy said earlier this week he was not keeping score.
"We're not keeping score by category. What I'm trying to do is staff
immediately and as quickly as possible commissionerships," Malloy said.
His previous department-head appointments are: Ben Barnes, Office of
Policy and Management; Supreme Court Justice Joette Katz, Department of
Children and Families; and Bradford, Department of Public Safety.
Malloy's inner circle so far consists of men he has known for years,
plus his running mate, Nancy Wyman. He has named Timothy F. Bannon as
chief of staff, state Sen. Andrew McDonald of Stamford as his legal
counsel and Roy Occhiogrosso, his media strategist on two campaigns, as
a senior adviser.
While the
rest of the State of Connecticut was watching UCONN...
Top
state education official resigns, citing 'stress'
Jacqueline Rabe, CT MIRROR
December 21, 2010
Saying the stress of the job had
become too much, State Education Commissioner Mark McQuillan announced
his resignation today, one day after a public outburst that stunned
members of a panel appointed to make recommendations on school
financing.
"I reached this decision yesterday
when I realized that I no longer wanted to do this work and saw all too
plainly that the stresses of my job are more than they should be and
more than I am willing to accept," McQuillan, 62, wrote in a letter to
state Board of Education members and other education officials.
On Monday a panel composed of
representatives of unions, businesses, municipalities and education
groups met to begin drafting some of their final recommendations on how
schools should be financed by the state. McQuillan opened the meeting
by saying he wanted to defer that discussion until January. As various members of the group objected
to the delay, McQuillan showed increasing irritation.
"Do you want to run this meeting?"
he finally snapped at board chairman Allan Taylor. When Taylor said
yes, McQuillan raised his voice and said, "No, I am running this
meeting."
He quickly adjourned the meeting and
was out the door in seconds, leaving the room of about 30 people
stunned. People
familiar with the episode said two events likely contributed to
McQuillan's outburst.
One was the fact that Gov.-elect Dan
Malloy's transition team for education had scheduled a meeting at the
same time McQuillan's group was to convene. The majority of the members
of the school finance panel were late because of the transition
meeting. McQuillan
also was taken off guard when a group of finance panel members
presented him with their own set of recommendations shortly before the
meeting began.
Taylor said he was surprised by
McQuillan's actions.
"I am sorry it happened that way,"
he said.
McQuillan has up until today said he
intends to lobby to remain the state's education commissioner.
McQuillan has been the commissioner for the last four years. His term
was set to expire at the end of the year, but the state board members
voted to keep him on until Malloy has decided who he wants as the next
education leader. Malloy
has said McQuillan is a strong contender for the position but said he
is also looking elsewhere to fill the position. During a recent trip to
Washington he asked U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan for names of
possible candidates.
The final decision will ultimately
be up to the 11-member State Board of Education, but Malloy will gets
to begin appointing eight of those members when he takes office Jan. 5.
McQuillan's resignation is effective the same day.
"I’m focused on working with the
State Board of Education to find an interim replacement while the
search for a permanent replacement goes on,” Malloy said reacting to
McQuillan's decision to step down.
Malloy rounds out top
policy and politics jobs
Mark Pazniokas
December 16, 2010
The top public policy and political ranks of Gov.-elect Dan Malloy's
administration took shape today with the appointments of his legal
counsel and communication strategist, followed hours later by other key
posts at the Office of Policy and Management.
Malloy named two close advisers, Roy Occhiogrosso of New Britain and
state Sen. Andrew McDonald of Stamford to his senior staff. Deputy
Comptroller Mark Ojakian of Hartford, state Rep. Michael P. Lawlor of
East Haven, Gian-Carl Casa of Hamden and Anne Foley of West Hartford
are filling the other top policy jobs at the Office of Policy and
Management.
The appointments of McDonald and Lawlor, the co-chairs of the
legislature's judiciary committee, will set off a scramble for two of
the higher-profile committee assignments at the State Capitol. Lawlor
is the committee's longest-serving co-chair.
Lawlor is one of the legislature's leading opponents of capital
punishment. Lawlor and McDonald, who are both openly gay, also helped
lead the legislative push to legalize same-sex civil unions and then
codify in state law a court decision legalizing gay marriage.
Occhiogrosso, who was Malloy's media adviser for his gubernatorial
campaigns in 2006 and 2010, will be the administration's communication
strategist. McDonald will be general counsel.
"Roy and Andrew have provided me professional guidance on a number of
issues throughout the years, and their acceptance of these offers will
allow me to rely on a senior leadership team in my office ripe with
experience inside and outside of state government, cognizant of the
great challenges that lie ahead for us, and uniquely prepared to deal
with them effectively and efficiently," Malloy said in a press
statement.
Occhiogrosso, McDonald and Timothy Bannon, the chief of staff, all will
report directly to Malloy.
With his inner circle complete, Malloy''s transition office named the
four other advisers who will be based at the Office of Policy and
Management, which is state government's budget office and often acts as
its think tank, providing policy advice directly to the governor's
office.
Ojakian, who is now the deputy to Comptroller Nancy Wyman, the incoming
lieutenant governor, will be the deputy secretary of the Office of
Policy and Management. Malloy previously had named Ben Barnes, a top
aide during his mayoral administration in Stamford, as OPM secretary.
"I'm grateful that these public servants have agreed to join my staff
at such a critical juncture in our state's history," Barnes said.
Placing Ojakian at OPM serves at least two purposes: one, it gives
Barnes, a newcomer to the Capitol, a deputy well-versed in the
political players, as well as fiscal issues; two, it reinforces
Malloy's promise that Wyman will play a policy role in the
administration. Ojakian is Wyman's closest adviser.
Lawlor, Casa and Foley will be undersecretaries, each overseeing areas
of public policy. Lawlor will be the undersecretary for criminal
justice, giving him an opportunity to shape Malloy's approach to
sentencing and prison issues.
Casa, the top lobbyist for the Connecticut Conference of
Municipalities, will be the undersecretary for legislative affairs. He
is a former colleague of Barnes, whom Malloy hired away from CCM to
join his mayoral administration.
Foley, who already is a senior policy adviser at OPM, will be the
undersecretary for policy development and planning. She has worked at
OPM for 23 years.
The vacancies caused by the coming resignations of McDonald and Lawlor
will force the first of several special elections. Others are expected.
Rep. John Geragosian, D-New Britain, the co-chairman of the
appropriations committee, is a top contender for the job of Democratic
state auditor, a post appointed by the House speaker and Senate
president pro tem, with the consent of the legislature.
Rep. Jamie Spallone, D-Essex, has been offered a job by Denise Merrill,
the incoming secretary of the state. Legislative leaders have
delayed
making committee assignments until they see who leaves for the
executive branch.
McDonald
to ascend to Malloy administration post
Stamford
ADVOCATE
Brian Lockhart And Magdalene Perez, Staff Writers
Published: 10:16 p.m., Wednesday, December 15, 2010
STAMFORD -- State Sen. Andrew McDonald, D-Stamford, handily won a fifth
term in November, but will instead return to Hartford in January as
counsel to long-time friend Governor-elect Dan Malloy.
Malloy, Stamford's former mayor, announced he will be naming two
important appointments Thursday at noon at the city's Government
Center, rather than the capitol in Hartford.
Hartford Courant Columnist Kevin Rennie first reported Wednesday
afternoon on his blog that McDonald, a Stamford native and long-time
Malloy friend and confident, will be named the new governor's top
lawyer.
Sources contacted by Hearst Connecticut Media Group supported Rennie's
claim.
A Malloy spokesman declined comment and McDonald did not return phone
calls.
"If it's true it's a superb choice," said Attorney General-Elect George
Jepsen, whom McDonald succeeded in the state Senate in 2003. "Andrew is
immensely capable. Works very hard. Has the utmost integrity and, in
addition to being an excellent lawyer, has excellent political judgment
and knowledge of governmental process. He's about as complete a package
for that job as you could possibly find ... He enjoys Dan's complete
confidence."
A former Stamford corporation counsel under Malloy, McDonald earned
notoriety when, as a freshman legislator, he was made co-chairman of
the legislature's powerful Judiciary Committee.
"Regardless of what you think of his politics, Andrew McDonald is a
very accomplished attorney," House Minority Leader Lawrence Cafero,
R-Norwalk, himself a lawyer, said. Cafero noted McDonald is
employed
as a litigation partner with Stamford-based Pullman and Comley.
"Pullman is no slouch firm," Cafero said.
Although there has been speculation among political insiders that
McDonald, a member of Malloy's transition team, would join the
administration, there have been some who thought Malloy would maneuver
to elevate his friend to a more powerful role within the state Senate
to ensure passage of priority legislation.
"I heard the rumors they were going to find a spot for (Senate
President and Brooklyn Democrat) Donald Williams ... and clear the way
for Andrew as far as being senate majority leader or president," Cafero
said. "And in that way the Malloy/McDonald partnership would take
effect, with him being head of one chamber of government."
Asked why an influential senator like McDonald might choose to leave
the General Assembly, Jepsen, a one-time senate majority leader, said
as Malloy's counsel, McDonald "would be an immensely powerful figure in
the administration during what promises to be four of the most
important years for determining Connecticut's future course."
The thought of McDonald gaining even more power is sure to worry some
of his critics who have been concerned he and Judiciary Committee
co-chairman Michael Lawlor, D-East Haven, have overstepped their bounds
in recent years. Though fiscally conservative, McDonald is
socially
liberal and was at the forefront of efforts to legalize same-sex
marriage in Connecticut. He has also clashed on numerous occasions with
the Catholic Church, most notably in 2009 when his proposal to alter
oversight of parish finances ignited a political firestorm and was soon
withdrawn.
State Rep. Arthur O'Neill, R-Southbury, a ranking Republican on the
Judiciary Committee, called McDonald "an able chairman" who brought "a
fairly rationale approach" to the position and was respectful of his
colleagues.
"It makes a lot of sense Governor-elect Malloy might pick someone like
Andrew, and being chief counsel to the governor is a tremendous
opportunity to influence public policy," O'Neill said. "Obviously
Andrew and I have disagreed on a variety of different issues over the
years ... As the governor's counsel he will be acting on behalf of the
governor and not a completely free agent. He'll have influent ... but I
get the distinct impression the new governor has a lot of his own ideas
and specifics of how he wants to handle things."
Reached by phone Lawlor declined to comment for this story. State
Sen.
Bob Duff, D-Norwalk, who, with McDonald, also represents a portion of
Darien, said McDonald joining the Malloy administration will be a big
win for the governor-elect.
"I know that Dan relies on Andrew and frankly Andrew has a great legal
mind," Duff said. "He's been such a good force on the Judiciary
Committee and as a legislator. But if he can serve the entire state, I
think that's good too."
Duff and McDonald have been voices for Fairfield County on the
Transportation Committee. Asked if McDonald's departure will be a loss
in that area, Duff said, "I think anybody who takes his seat would
still be a strong voice on transportation. And he'd continue to be a
strong voice within the administration."
Gary Rose, chairman of the Department of Government and Politics at
Sacred Heart University, said it would be a "logical choice" if state
representatives in the district run for the seat. Those, excluding the
seat won this fall by Republican Michael Molgano, include state
Representatives Gerry Fox III, Carlo Leone and Patricia Billie Miller,
all Democrats. However, moving from representing a house district of
about 29,000 to a senate seat encompassing 90,000 constituents can be a
big change, Rose said.
"You're really talking about double the responsibilities in terms of
constituent services, in terms of issues," Rose said. "All of a sudden
serving in the state senate, it's a whole different dynamic. It's two
different worlds in many ways."
Republican Board of Finance member Bob Kolenberg, who ran against
McDonald for the senate seat, questioned why McDonald ran for the
office if he was going to accept an administration position. But he
said he is open to running again.
"I'm not going to say no and I'm not going to say yes but I'd
definitely consider it," Kolenberg said. "I'd have to see what kind of
support is out there for me."
Democratic City Committee Chairwoman Ellen Camhi said there are "many
Democrats that would fit the bill" for a special election, but did not
elaborate.
Asked whether he would consider running, Fox said it was too early to
comment.
"I'm sure there will be a number of announcements in the next few weeks
and I don't want to speculate on what might be," Fox said.
Leone and Miller could not be immediately reached for comment.
Stamford Democratic Registrar of Voters Alice Fortunato said she and
her Republican counterpart would have to look into how and when a
special election would take place, as there has never been one for a
state senate seat during her 12 years serving in the office.
"We'd have to research that, it hasn't happened in my time as
registrar," Fortunato said. "Certainly that's a very important
position."
Malloy names former trooper
public safety commissioner
CT POST
Ken Dixon, Staff Writer
Published: 11:33 p.m., Wednesday, December 15, 2010
HARTFORD -- A retired state trooper who directs security for the
NFL was named Wednesday by Gov.-elect Dan Malloy to be the next
commissioner of Public Safety, the first black to hold the position.
Reuben F. Bradford was called a "great and seasoned leader" by Malloy
during a noontime news conference. Malloy also said Bradford will make
the state police department "sharp and glow."
"It is truly and honor to come full circle," said Bradford, who started
his 22-year career with the state police in 1974.
Bradford, who rose to the rank of major in the State Police, will not
join the Malloy administration until after the Super Bowl and Pro Bowl
early next year.
The current chief of the department, Commissioner James Thomas, has
agreed to remain in his current post until then.
Bradford has worked for the NFL for 15 years and is responsible for
ensuring games and venues across the country are safe.
The 64-year-old Bradford anticipated retiring next August, but the lure
of public service beckoned. He said the commissioner pay is
"substantially less" than his current salary.
Bradford, an African-American, who recalled overcoming racism while in
the state police, also has a motor-neuron disease that affects his
balance.
A state trooper for 22 years, he at one time commanded Troop G when it
was based in Westport. Troop G is now located in Bridgeport. Bradford
lives in Glastonbury with his wife and three children.
The Department of Public Safety is composed of three divisions: the
Division of State Police, the Division of Fire, Emergency and Building
Services and the Division of Scientific Services.
As a retired state trooper, Bradford gets a $3,069 monthly pension,
according to a state database.
Malloy
names state's first black
public safety chief
Mark Pazniokas, CT MIRROR
December 15, 2010
Gov.-elect Dan Malloy today named Reuben F. Bradford of Glastonbury,
the NFL's senior director of security and a retired state police major,
as Connecticut's first African-American commissioner of public safety.
Bradford, 64, retired from the police in 1996 after a 22-year career
that saw him rise through the ranks from trooper to major, with
assignments that included commanding a barracks, two regional
districts, the training academy and being the chief of staff.
"He has a great understanding of the needs of the department, has been
an insider and an outsider and is prepared I think to be an
extraordinary commissioner for this department," Malloy said at a press
conference at the Legislative Office Building in Hartford.
Bradford said Malloy was offering him a rare opportunity to end his
career where it began.
"It's not often that you get a chance to come full circle," Bradford
said. "It is truly an honor."
Bradford, who has been with the NFL for nearly 15 years, will not join
the Malloy administration until after the football season concludes.
Public Safety Commissioner James Thomas has agreed to remain in office
until Bradford is available, Bradford said.
The commissioner of public safety is a civilian post with
responsibility for the state police, the state crime lab, the state
fire marshal's office and state building inspector.
Bradford will assume command of an agency that was the subject of a
scathing investigative report in December 2006 about shortcomings in
its internal affairs division. Its crime lab suffered from a backlog
that drew Malloy's attention during his campaign.
A year ago, the lab had more than 10,000 DNA samples from convicted
criminals that had yet to be processed and entered into the DNA
registry, but the administration of Gov. M. Jodi Rell says all the
samples have been entered since the state used $1 million in federal
stimulus money to hire forensic examiners. The lab still has a smaller
backlog of DNA investigation for open criminal cases.
In March 2008, Gov. M. Jodi Rell said that all pending internal affairs
investigations referenced in the 2006 report had been completed.
"The Department of Public Safety is on the right track in transforming
the internal affairs process," Rell said. "We want the State
Police Internal Affairs unit to be a model for the rest of the nation
in promoting integrity within the department, and I am pleased with the
progress that is being made."
At various times, the state police also have been subject to
allegations of racial discrimination. Asked if he ever had faced
discrimination in his state police career, Bradford replied without
hesitation, "Yes, but it was overcome." He did not elaborate.
"I've selected someone who I think will make the department sharp and
glow. He will not be subject to political pressures from my office. I
was very clear," Malloy said.
Asked about the best and worst elements of the department's culture,
Bradford said the ethic of public service was the best. "I really can't
come up with a worst-case scenario," he said.
As the security chief for the NFL, Bradford traveled widely, helping to
coordinated security for major events such as the Super Bowl. He had
just flown back for his press conference on a red-flight from meetings
in Hawaii.
Bradford has a neurological disorder, ataxia, that affects motor
control and sometimes leaves him unsteady on his feet, especially when
fatigued. He mentioned the disorder during the press conference. In
some people, ataxia also can affect speech.
The return to public service will cost him a significant pay cut, but
it will keep him close to family in Connecticut. He is married and the
father of three.
Bradford is Malloy's fourth major appointment. He is the
governor-elect's first minority appointment.
He previously has named Timothy Bannon as chief of staff, Ben Barnes as
budget chief, and state Supreme Court Justice Joette Katz as
commissioner of the Department of Children and Families. Other
appointments are expected this week and next, but Malloy has ordered a
national search to fill other jobs.
Malloy
tells labor he'll 'protect the most vulnerable' from budget cuts
Keith M. Phaneuf, CT MIRROR
December 16, 2010
MERIDEN -- For those state employees who are worried how Dan Malloy's
plans to solve the state budget crisis will affect them, the Democratic
governor-elect cautiously reminded them Wednesday night that it could
be worse: Republican Tom Foley could have won the election.
Malloy, who was greeted loudly and enthusiastically at the Connecticut
Working Families Party's winter awards dinner, also thanked the public-
and private-sector labor groups behind the party for the crucial role
they played in securing his narrow win on Election Day. His warm
reception at the labor gathering came just a day after a business
group, the MetroHartford Alliance, applauded Malloy's pledge to improve
the business climate in the state by balancing the budget and providing
the stability needed to promote economic development.
But the governor-elect reasserted Wednesday that fixing the state's
fiscal problems would not be at the expense of Connecticut's neediest
and most vulnerable citizens.
"How bad would it be for the people we embrace... if we had not
accomplished what we had accomplished on Election Day?" Malloy told a
crowd of about 150 gathered at the Augusta Curtis Cultural Center. "We
in Connecticut stood up on a principled basis and said we care about
our fellow human being."
Foley had frustrated Malloy throughout the campaign by insisting he
could close the largest budget deficit in state history -- a projected
$3.67 billion budget gap-- without raising taxes. Malloy never
referred to his chief gubernatorial rival by name, nor did he refer to
Foley's no-tax-hike pledge directly, saying only that the campaign was
marked by "people saying what they never should have said."
Foley had said he would seek major concessions from state employees and
would consider trimming state social services to close the deficit. And
while Malloy repeatedly said "we're not going to shred the safety net,"
he generally was more vague about the prospect of seeking wage- and
benefit-givebacks.
The next governor was gracious and appreciative Wednesday in his
10-minute address to the Working Families Party, whose member unions
played a key role in delivering Malloy huge margins of victory in
Connecticut's urban centers while Foley was capturing most other
communities across the state.
"We're all part of one big family," said Malloy, who arrived with
running mate Nancy Wyman. "We wouldn't be here without all of the hard
work of the people in this room. I know that. I appreciate it."
The party honored Carmen Boudier, president of New England Health Care
Employee Workers Union, District 1199, and Malloy hailed her as "a
great leader" and advocate for "people who have been forgotten in
society... who care for the sickest."
Malloy said that he would take a physician's approach to the budget
crisis, following the foremost principle behind the Hippocratic Oath:
"We should do no harm."
"Some way, along the way," he added, "we have to protect the most
vulnerable among us."
Pledging to break from past Republican administrations that have
clashed loudly and at times bitterly with public-sector unions, Malloy
again emphasized his willingness to consider all labor proposals to
reshape government.
"We're going to talk to more people," he said. "We're going to be in
more places. No one is going to be shut out."
Malloy wasn't alone in offering a glass-is-half-full outlook to the
difficult budget solutions Connecticut must face.
"I know we all have breathed a big sigh of relief" when Malloy won on
an Election Day when Democrats lost the governor's office in many other
states, said Julie Kushner, president of the United Auto Workers Region
9A, one of two party leaders who introduced Malloy. "The rest of the
country went right down the tubes."
Working Families Party Director Jon Green said afterward he believes
many party members recognize that Malloy's fiscal choices are limited.
"There's rhetoric and there's reality and the reality is the state is
in a very deep hole," Green said.
But the party leader also was careful with his comments, making it
clear that organized labor believes it also is one of the new
governor's highest priorities. "I believe the governor's remarks
tonight were a reminder on how important it is to have a leader in this
state who recognizes the important role working families play in our
economy."
Malloy consistently has endorsed one of the party's highest legislative
proposals, mandating paid sick leave for part-time workers.
Legislation defeated last year would have required companies employing
more than 50 workers and not already providing any paid time off to
allow them to accrue one hour of paid sick leave for every 40 hours
worked.
The Connecticut Business and Industry Association, the state's chief
business lobby, has said that regardless of whether this proposal would
impact a significant number of companies, it would break ground no
other state has stirred up yet, and send a dangerous anti-business
message. During an interview after his address, Malloy, who also
has
said Connecticut must carefully monitor its tax policies against those
of competing states, said he doesn't believe mandating paid sick leave
for part-time workers would contradict that principle.
"I think it will benchmark us, but in the right category," he said,
adding it would demonstrate Connecticut's commitment to healthy, safe
working environments that protect both workers and consumers.
"I'm willing to talk with anyone," he said. "We can still talk about
the details. But people shouldn't come to work sick."
Malloy vows to tackle fiscal
mess ignored by Rell, legislators
Mark Pazniokas, CT MIRROR
December 9, 2010
In increasingly blunt talk about the state's fiscal crisis,
Governor-elect Dan Malloy says his Republican predecessor, M. Jodi
Rell, and the Democrat-controlled legislature clung to futile hopes for
a quick economic recovery instead of making long-needed structural
changes to Connecticut's operations and finances.
"They should've been done earlier. They should have been done by the
governor," Malloy said in an interview with The Mirror in his
transition office at the State Capitol. "They should have been done by
the legislature. Now I have to do them."
Malloy offered a view of the state's multi-year fiscal crisis that is
sharply at odds with his fellow Democrat, House Speaker Christopher G.
Donovan of Meriden, who has largely blamed the crisis on the recession
and resisted calls for sweeping changes.
In public speeches and private conversations, Malloy said he is making
the case that legislators are wrong if they believe Connecticut can
take stop-gap measures and then wait for a rebounding economy to erase
a deficit of more $3.5 billion
"They had the hope that this recession would be like other recessions,
that the recovery would be well under way right now," Malloy said.
"Now, I never agreed with that. I never supported that."
Despite his blunt language, Malloy said he is casting no blame or
criticism at anyone who has been hoping that an economic recovery would
save the state from painful spending cuts and tax increases, a pattern
followed after most previous recessions.
"It doesn't mean that they were evil, it just means that they were
wrong," Malloy said.
Rell proposed a budget for the fiscal year that began July 1 that
guaranteed the next governor would face a deficit. Her proposed $18.9
billion budget for the 2011 fiscal year was based on $2.7 billion in
one-shot revenue, including federal stimulus dollars, reserve funds and
borrowing against future revenue. In a speech Monday to the House
Democratic majority, Malloy said he wanted to acknowledge that many
Democrats have pinned their hopes on a recovery. But they must embrace
a tougher reality, he said.
"We've got to turn the corner on that, and our aspirations are
undoubtedly going to be delayed. Those were two very pointed messages,"
Malloy said.
Other than acknowledging he intends to propose a mix of new taxes and
spending cuts, Malloy has declined to spell out what he means by
structural changes. The details will come in his first budget proposal
in February, a month after he takes office as Connecticut's first
Democratic governor in 20 years. Donovan, who is completing his
first term as speaker, resisted calls for fundamental changes in the
state's budget this year, saying that a combination of federal stimulus
money and an improving economy could get the state through the crisis.
"Unfortunately, Dan wasn't the governor then," Donovan said Wednesday.
"Now, we're going to make those changes."
Donovan said state revenues have picked up, but not enough to offset
rising costs for Medicaid and other services. With the Republican
takeover of the U.S. House, Donovan said he no longer is expecting more
federal help.
"That's a big change. We need to react to that change," he said.
In an interview late last February, Donovano did not accept that
government must downsize or that the state needs to renegotiate state
employee benefits to reduce the state's unfunded liability for pensions
and retiree heath costs.
"I think in some ways government is the whipping boy for other
structural changes that have to take place," Donovan said then. "The
Obama administration is right to look at health care. That's a major
cost."
Donovan said unwarranted negativity is itself a drag on the economy.
"I think some people, constituencies hurt themselves by trying to make
this worse. They don't look for the silver lining," Donovan said in the
February interview. "They look for the most negative thing. In some
ways putting out that attitude, throughout the state, throughout
business, throughout the community, it hurts our recovery."
Malloy said Donovan was hardly alone in viewing the recession as
something the state could merely outlast.
"In fact, I think all but a handful of people in that room fall into
that category. They are not bad people," Malloy said of the House
Democratic majority he addressed Monday at the Hartford Hilton. "It
means that they were optimistic. They were overly optimistic."
Malloy said he was not being critical of what failed to happen in the
past; he is trying to focus the legislature and public on what must
happen today.
"I have to acknowledge that no one acted out of malice. That's my
message. It's not that I'm being critical of other people. I was
acknowledging their good intentions."
After Malloy addressed the House Democrats at a luncheon retreat Monday
at a hotel in downtown Hartford, Donovan stood next to the incoming
governor and pledged a partnership.
"We're looking forward to working with the governor, facing the deficit
squarely and saying, what do we have to do? What are the ideas?"
Donovan said.
"There's going to be disagreements," he said, standing outside a room
where most of 101 Democrats in the House had just applauded
Malloy."There are disagreement among the 100 people in that room right
there, but we have dialogue."
Lt. Gov.-elect Nancy Wyman: 'We might as well face the problems'
(Keith M. Phaneuf). Like pulling teeth?
Conversion to GAAP means kicking bad
fiscal habits
Keith M. Phaneuf, CT MIRROR
November 23, 2010
It's the budgetary day of reckoning that state officials have avoided
for nearly two decades.
But when Gov.-elect Dan Malloy attempts to convert state financing to
generally accepted accounting principles starting next year, it's
likely to mean more than paying for over $1 billion in papered-over
problems from the past. For a legislature that initially mandated
GAAP
conversion in 1993--and has postponed it repeatedly since 1995--it will
mean immediately swearing off an array of fiscal gimmicks that has
enabled it to balance a series of budgets with hundreds of millions of
dollars in phantom savings and creative accounting.
"The fact is that the gimmicks are gone," said Lt. Gov.-elect Nancy
Wyman, who has spearheaded the push to follow GAAP rules since she
became comptroller in 1995. "While we're facing our new problems, we
might as well face the problems we avoided previously."
According to the Government Accounting Standards Board, that means
following a series of common financial guidelines--already imposed on
Connecticut cities and towns--that emphasize transparency. Unlike
the
modified cash basis currently used, under GAAP expenses must be
promptly assigned to the year in which they were incurred. Similarly,
revenues are counted in most situations in the year in which they were
received.
In the context of the state budget, that means no more pushing the last
monthly payment for nursing homes from June 30 to July 1--a move that
artificially helps to balance the books by shifting state expenses from
the last day of one fiscal year into the first day of the next.
Similarly, other Medicaid expenses incurred in one year and paid in the
next can't be recorded as part of a future budget. And tax
revenues
accrued at summer's end no longer can be drawn back into the prior
fiscal year.
At first glance that appears harmless. If an extra payment to nursing
homes was added in July, at the start of a given year, wasn't it offset
at year's end, when the June 30th payment was similarly pushed into the
future, and so on? The problem with this never-ending shifting
theory
is inflation, which always leaves the future inheriting a somewhat
higher cost.
According to calculations by the comptroller's office in the
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, these gimmicks have gradually
amassed a sizable spread between the budget set under the modified cash
system and a budget that adheres to GAAP. Since 2003, that
difference
has risen annually by an average of $85 million. By the end of 2008-09
fiscal year it had grown beyond $1.35 billion. Though Malloy
pledged
to sign an executive order directing all agencies to begin converting
to GAAP rules immediately after he is sworn in on Jan. 5, untangling
this fiscal mess could take some time.
Agencies traditionally work for three months or more preparing their
budget requests, and the respective plans for 2011-12 from more than 60
departments, boards, commissions and offices already have been
submitted. That means Malloy's first biennial budget proposal due
in
February, which will cover the 2011-12 and 2012-13 fiscal years, likely
would have to wait until the second stage to operate under GAAP
finances from start to finish.
The more immediate challenge for Malloy simply will be not making the
GAAP margin worse as he tries to close a deficit which could run as
high as $3.7 billion in 2011-12, equal to about one-fifth of current
spending and one-half of all annual receipts from the state income
tax. Though the new governor's first budget still is under
development, Wyman said the incoming administration is committed to
beginning the conversion and stopping the cumulative GAAP margin from
getting any worse. That would mean Malloy, in addition to closing what
effectively equals the largest deficit in state history, also would
have to find about $85 million or more in offsetting spending
reductions or new revenues.
"Dan understands this will be hard, but this whole budget will be
hard," Wyman said. "But this has got to be transparent. People have to
understand what is going on. We call it honest budgeting."
But what about the $1 billion-plus difference that ultimately must be
addressed? A 1994 study by the Office of Policy and Management
suggested closing a much-smaller GAAP margin at that time by making
annual payments into a separate fund for 15 years, using that and the
fund's interest earnings to complete the conversion. Wyman
declined to
speculate whether Malloy would expect state government to begin
whittling that $1 billion-plus margin down right away, noting that the
legislature's plate already would be filled addressing a huge deficit
and the first stage of GAAP conversion. But she did predict Malloy
would propose a long-range strategy for finishing the job.
Malloy made the GAAP conversion one of the cornerstones of his
platform, vowing to veto any budget that did not begin the changeover.
His promise to adopt strict budgetary standards sparked considerable
speculation over whether his fellow Democrats, who have controlled both
chambers of the legislature since 1997, would be willing to give up
their fiscal leeway. Rep. John Geragosian, D-New Britain,
co-chairman
of the Appropriations Committee, predicted his fellow Democrats would
adopt a GAAP conversion "in some form" in 2011.
"We've all heard about the deficit and we all know what the nature of
the problem is," he said. "I think it's always good to know where you
stand."
But Rep. Craig A. Miner of Litchfield, ranking House Republican on the
Appropriations Committee, noted that when outgoing Gov. M. Jodi Rell
warned of a potential $46 million gap in federal funding for the winter
heating assistance program, legislators opted neither to scale back the
program nor appropriate additional funds.
"If that was any indication, it might (not?) be happen right away," he
said.
Malloy unveils
transition team
Keith M. Phaneuf, CT MIRROR
November 22, 2010
Gov.-elect Dan Malloy unveiled a 22-member transition team Monday that
includes officials from state and municipal government, representatives
of business, labor and the private, nonprofit community, political
consultants and several individuals from a racial or ethnic minority
background.
Malloy made the announcement two days after being publicly accused by
the Connecticut chapter of the NAACP of lacking diversity within his
transition effort--a charge the Malloy team quickly countered was
unfounded.
"I've chosen people from public and private life, Republicans and
Democrats, and those who have participated in state government
before--as well as those who never have," the governor-elect said in a
written statement. "I'm confident that the people selected will help me
find the best and brightest hires for positions within my
administration and make sure we get off to a strong start."
Malloy announced shortly after Election Day that Timothy F. Bannon of
Manchester, head of the Connecticut Housing Finance Authority and
holder of several key posts in former Gov. William A. O'Neill's
administration, would be his chief of staff, and that Bannon and Lt.
Gov.-elect Nancy Wyman would co-chair the transition effort.
Several of those appointed have strong backgrounds in state government.
Lorraine M. Aronson, who is Bannon's wife, is a former chief financial
officer for the University of Connecticut, is a former deputy budget
director under Govs. Lowell P. Weicker Jr. and John G. Rowland, and
commissioner of the Department of Income Maintenance--the forerunner of
the Department of Social Services - under O'Neill.
Sen. Andrew McDonald, D-Stamford has served eight years in the
legislature and co-chairs the powerful Judiciary Committee.
Former Superior Court Judge Kathryn Emmert of Stamford also is a past
president of the Connecticut Trial Lawyers' Association.
Mark Ojakian has served as deputy comptroller since 1995.
A former mayor of Stamford for 14 years, Malloy named three mayors,
Pedro Segarra of Hartford, Adam Salina of Berlin and Scott Jackson of
Hamden, to the transition.
Among the business and labor leaders Malloy tapped are: Northeast
Utilities senior vice president Greg Butler; Juanita James, the
recently retired chief marketing and communications officer for Pitney
Bowes Inc.; Johnna Torsone, general counsel at Pitney Bowes; longtime
state AFL-CIO President John W. Olsen; Ben Cozzi, president of the
International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 478; and Shawn
Wooden, a partner with Day Pitney LLP and formerly an official with the
national AFL-CIO's investment office.
Malloy also appointed Joseph McGee of Fairfield, a former state
economic development commissioner and currently a vice president for
the Business Council of Fairfield County.
Having pledged in the last campaign to protect Connecticut's social
service safety net, Malloy named several individuals from the private,
nonprofit community to assist with the transition, including, Marilda
Gandara, who has held leadership roles with several groups including
the Hispanics in Philanthropy Funders Collaborative, which raised over
$50 million for Latino-linked nonprofits; Linda Kelly, president of the
Hartford Foundation for Giving; Len Miller, co-founder of the Nonprofit
Collaborative Alliance; and Sanford Cloud Jr., chairman of the
Connecticut Health Foundation.
Malloy also reached into his most recent campaign and his 2006
gubernatorial run for political advice.
Roy Occhiogrosso, a partner with the Global Strategy Consulting Group
and senior advisor to the 2010 campaign, was chosen, as was Chris
Cooney, Malloy's campaign manager in 2006 and president of The Wilmark
Group, a marketing consulting firm.
"These teams reflect the diversity of opinion, experience, political
party, and cultural background that make Connecticut the great state it
is," Malloy added.
The governor-elect was chastised Saturday by the Connecticut NAACP,
which released a list of nine individuals--all of whom are white--that
it believed were involved in the transition effort, adding it reflected
a "shameful" lack of diversity.
But the Malloy transition quickly responded Saturday that half of the
names were incorrect, that the transition team would be diverse, and
that it still was a few days away from being announced.
The group Malloy announced today includes eight individuals who are
African-American or Hispanic. Segarra, a native of Puerto Rico, is
Hartford's first openly gay mayor.
Connecticut NAACP President Scot X. Esdaile could not be reached for
comment immediately after the Malloy team was announced on Monday.
Supreme Court justice to head troubled
child welfare agency
Mark Pazniokas and Jacqueline Rabe
November 30, 2010
Governor-elect Dan Malloy today turned to Justice Joette Katz of the
Connecticut Supreme Court to lead the Department of Children and
Families, a troubled agency that has been under court supervision since
1991.
Katz, 57, is giving up a seat on the state's highest court to take over
an agency that has frustrated efforts by three gubernatorial
administrations to escape the oversight of the U.S. District
Court.
The choice announced today during a press conference in Hartford was a
political blockbuster by a governor-elect who has enjoyed offering
surprising choices to populate his new administration.
Katz brings to the job a reputation for a first-rate intellect, but no
experience in running a major bureaucracy. Prior to going on the bench,
she was the chief of legal services for the Office of the Public
Defender.
Malloy said Katz, who also serves as the administrative judge for the
appellate courts, has significant management experience in the judicial
system, but he made clear he was most interested in bringing a keen
mind and an outsider's perspective to a difficult job.
"Quite frankly, I'm hiring a pretty smart person right now," Malloy
said.
Katz called her new appointment, which is subject to confirmation by
the General Assembly, "my most important challenge."
She said Connecticut should be grateful to the advocates who first
filed suit during the administration of Gov. William A. O'Neill to
demand improvements in DCF, which has been subject to court oversight
since the administration of O'Neill's successor, Lowell P. Weicker Jr.
"The DCF today is not the same DCF that it was," Katz said. "Having
said that, however, it is clear to me that it is not the DCF that it
can be."
Earlier this year, U.S. District Judge Christopher Droney refused a
request by the administration of Gov. M. Jodi Rell to end court
oversight, the latest reminder of the difficulties of bringing the
child-welfare agency up to national standards. In response to a
reporter's question, Katz dryly acknowledged she was giving up a
"monastic" life on the court for the rough and tumble life of running
an agency that often invites the harsh glare of the media.
"You mean, have I seen my psychiatrist this morning?" she said,
smiling.
She was appointed to the Superior Court by O'Neill in 1989 and became
the state's youngest justice at age 39 in 1992 with her appointment by
Weicker to the Supreme Court. She was reappointed by Gov. John G.
Rowland and Rell. Once justices are confirmed for an initial
eight-term term, by tradition they are reappointed every eight years
until retirement, an effective lifetime appointment. Katz could think
of no one who had left the court for another career.
Jamey Bell, the executive director of Connecticut Voices for Children,
called Katz a “brilliant choice” to lead DCF.
“It takes the precisely right person, and I think this choice is the
best shot we’ve had in a long time to bring this agency up to where it
should be,” said Bell, who rushed to the announcement from another
meeting at the Legislative Office Building. Among the agency's
failings, according to a court-appointed monitor, were inadequate
health and dental services, as well as delays in moving children from
state institutions to foster care.
“We don’t have a scarcity of foster parents. We have enough if we could
just retain them,” Bell said.
Bell and Malloy have also said the state’s inability to comply with the
consent decree is not from a lack of money – the agency has a $865
million budget for the current year.
“Money is not the barrier, retaining foster parents is,” Bell said.
Martha Stone, one of the lawyers behind the class-action lawsuit that
led to federal oversight, said she knows from her professional dealings
with Katz that "she is not going to tolerate bureaucracy hindering
progress. ... She has absolutely got her eyes on the prize. She
wouldn't have left a job with as much prestige unless she is dedicated."
Stone also said Malloy's selection is "unique" from any other previous
DCF commissioner.
"It's definitely a different kind of appointment from what we've seen
because she doesn't have a child welfare background. That will make it
that much more important who her team is made up of," Stone said. "I
think she is going to get the job done."
Betty Gallo, who was a lobbyist for the American Civil Liberties Union
when it helped bring the DCF suit, complimented Malloy for "a
best-and-brightest" approach to his initial appointments.
"This augers well," Gallo said.
Katz is an honors graduate of Brandeis University and the University of
Connecticut Law School. She was a public defender from 1978 to
1983
and the chief of legal services for the Office of the Public Defender
from 1983 until she became a judge in 1989.
Katz was born and raised in Brooklyn, N.Y. She is married to Dr. Philip
Rubin, the chief executive officer of Hoskins Laboratories in New
Haven. She is the mother of two adult children, Jason Rubin and
Samantha Katz.
Martha Stone
DCF commissioner appointment a 'high
priority'
Jacqueline Rabe, CT MIRROR
November 22, 2010
For two decades, the state has failed to meet the mandates of a federal
court order to improve the way it cares for children in its custody,
making Gov.-elect Dan Malloy's choice to head the Department of
Children and Families a closely-watched decision.
"He has to get this right," said Martha Stone, one of the lawyers
behind the class-action lawsuit that led to federal oversight of DCF.
"Enough is enough. Let's finally fix this."
"This appointment is a very high-priority,' said Malloy's chief of
staff and transition team leader, Timothy F. Bannon. "Now that the
focus is no longer on filling the [budget director] job, we have
shifted to this."
The latest quarterly report by the court-appointed monitor overseeing
DCF cites both the state's continued lack of foster homes and the lack
of medical and mental health treatment for too many of the 4,000
children in DCF care. Overall, DCF adequately met the needs of children
in just over half the cases reviewed, the report said
"You can't change things overnight, but it shouldn't take 20 years to
fix things... Many children still aren't getting the care they
deserve," said Stone, who still represents plaintiffs in the lawsuit.
Among the problems resulting from the lack of foster homes, she said,
are the 300 children living in out-of-state facilities at any given
time and infants living in large group settings.
"When Malloy chooses who will run DCF, hopefully they will be able to
make progress pretty quickly," she said.
Malloy has said the problems at DCF stem from the lack of leadership
and the state's inability to recruit and retain enough foster care
parents.
"We just about need to change everything we've been doing... We have to
change directions," Malloy said during the campaign after a federal
judge rejected Gov. M. Jodi Rell's request to relieve DCF of federal
supervision. Malloy said he agreed with U.S. District Court Judge
Christopher F. Droney's ruling.
Three Connecticut governors have failed so far to reform the state's
child welfare agency enough to end federal supervision. Now it's up to
Malloy and whomever he appoints as the next commissioner to reshape the
$865 million bureaucracy.
Bannon said they have begun reaching out to potential candidates to
replace current-commissioner Susan Hamilton, who announced the day
before Malloy was elected she would resign at the beginning of the year.
"We have been focused on top-tier appointees who just haven't come out
of the process in the past. They have been unsuccessful," Bannon said.
"We are going to solve the problems at the root of that consent decree."
Stone said the constant turnover of leadership in DCF has been part of
the problem.
"It's a revolving door," Stone said, noting that no DCF commissioner
has lasted more than 3 years since federal oversight began. "We need
real leadership."
The state's child advocate, Jeanne Milstein, is confident Malloy
understands what needs to be done.
"He clearly understand the need for a new leadership team at DCF," she
said.
Why do you think?
Bridgeport decides to keep controversial Election Day ballots away from
state audit
CT POST
Ken Dixon, Staff Writer
Published: 12:51 a.m., Wednesday, November 17, 2010
HARTFORD -- Bridgeport officials have rejected a plan to audit
the voting in 12 city precincts that ran out of ballots and were kept
open an extra two hours, stunning the state's top election official who
pushed for a review to clear up lingering Election Day questions.
Arthur C. Laske III, deputy city attorney, said Tuesday night that
Bridgeport's two voter registrars never agreed to such an audit and
that Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz does not have the authority
to order one. Laske, speaking before Tuesday night's public hearing on
the Election Day confusion, said the local registrars are unprepared to
undertake another recount and there is no budget for such an endeavor.
"What's the legal authority, who agreed to do it and who's going to pay
for it?" Laske asked during an interview in the City Hall Annex. "They
(state officials) haven't answered any of those questions."
Laske said that "preliminary" discussions with a member of Bysiewicz's
staff occurred, but her staff never followed up, so there was never an
agreement on Bridgeport becoming part of the statewide post-election
audit.
City Attorney Mark Anastasi called Bysiewicz's office Monday afternoon
to announce the city would not participate. In a joint statement
Tuesday night, Laske and Anastasi reiterated their belief that the city
and Bysiewicz agree there is no legal authority requiring -- or even
allowing -- the state or the city to conduct such a recount that does
not involve the random audit of machine-cast ballots.
Bysiewicz disagreed with that account.
"Bridgeport did not want to conduct an audit," Bysiewicz said in a
Tuesday phone interview. "This is contrary to what we agreed upon with
the voter registrars last week." Bysiewicz initially had attempted to
order Bridgeport officials to conduct the audit, a posture she had to
abandon in favor of persuasion when it was found that she lacked the
authority to compel such a review.
On Monday, Bysiewicz said that Santa Ayala and Joseph Borges,
Bridgeport's Democratic and Republican registrar, respectively, said
they were willing to have a review of the cardboard ballots --
essentially a recount -- that were cast on the state's optical scan
machines as well as the lighter, photocopied ballots used when the
cardboard ballots ran out.
Bysiewicz Tuesday said she was surprised by the development in the
scandal that embarrassed the city on Nov. 2, when the dozen precincts
ran out of the election ballots, resulting in a three-day delay in
deciding the close gubernatorial race between Democrat Dannel Malloy
and Republican Tom Foley.
"We understand that we don't have the statutory authority to order an
audit, but given the situation, we thought that Bridgeport would be
eager to participate in a hand count, which would have gone a long way
toward reassuring voter confidence," Bysiewicz said.
The much lighter photocopies do not scan and they had to be counted by
hand. It delayed the final tallies until Friday, Nov. 5. Foley finally
conceded on Monday Nov. 8, losing by 6,707 statewide. In Bridgeport,
Malloy had 17,973 votes to Foley's 4,099.
Anastasi's call to Bysiewicz's office Monday occurred hours after a
morning news conference to randomly select 74 precincts -- 10 percent
of all statewide polling places -- for routine audits of the use of
optical scanners.
Barnes warms to
the challenge of Connecticut's fiscal crisis
Keith M. Phaneuf, CT MIRROR
December 3, 2010
Those close to Gov.-elect Dan Malloy say they never doubted who'd be
asked to tackle a massive budget deficit, end billions of dollars worth
of fiscal gimmicks and help revitalize a stagnant job market.
Connecticut's fiscal Rubik's Cube was destined for Ben Barnes' hands
from the moment the election was over.
"Ben is one of those rare talents," Tom Cassone, former Stamford city
corporation counsel, said. "He develops his thoughts, expresses them so
well, and carries them out. He even speaks in fully developed
paragraphs.
"Anybody who knew Stamford city government knew Ben Barnes would be OPM
(Office of Policy and Management) secretary."
The appointment of Barnes, the 42-year-old chief operating officer for
the Bridgeport public schools and an outsider to Capitol circles,
stunned many political observers earlier this month. He will head the
budget office for an administration facing the worst fiscal challenges
in two decades. Raised in St. Petersburg, Fla., Barnes has spent
most of the past two decades connected to municipal government, first
as a policy expert for the Connecticut Conference of Municipalities,
then by holding three posts under Malloy in Stamford, and lastly with
his current job in Bridgeport.
But while no one expects Barnes to reverse overnight fiscal problems
that have developed over years--and in some cases decades--his
supporters say the new budget chief has insight to find solutions
others would miss.
"Ben always wants to get to the heart of the matter," Malloy said.
"He's a very bright guy, very inquisitive and he's willing to peel the
onion."
"Ben is unflappable," said Sen. Andrew McDonald, D-Stamford, another
veteran of Malloy's municipal administration. "He has the unique
capability of mastering any aspect of government in short order."
McDonald, who also had served as city corporation counsel, first met
Barnes 10 years ago when he applied to lead the city's efforts to
promote affordable housing. Over the next decade, Barnes also would
oversee Stamford budget and financial operations, as well as its public
works and engineering departments.
But it was while pursuing his master's degree in urban planning
at New York University in the late 1980s that Barnes first gained his
interest in economics and government finances.
"I learned that if you wanted to build stuff and make cities better
places, the single biggest impediment was figuring out how to pay for
it," he said during an interview Thursday.
For example, when a city program to help poor families purchase
affordable housing bogged down about five years ago, Barnes moved
"decisively" to help hundreds of families, according to Joan Carty,
president of The Housing Development Fund, Inc., the Stamford-based
nonprofit working with the city on that project. Delays in
receiving federal funds kept some eligible families from closing on
homes. But Barnes arranged a broader funding pool that temporarily
leveraged city funds to resolve the problem without added costs, she
said.
"It was fixed virtually overnight because Ben got the problem and he
knew how to solve it," Carty said. "It became immediately apparent to
me he could home in on whatever challenge you had and then take it to
the next step."
Barnes, who lives in Stratford with his wife, Tania, and their three
sons, conceded that when it comes to politics, he's comfortable with a
low-key approach. His friends say that might be an understatement.
"Ben would gladly sit at the back of the room," Cassone said. "He's not
a big personality, like Dan is, but he's just as bright."
"Ben is good with words and he's good with numbers," CCM Executive
Director James Finley said. "That's a rare combination."
Barnes' father, Andrew, a who retired two years ago as chief executive
officer for the St. Petersburg Times, spent nearly four decades in
journalism as a reporter, editor and newspaper executive, including
stints at the Washington Post and Providence Journal-Bulletin.
Despite taking on one of the most sensitive positions in state
government, Barnes said he doesn't anticipate an adversarial role with
the news media, even though there will be times he can't comment on
issues under development.
"I really believe in the public's right to know," he said. "I'm a big
supporter of the news media, and a big consumer. Hey, they paid for me
to go to college."
McDonald, who once described Barnes as a "little geeky," said his
former colleague is shockingly bright with a dry sense of humor. He
doesn't take himself too seriously, but he takes his job very
seriously."
And though no one said they expect Barnes to find any fiscal silver
bullets to solve the budget crisis, they predicted his recommendations
will speak for themselves. Fiscal gimmicks, such as paying
tomorrow for expenses incurred today or using one-time funds to support
ongoing programs, have been a prerogative of legislatures throughout
history, Barnes said. But if Connecticut is to begin moving in another
direction, it means reminding officials of the price tag that comes
with those short-cuts.
"If you build a cliff for yourself, you have to remember that the day
of reckoning does come," he said, referring to a nearly $3.7 billion
built-in deficit in the first budget Malloy must draft, a shortfall
equal to nearly half of all annual revenue from the state income tax.
Barnes' tenure in Stamford also taught him the value of taking
"well-considered risks to make government work better"--a philosophy
Malloy uses to empower his staff. "If my people can convince me of the
rightness of their ideas, they can probably convince anybody," Malloy
said.
"I've been very frustrated because I don't think the state of
Connecticut has lived up to the potential that it has," Barnes said. "I
think there is a lot of room for more creativity and some ideas to make
things work better."
A small strategic investment can make a huge difference, he said,
recalling how assigning one city employee in Stamford a few years ago
to expand health care outreach resulted in thousands of uninsured,
needy residents being enrolled the state's HUSKY program.
"It was a tremendous benefit to the community and it took just one
person," he said.
Barnes and Malloy haven't tipped their hands regarding the fiscal
solutions they'll present to the legislature in just over two months,
but the new budget director said he expects his boss will be fully
engaged. Barnes said his relationship with Malloy is built both
on professionalism and friendship--along with a mutual fascination with
how government works.
"Dan does his homework," Barnes said. "He remembers everything you tell
him with astonishing clarity. I like to talk about public policy
myself, but he will keep needling you to keep telling him details about
things. ... He is very interested in how everything works."
The two met in 1990s when Barnes was working on education policy for
CCM, and the new Stamford mayor had been chosen the coalition's
president.
Barnes had become fascinated with public funding strategies for
education and Malloy was grappling with a system that penalized
Stamford for its wealthy tax base while failing to recognize the city's
large pockets of poverty.
"He was a very exciting new mayor of a big city and we raised a number
of ideas," Barnes said.
Barnes returned briefly to Florida for less than a year in 2000, but
ultimately decided he wanted to return to Connecticut. A resume was
sent unsolicited to the Malloy administration, and a few interviews
later, Barnes would begin a 10-year tenure in city government.
"Ben and I have always worked well," Malloy said, adding that those who
suspected Barnes always had been part of his plans for state government
are correct. "He was always going to play a role in my administration."
Malloy
names Capitol
outsider as OPM chief
Mark Pazniokas and Keith M. Phaneuf, CT MIRROR
November 17, 2010
Governor-elect Dan Malloy today named one of the top aides from his
mayoral administration in Stamford for the pivotal role of overseeing
the budget and contract negotiations with state employees.
Malloy introducing Ben Barnes
Gov.-elect Dan Malloy introduces his OPM choice, Ben Barnes, as Lt.
Gov-elect Nancy Wyman looks on (Mark Pazniokas)
Ben Barnes, 42, who held three top jobs in Stamford, brings an
outsider's perspective to the post of secretary of the Office of Policy
and Management, a job that in recent administrations often has gone to
former legislators.
Along with the chief of staff, the OPM secretary tends to have one of
the closest and most important relationships with a governor,
especially one who will be confronted with a deficit of as much as $3.7
billion.
"He knows how I work," Malloy said with a smile, talking about some of
Barnes' qualifications. "I think ultimately in my choosing an
individual to move forward with, I had to feel confident the person
fully understood what it is I am trying to accomplish."
He introduced Barnes at a press conference at the Legislative Office
Building by joking that his latest appointee should not expect a
vacation before August.
Barnes was a government finance expert at the Connecticut Conference of
Municipalities when Malloy, then mayor of Stamford, hired him away
nearly 10 years ago. Of the three posts that reported directly to
Malloy, Barnes held three of them.
"I am terribly honored by the selection and the trust Dan has shown in
me," Barnes said. "I am looking forward to facing some rather enormous
challenges the state of Connecticut faces."
Barnes, who lives in Stratford with his wife and three sons, is now a
facilities manager for the Bridgeport schools. He is a graduate of
Swarthmore College and has a graduate degree in urban planning from New
York University.
Friends describe Barnes as smart, even-tempered and detail-oriented,
all traits that will be tested in the first months of the new
administration. Andrew J. McDonald, a state senator from Stamford who
was Malloy's legal counsel, says Barnes can be a "little geeky," with a
wickedly dry sense of humor.
"There is no doubt that Ben understands the rhythms of Dan Malloy's
style of leadership," McDonald said.
When asked if he felt a special affinity for cities and towns, which
rely heavily on state aid to balance their own budgets, Barnes nodded
and deadpanned, "I wouldn't live anywhere but in a city or town."
Advisers to the governor-elect say Barnes enjoyed Malloy's complete
confidence while overseeing, at different times, such diverse areas as
finance, administration and operations.
"Dan Malloy has offered me some extraordinary opportunities in my
career, and in accepting them and working with him I have prospered,
and I hope that communities we served together have prospered," Barnes
said.
Barnes will get his first briefing at OPM on Wednesday.
He said there is no "silver bullet" that will erase the state's fiscal
challenges.
Malloy's decision to reach outside of legislative circles for a
strategist to solve what effectively equals to largest budget deficit
in Connecticut history was applauded by fellow Democrats.
"Sure, a former legislator can come in to the job knowing more people,"
state Auditor Kevin P. Johnston, himself a former legislator, said
after the announcement. "But somebody can be colored by having been
here so long. We need to have someone who is open to new ideas."
"They should have the best people around, be they from the legislature,
municipal government, the business world or academia," said Rep. John
Geragosian, D-New Britain, co-chairman of the Appropriations Committee,
adding that a legislative background is not essential for a budget
office to have a good relationship with the General Assembly.
"Ben is going to be part of a larger team and there probably will be
others who can provide that background," Geragosian added.
Sen. Donald DeFronzo, D-New Britain, the subject of some speculation
that he might have been under consideration for the job, said Barnes
can be brought up to speed on the budget.
"The number one consideration is whether the governor is confident" in
the OPM secretary, DeFronzo said. With Barnes, he added, "There is a
confidence level that doesn't have to be created. This, by all
accounts, is a relationship that is intense and well-established."
Malloy's running mate, Nancy Wyman, said the new administration wanted
someone who wouldn't be dissuaded by politics from examining any
solution to the state's fiscal problems. The new team faces a built-in
shortfall for the fiscal year that begins July 1 that ranges from $3.4
billion to $3.7 billion, based on estimates from the Rell
administration and nonpartisan legislative analysts.
But both projections represent nearly one-fifth of current spending,
and more than half of all annual receipts from the state income tax.
"With what we're facing, a fresh look is what we need," said Wyman, a
former legislator who has been state comptroller since 1995. "Maybe an
idea didn't work out before, but it could now. Ben has the experience
and he understands how budgets work."
Johnston added that legislative experience, though valuable in many
instances, isn't always an advantage.
"People can come out of the legislature with a lot of baggage," he
said. "You can have a former legislator that nobody cared for."
A
transition begins, for a
governor-elect and Connecticut
Mark Pazniokas, CT MIRROR
November 8, 2010
In his first press conference as governor-elect, Democrat Dan Malloy
today praised his opponent, Republican Tom Foley, as "a classy guy,"
then quickly turned to Connecticut's first full-fledged gubernatorial
transition in 16 years.
"Now it's time for Nancy and I to get to work," said Malloy, standing
with his running mate, Nancy Wyman. "I want the people of
Connecticut to know that we are committed to putting Connecticut back
to work and getting Connecticut's fiscal house in order."
Malloy, 55, the former mayor of Stamford, will be inaugurated Jan. 5 as
the state's 88th governor, assuming responsibility for a deficit of
$3.3 billion and control of a government with the nation's second-worst
record of creating jobs over two decades.
Less than two hours after Foley conceded defeat and announced he would
not challenge the election results, Malloy and Wyman stepped to a
lectern in the ornate Old Judiciary Room of the State Capitol for the
first time as the undisputed governor-elect and lieutenant
governor-elect.
Malloy, who unsuccessfully sought the office in 2006, said he was fully
cognizant of the weight of expectations and challenges that soon will
fall on his shoulders.
"The good news is the state of Connecticut is filled with good, honest,
hardworking people who have great strength and resiliency, and this
will be an administration that will match the people's strength and
resiliency," he said.
He pledged to the public and press to be as open and transparent as
possible as he takes office as the first Democratic governor since
William A. O'Neill left office in January 1991, giving way to the
independent, Lowell P. Weicker Jr.
"We will treat you with honesty, with forthrightness and look to have a
strong working relationship," Malloy said.
The first real trappings of power will be visible Tuesday, when Malloy
is expected to come under protection of a State Police security detail
that will be his constant companion for the next four years.
Malloy, who is married and has three sons, the youngest of whom is a
college freshman, intends to live in the Executive Residence on
Prospect Avenue in Hartford's fashionable West End, near Elizabeth Park.
Connecticut has not seen the governor's office pass from one party to
another since January 1995, when Weicker was succeeded by Republican
John G. Rowland. Rowland resigned under threat of impeachment for
corruption in July 2004 and was replaced by his lieutenant, M. Jodi
Rell.
Malloy used the Rell administration as a constant foil on the campaign
trail, calling the governor a disengaged chief executive. Foley was
only marginally friendlier to Rell, who remains personally popular.
Rell congratulated Malloy today.
"I want to offer my personal congratulations to Governor-elect Malloy.
I also extend my appreciation to both candidates for the patience they
have shown during the extraordinary and often trying days that have
followed the election," she said.
She offered her cooperation, even though she issued a memo last week
barring her commissioners from direct contact with Malloy. Today,
Malloy said he assumed the memo was a reflection only of the
uncertainty about who had won.
"I take the governor at her word," Malloy said. "She wants to have a
robust dialogue, concerning the transference of authority, and I expect
that will take place."
Tim Bannon, Malloy's chief of staff and the co-director of the
transition team with Wyman, already has met with Rell's chief of staff,
Lisa Moody.
Bannon, who served in the O'Neill administration when Moody was a
legislative staffer, called Moody an old friend. He said he anticipates
a smooth transition.
So far, the transition team has no work space, other than Bannon's
kitchen. Even before the election, Bannon was tasked with the
responsibility of completing a check list for the new governor.
Malloy will take office with less than 50 percent of the vote, as did
Weicker in 1991 and Rowland in 1995. He dismissed a question about a
lack of a mandate.
"I have 100 percent of the responsibility," he said. "My mandate is to
do the best I can with my running mate."
His first question was an easy one: Why did he stop wearing the green
neckties he wore every day since May 1? They had become a good luck
charm for Malloy, the seventh son of an Irish-Catholic couple.
Today, he wore a maroon tie.
His answer: "Because I won."
Ballots previously stored in City Hall Annex building; LWV counts
at McLevy Hall (l). Jasper McLevy, former Mayor of Bridgeport on snow
removal: "God put it there, let Him take it away".
Bridgeport vote recount shows widespread miscalculations, cascading
errors
CT POST
Tim Loh, Staff Writer
Published: 01:07 a.m., Sunday, December 12, 2010
BRIDGEPORT -- If you cast a photocopied ballot in last month's
gubernatorial election in Bridgeport, there's a 1 in 4 chance your vote
was miscounted.
A recount of the Bridgeport governor's vote from the chaotic Nov. 2
election shows that about 1,500 of the nearly 6,000 photocopied ballots
used when polls ran out of regular ballots were incorrectly counted,
never counted at all or misrepresented on the city's final returns. The
photocopied ballots were a part of the overall 24,000 cast in the
governor's race.
In three precincts, the photocopied ballots weren't even included in
the city's final report.
The net effect was that Democrat Dannel Malloy was shortchanged by 761
votes; Republican Tom Foley by 174; and Independent Tom Marsh by 19.
The errors affected the candidates in roughly the same proportion as
Bridgeport's reported results, which suggests there was no fraud afoot.
The missing votes would have increased Malloy's margin of victory by
nearly 600 votes above the official statewide margin of 6,404. Thus,
the final result of the gubernatorial race would not have been swayed.
But the scope of the mishandled ballots raises a troublesome prospect:
Had Foley earned about 9,000 more votes in the rest of the state,
Bridgeport's botched returns might have prevented a statewide official
recanvass for races closer than 2,000 votes.
The recount illustrates the profound consequence of the city's failure
to order enough ballots, which set off the chain of cascading errors
that grew into Connecticut's biggest Election Day meltdown since it
switched to optical-scan voting machines four years ago. The recount
also points to a lack of training and leadership in the city's election
offices and to issues of oversight the state Legislature may soon be
addressing.
"What if the election was a little closer and our result brought the
race into the recount territory?" asked Luther Weeks, executive
director of the Connecticut Citizen Election Audit Coalition, which
conducted the recount. "But now, it's too late by state statute to
recanvass, so you'd probably have to go to court."
The Connecticut Post sponsored the recount in an effort to clear up
confusion surrounding the Nov. 2 election in Bridgeport. The newspaper
obtained access to the ballots under the Freedom of Information law.
The troubles grew out of the two registrars of voters' decision to
order only 21,100 ballots for the city's roughly 68,000 registered
voters. City officials agreed to the recount and cooperated fully on
the project.
It has no legal impact on the outcome of the election.
Many voting districts on Nov. 2 ran out of ballots by early afternoon,
creating long lines for people hoping to vote and forcing city
officials to send waves of photocopied ballots to every district. The
photocopied ballots, which can't be read by the scanning machines, had
to be hand counted by polling station workers after the voting closed.
The problems delayed the city's reporting of its results to Hartford
until Nov. 5, as head moderators holed up in McLevy Hall, working
around the clock through the labyrinth of numbers.
HOW BAD WAS THIS?
The margin of error found in Bridgeport's results is hard to put in
context because there are few comparisons.
For one thing, most areas of the country that use optical-scan machines
only started doing so recently, so there are few recounts like this
one. Most have been limited to the machine-read totals, such as
Connecticut's post-election audits of 10 percent of the state's voting
districts. And when hand-counted tallies are included, they generally
account for such a small portion of the votes as to be statistically
negligible.
Bridgeport was different. Hand-counted ballots represented 1 in 4 votes
cast. And the circumstances in which they were counted -- by poll
workers following a 15- to 17-hour work day, between midnight and
Wednesday morning's sunrise -- were far from conducive to accuracy.
What's more, election experts assert, the inclusion of hand counting
immediately increases the prospect for error.
"If it weren't so late, and people hadn't been working all day, and you
didn't have this confusion with the paper ballots, there would likely
still be some mistakes," said Lawrence Norden, senior counsel of the
Democracy Program of the Brennan Center for Justice at New York
University School of Law. "But a 4 to 6 percent error rate is not
acceptable. It may happen sometimes, and it's not the end of the world
in a situation like this, where it's not impacting an election outcome,
but I think that's clearly too high a number. And Bridgeport and the
state should be looking to bring that down significantly in future
elections."
To be fair, Bridgeport's margin of error pales when compared with the
17 percent margin of error that the New York Board of Elections
discovered in its own recanvass of last month's election. That error
stemmed from the city not reporting nearly 200,000 votes on Election
Day.
But that discrepancy, which included only machine-read votes, was
unearthed by the election board before the vote was certified. This was
not the case for Bridgeport, which failed in its own opportunity to
identify some of the discrepancies before the election was certified.
Some good news for Bridgeport: The recount found there were about 50
fewer votes recorded overall than the total number of voters whose
names were checked off precinct lists. In other words, there is not the
remotest indication of any ballot-box stuffing.
WHO MESSED UP WHERE?
The recount found mistakes at several steps -- in the hand counting of
ballots at almost every polling station, in the delivery of the hand
counts to the city's head moderators who were compiling results in the
registrars' office, and in the head moderator's transposition of the
districts' results into the final report that was sent to Hartford.
For example, the moderator of the City Hall voting district, who
counted and tallied roughly 110 ballots by hand after the polls closed,
mistakenly sealed up those results with the photocopied ballots in a
bag separate from the machine-read ballots. The moderator returned both
bags of ballots, but only provided the head moderators with the
machine-read tally sheet. The head moderators never knew there had been
a hand count at the polling district.
That misplaced tally sheet only resurfaced during the Connecticut
Post's recount -- and only after several hours of head-scratching when
it was discovered that the district's machine-read numbers clearly
didn't match up with the district's voter check-in list. The
hand-counted votes would have given Malloy 86 more votes and Foley 12
more votes. These numbers represented two out of every five votes cast
at the City Hall district.
Nor was that the only polling station where this mistake seems to have
occurred. Bridge Academy never reported its hand-counted ballots --
there appear to have been 93 of them -- and neither did one of the two
Bassick High School districts.
Also, most of the districts that hand counted ballots -- 20 of them
--seem to have made minor counting mistakes compared with the recounted
figures. But in a handful of cases, the coalition found, the city's
counters appear to have erred with whole stacks of the ballots,
creating discrepancies that, on a few occasions, exceeded 100 votes.
For instance, the Park City Magnet district seems to have missed
roughly 130 hand-counted votes for Malloy. And the Central High School
129-2 district appears to have given Foley 14 extra votes and
shortchanged Malloy by 87, the coalition reported.
At seven of the voting districts, it appeared that moderators
incorrectly handled the so-called "unknown votes" for Malloy, which
occurred when a voter filled in two bubbles for the candidate -- once
in the Democratic row, once in the row for the Working Family Party,
which also endorsed him. These votes should have gone to the Working
Family tally, but sometimes were excluded from the results entirely. In
the Read Middle School district, for example, it appeared that the
moderator excluded the 25 of these votes from the tallies.
In a half-dozen cases, the recount found discrepancies between the
results that polling stations reported to the head moderators and what
the head moderators reported to Hartford. These discrepancies occurred
while the head moderators were transposing the districts' results. One
example was the Longfellow School 129-03 district, whose moderator
reported 39 fewer votes for Malloy than what the head moderators
reported to Hartford.
That latter problem is troubling because Bridgeport's town clerk's
office was supposed to have identified at least some of those errors
before it was too late. By state law, the town clerk is required to
compare the district moderators' returns with the numbers the head
moderator sent to Hartford. The town clerk is given three weeks to find
any discrepancy, sort out the problem, and report amended figures
before the secretary of the state certifies the election.
This did not take place. For example, the moderator for the Roosevelt
School district reported 117 votes for Foley and 35 for Malloy in the
Working Family Party. The head moderators, however, reported to
Hartford 110 votes for Foley and 18 Working Family votes for Malloy.
(This particular district had no hand-counted votes.) Had the town
clerk's office identified this discrepancy -- and some of the handful
of others, which in one case provided for a 71-vote swing -- then the
city could have eliminated at least some of the miscounts before it was
too late.
"There were counting errors," concluded Luther Weeks, "yet there were
also accounting errors in transcribing, adding and including district
totals to provide official results to the state. These accounting
errors caused the greatest differences in the reported results."
OFFICIALS RESPOND
Bridgeport Mayor Bill Finch declined to offer an opinion as to how to
prevent such a mess from recurring or who should be held responsible,
citing the ongoing work of the five-member commission he charged with
investigating the matter.
"The public will was confirmed," he said, referring to the recount. "It
was in our self-interest to show the public that the outcome was
accurate, that the right candidate won -- the one who had the most
votes. That's the most important thing."
Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz repeated calls for the state
Legislature to mandate that municipalities order ballots for every
registered voter.
"I have great difficulty trying to require that registrars do things
that aren't in the law," she said. "That's why it has to be a law. If
that were the law on Nov. 2, the registrars would be subject to
complaint and fine for violating a statute."
Santa Ayala, Bridgeport's Democratic registrar of voters, said that
more training for moderators and poll workers may be needed. "They have
been trained, but it's like learning a foreign language," she said. "If
you don't practice it, it's not going to be as fresh in your mind --
even though we go over everything in a general formal way."
Moderators, she said, may be trained for hand counts, but not for the
scope of what Bridgeport underwent. And seizing Bysiewicz's claim that
hand counting might start the following morning, she said:
"Unfortunately, everyone is saying that now, but no one was saying that
that night when we were being rushed from every which side."
Were she to repeat the experience, she said, she would have sent the
poll workers home before the recount: "And I'll never allow them to
work with cameras in their faces and microphones on top of the table
where they're trying to do a tally," she said. "They were working under
super stressful circumstances and I'll never allow that to happen."
Both registrars have acknowledged the most serious blunder was their
decision not to order enough optical-scan ballots, a decision that had
a snowball effect in poll after poll Election Day.
Neither Malloy nor Tom Foley was shocked by the 1,500 errors found in
the recount of Bridgeport ballots. Both indicated that the state should
do whatever it can to make sure the shortage of ballots does not happen
again.
"There were persistent problems in Bridgeport and not just the last
time around with this election, but voting in the past," said Foley.
"They might want to bring in someone at the state level to help them.
When you have problems it calls into question the results and the
integrity of the election process and that shouldn't really be
happening in Connecticut."
For two days after the election, Foley insisted he had won a narrow
margin out of the 1.1 million-plus votes cast. Until Bridgeport's
numbers came in, Foley did indeed hold a slim lead. The outcome had
been earlier muddled when The Associated Press reported incomplete
numbers out of New Haven that failed to show all of Malloy's vote.
Roy Occhiogrosso, a top adviser for Malloy, who takes office Jan. 5,
agreed with Foley that mistakes were made in Bridgeport, but he said
they were inadvertent and that officials acted in good faith to sort
out the mess. Occhiogrosso said that Malloy would support rectifying
any official miscues that resulted in the mistakes.
Just who are the people counting the
ballots?
CT POST
Tim Loh, Staff Writer
Published: 05:53 p.m., Saturday, December 4, 2010
BRIDGEPORT -- Bill Bunnell is leaning over a blank worksheet, which is
lined with many boxes and many rows. With a freshly sharpened pencil in
hand, he evokes the image of a fifth-grader just before the big test.
Only Bunnell is 80. And for possibly the thousandth time of the day,
he's waiting to hear the word "Democrat." That means he'll draw a hash
mark on line number two. But if he hears "Republican," he'll make the
scratch on line number one. There are two other options, which
correspond with lines three and four.
Seated across the table, Ruth Karl grabs the first sheet of paper and
states "Democrat." She slides it left and reaches for the second. She
continues the process for several minutes. By the time she stops, her
words have prompted Bunnell into action 49 times. Content with this, he
lifts his head to find his supervisor frowning.
"I'd be satisfied if your box here had one more mark," David Anderson
says.
An extra mark would, in fact, square Bunnell's worksheet with that of
Cheryl Dunson, who's seated beside him. Then the team would move onto
their final stack of ballots for Thursday, and soon be headed home. But
what if Dunson's sheet is wrong and Bunnell's sheet is right? He seems
to mull the thought as he rotates his pencil. He eyes the eraser; he
eyes the graphite tip. Once more, Karl breaks the silence.
"We have to do it again, don't we?" she says.
Dunson whispers: "Yup."
For the dozens of volunteers inside City Hall Annex last week, pouring
through Bridgeport's ballots offered a rare glimpse under Election
Day's usually tightly clamped hood. The innards they encountered were
particularly complex given Bridgeport's bungled election last month,
when a shortage of ballots forced city officials to send photocopies to
every polling station; when poll workers toiled nearly to Wednesday's
sunup hand-counting the photocopied ballots; when head moderators
needed three days to untangle all the tallies and file official results
with Hartford.
When the city agreed to allow the Connecticut Post and a group of good
government groups to recount the gubernatorial race just before
Thanksgiving, the volunteer counters started signing up. They would be
arriving from every corner of the state -- from Greenwich to
Glastonbury, Deep River to Litchfield. (Bridgeport residents were
barred from taking part)
So who are these volunteers? Most of them are members of the
Connecticut Citizen Election Audit Coalition, which joins the League of
Women Voters in Connecticut, Common Cause, CTVoters.org and Connecticut
Citizen Action Group. Many of them have spent the past three years
observing the state's post-election audits, which only scrutinize
ballots that are read by optical scanning machines. Here was their
chance to do the recounting themselves.
During breaks, the counters often spoke of performing a civic duty: "If
your vote doesn't count," said David Anderson, "then does anything else
matter?" At times though, they were so swamped in voting sheets that
the civic duty seemed not so much about mastering the election medium
as fighting through the election tedium.
Anderson, who's 52, runs an epoxy manufacturing firm in Manchester. His
business partner, also his brother, was "somewhat sympathetic" to his
decision to skip work on Thursday and help with the recount. They would
have to postpone a meeting until Friday so he could do so. "He said,
`What's the big deal?'" Anderson told his counting team, of which
Bunnell, Dunson and Karl were members. "And I said, `Well it matters to
me!'"
He reshuffles the stack of 50 ballots and passes them to Karl, who
lives in Windham. When she's finished reading each vote aloud, everyone
cranes their necks to see if Bunnell's and Dunson's worksheets are
equal. They are. This affords Karl to lean back and yawn. Anderson
pulls a five-hour energy drink from his breast pocket. "Want some of
this?" he asks. "I use it every day at work about 2 o'clock. Gets me
through the afternoon."
Counting ballots is only one of the volunteers' tasks.
Others, like Laura Axthelm of Westport, were busy reading through voter
check-in lists -- those thick stacks of stapled pages that list
residents by street and alphabetically -- to make sure that everyone
who checked in as having voted had their ballots counted in the
results. It was a job that seemed to fit with Axthelm, a member of the
League of Women Voters.
"I have two buttons at home," she said Friday afternoon. "The first one
says `I care enough to vote.' The second one says `My vote counts.'"
Pounding her fist on the table, she added: "That's what we're doing
here. Making sure everyone's vote counts."
Her partner was Tom Flynn, a former deputy registrar of voters in
Fairfield. He watches as Axthelm bounces her pencil eraser down Page
One, landing for a moment on each voter who's checked off as having
voted at Hallen School.
"Thirty in-person voters," Axthelm stated. "And zero absentee."
Flynn put those numbers in box number one on two different sheets. Then
the pair went through 16 more pages of names, finding 650 in-person
voters and 13 absentees. This was nearly a perfect match with what the
moderator reported after the polls closed. Opening the next packet,
this one for Black Rock School, Axthelm asked, "Should we mix it up and
do the absentee ballots first?"
"Oh," Flynn answered. "That'll be exciting."
Bill Bunnell couldn't work Friday. He'd worked Monday, Tuesday and
Thursday, but on Friday he had to "catch up with the doctor
appointments." So when his team counted through the last stack of 50
ballots Thursday afternoon, he strapped his jacket on and consulted the
train schedule that had been poking out of his back pocket.
"It's less than an hour commute in the morning," he said, "if I get the
connection right." The connection is in New Haven, where he switches to
the Shore Line East train tracks and heads home to Madison.
This offers him several advantages. First, he can read through the
report he brought one morning, subtitled "Eva Waskell and the Election
Integrity Movement." Second, he doesn't have to deal with parking in
Bridgeport.
"And it's cheap as hell," he adds, heading for the door. "Round trip is
only $14." Then he stops.
"I mean it's $7; as a senior."
End in
sight as Bridgeport recount breaks for the weekend
Tim Loh, CT POST Staff Writer
Published: 09:44 p.m., Friday,
December 3, 2010
BRIDGEPORT -- On the sixth and
seventh days, the recount workers will finally rest.
But they'll return to City Hall
Annex on the eighth, Monday morning, and pick up where they left off --
tallying ballots from this city's 25th and final voting district,
comparing their numbers with the ones sent to Hartford last month and
allowing city officials one final crack at finding errors in the
recount process.
Then they'll be done.
"But first we're going to go over it
all with the city and see if there's anything they're not satisfied
with," explained Luther Weeks, executive director of the Connecticut
Citizen Election Audit Coalition, which is co-sponsoring the recount of
Bridgeport's gubernatorial race along with the Connecticut Post. "We'll
see if there's anything the registrars of voters want us to review, or
to review themselves."
The recount was undertaken after a
shortage of ballots on Nov. 2 left Bridgeport election workers having
to hand-count photocopied ballots and delayed reporting the city's
final tally until Nov. 5. That delay tossed the governor's race between
Democrat Dannel Malloy and Republican Tom Foley into limbo, until
Bridgeport's numbers gave Malloy the victory.
The recount does not affect the
outcome of the race, but city officials and good government groups have
supported the effort, saying it will bring some clarity to Bridgeport's
muddled results. Weeks
noted that recount volunteers -- although they're given more time and
rest than their Election Day counterparts -- also can make mistakes.
Even though the recount system is steeped in double- and
triple-checking, some mistakes in counting or transferring numbers
could sneak through onto Weeks' master tally sheet.
And if that happens, which is one
possible explanation if certain recount numbers disagree with the
city's totals, then the registrars ought to have the chance to show the
problem isn't theirs, Weeks said. That's how Friday ended, maybe.
While finalizing the recount numbers
from one district, Weeks compared his team's numbers for photocopied
ballots with the city's figures. He showed the comparison to Santa
Ayala, Bridgeport's Democratic registrar of voters. The numbers weren't
in alignment, so the two agreed to check for a recounting fault.
First, Weeks and his assistant,
Cheryl Dunson, president of the League of Women Voters of Connecticut,
checked that their master tally sheet -- which shows the district's
total results, broken down into the number of machine-read ballots and
hand-counted ballots -- matched perfectly the half-dozen or so working
tally sheets that were affixed to each stack of 50 photocopied ballots.
The stacks were located in the district's duffel bag, neatly
paper-clipped, with the worksheet on top. The tally sheets agreed.
So out came the ballots for another
recount.
"We're looking at the `Malloy for
Democrat' numbers," Dunson told four female counters, who were sitting
at the neighboring table. The statement distinguished the desired
tallies with the two other Malloy columns, one of which represented
voters who cast ballots for the Working Family Party, which also
endorsed Malloy.
The roughly 15 minutes of recounting
that followed yielded one hash mark being moved. It wasn't enough to
account for the difference between the recounted numbers and the city's
results.
"At this point," Weeks told Ayala,
"we're going to put these ballots back in the duffel bag. Would you
agree that our numbers are correct?"
Ayala thought for a second.
"I'd like to look at it again on
Monday," she said. "With some fresh eyes."
Going on now...
How the recount will take place
CT POST
Tim Loh, Staff Writer
Published: 07:25 p.m., Saturday, November 27, 2010
Election Day was a mess. Bridgeport's ballot shortage and the resulting
chaos is troubling, particularly with such a tight governor's race.
Winners have been certified, but we want another look at the ballots.
So on Monday, the Post's own recount will begin. It's no small task,
but we'll take as much time as we need. In the end, we'll compare
results with the city.
Who are the counters? How can I help?
The point man for the recount is Luther Weeks, the executive director
of the Connecticut Citizen Election Audit Coalition, which formed in
2007 after the state switched to optical-scanning voter machines.
Weeks hopes for between 30 and 40 volunteers each day at the recount,
and said Friday that he has about half of that manpower signed
up. Not just anyone can help. Carrying out such a sweeping
recount poses myriad challenges, so Weeks is relying mostly on members
of his coalition -- which includes the League of Women Voters of
Connecticut, Common Cause, Connecticut Citizens Action Group and
CTVotersCount.org -- to do so.
These volunteers typically monitor Connecticut's state-mandated audits,
which follow primaries and full elections, and then brief state
officials and the public on how effective the audits were. Now,
though, the members will conduct the audit themselves.
"We just don't have the time to work with everyone that might sign up,"
Weeks explained. "A lot of our observers have been involved in the
process one way or another and have experience. But we would love for
people to just become involved in the next audit situation."
Anyone interested in watching the recount is invited to come to the
City Hall Annex at 999 Broad St. What, exactly, are the counters
counting? The recount starts Monday from 1 p.m. to 7 p.m., and
will run through the week from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.
Throughout, counters will pore through every ballot cast in Bridgeport,
tallying anew the governor's race.In its official moderator's report
sent to the state, the city stated that 23,158 registered voters' names
were checked off at polling stations and that 22,185 votes for governor
were cast. That allotted Democrat Dannel Malloy 17,973 votes,
Republican Tom Foley 4,099 votes and the Independent Party's Thomas
Marsh 113 votes.
The recount will probe further, tallying the number of votes cast in
more than five categories, which include machine-read ballots,
photocopied ballots, provisional ballots, absentee ballots and
write-ins.
HOW WILL THE COUNTING WORK?
Here's a broad outline of how the recount will be carried out,
described by Weeks and Cheryl Dunston of the League of Women Voters.
The details are subject to change.
Volunteers will form several sets of teams responsible for calculating
votes, checking chains of custody, making judgments on questionable
ballots and supervising the entire operation. The volunteers may switch
among teams during the course of the week.
The process will kick off on Monday afternoon, when city officials
deliver several bags of ballots from the registrar's office in McLevy
Hall, located across the street from City Hall Annex.
Save for absentee and provisional ballots, which have their own bags,
each bag will contain all of the ballots from one of the city's 25
polling stations. Before the bags are opened, the chain-of-custody team
will check the numbered seal on the bag to make sure the bag hasn't
been opened without documentation since election week.
Meanwhile, the counters will form teams of four, each team with two
tables -- one for tallying, the other for storing a voting district's
ballots. Before tabulating, the team will place all of a district's
ballots in stacks of 25, making sure to sort out any "questionable"
ballots, misplaced write-ins, or unclear hand-counted ballots, the
processes for which are described below.
The counting teams will then start adding the stacks of 25 ballots at a
time. Returning with a stack to their first table, one member of the
team will read one ballot at a time, with a second looking on. The
third and fourth team members, seated across the table, will register
hash marks beneath each candidate's name. These two will compare
results when the stack is finished.
After a team is finished with an entire bag of ballots, the ballots
will be placed back in the bag, and a new seal on the bag. City
officials will return that bag to the registrar's office, eventually
bringing new bags to the recounting room. While counting teams will
typically cover an entire voting district as a unit, there may be times
when a bag is split between several teams, such as toward the end of a
day, when the teams hope to finish a voting district before everyone
heads home.
`QUESTIONABLE' BALLOTS
The term "questionable" refers here to the counters' uncertainty that a
machine actually read a ballot, not the counters' confusion over who
the voter intended to vote for. For example: a voter might have placed
a check mark or an "X" beside a candidate's name rather than filling in
the bubble. Generally, the machine isn't fooled by these mistakes and
registers the vote anyway. But not always.
There are other problems. Occasionally, a machine might break down. Or
a voter might make a more egregious error, such as circling a
candidate's name or scribbling the candidate's name across the ballot.
These ballots are unlikely to register. As a result, the counters sort
out the "questionable" ballots from the beginning, passing them to a
separate team that doles out votes based on their view of the voter's
intention.
HANDLING 'PHOTOCOPIED' BALLOTS
A similar logic applies to the photocopied ballots, all of which were
hand-counted after Election Day.
During the recount, whenever a photocopied ballot appears that is
improperly filled out, it will be sent to the team charged with
discerning voters' "intent." This also happened on Election Day, with
the moderators making the judgment call. The two readings may at times
be different, but Weeks expects that to happen infrequently. The
rest of the photocopied ballots will be tallied in the way described
above, with the teams making separate counts for how many photocopied
ballots there were at each voting district.
"Questionable" machine ballots and unclear photocopied ballots don't
bob up all too often, Weeks added: "It depends on who went to the
polls, but people are getting better at filling out the ballots."
HANDLING 'PROVISIONAL' and absentee BALLOTS
Provisional ballots are those filled out by people who either weren't
listed as registered voters on Election Day or who forgot to bring
identification to the polling district. The ballots were
separated then so that city officials could follow up on the voter's
status. Depending on the finding, the ballots were either confirmed or
tossed away.
Because of the review process, the provisional ballots aren't stored
with the rest of the ballots. As such, they -- and absentee ballots,
for a similar reason -- are bundled together. That's the only
difference about these ballots for the recounters, who will re-tally
each group.
WHAT IF these numbers are vastly different? are these numbers better?
The short answer is that nothing, legally, changes. But if the
recount produces a widely divergent outcome, then it may form a basis
for legal action by concerned parties. It could also expose problems
with the voting system, both state and citywide.
"I don't want to speculate until I see the results," Weeks said, "but
if there were significant differences, there would obviously be some
lessons or implications."
As for the primacy of the recount's numbers in the public eye, Weeks
would only say that these numbers will be "accurate."
"The recount will be observed, done deliberately by people who've
gotten a good night's sleep and who haven't just put in a 17-hour day
conducting an election," he said. "I'm not saying our numbers are going
to be more accurate than Bridgeport's. But that's what we're going to
find out."
And how long will this take? The recount is tentatively
scheduled to last five days, starting Monday from 1 p.m. to 7 p.m., and
resuming Tuesday through Friday from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. That may
not suffice, but Weeks thinks that it will. He's hoping things will
wrap up by Thursday. But he won't prognosticate.
"We'll just have to see what happens," he said. "We don't want to rush
it, especially in the beginning if we have kinks in the system, people
learning the process. We just have to make sure we get going at a good
fitting."
Foley concedes, finding
'no credible evidence' of fraud
Mark Pazniokas, CT MIRROR
November 8, 2010
Republican Tom Foley conceded the race for governor today to Democrat
Dan Malloy, ending Connecticut's closest gubernatorial contest in a
half century. Nearly a week after the polls closed and three days
after the last vote was counted in Bridgeport, Foley said he will not
seek a court-ordered recount, despite errors and irregularities in
Bridgeport.
Foley said a review of results over the weekend found "no credible
evidence of fraudulent voting." He called Malloy's victory
"conclusive," and he said he intended to call the Democrat after his
press conference.
"I'll be congratulating him," Foley said.
The 5,637-vote margin of victory was well outside the statutory trigger
for a mandatory recount: 2,000 votes or less. An automatic
recount is ordered only when the margin is 2,000, so Foley and his
lawyers have been examining the chaotic results in Bridgeport, where a
shortage of scannable ballots forced city officials to use thousands of
photocopied ballots that had to be counted by hand.
With the delivery Friday afternoon of results from Bridgeport, the
secretary of the state's office announced that Malloy won with 566,498
votes to 560,861 for Foley and 17,586 for Independent Tom Marsh.
The town-by-town results showed Malloy winning a three-way race for
governor with just under 50 percent of the vote. It was Malloy, 49.48
percent; Foley, 48.99 percent; and Marsh, 1.54 percent.
Despite Foley's decision, the Connecticut Republican Party has hired
Ross Garber, a prominent Republican attorney, to conduct an inquiry
into how the election was conducted in Bridgeport. Garber already
has written to the U.S. Attorney for Connecticut, David Fein, and Chief
State's Attorney Kevin Kane, asking them investigate, saying the GOP's
has found evidence of "significant deficiencies, irregularities and
improprieties."
Bridgeport's registrars ordered only 21,000 ballots in a city of 69,000
voters, assuming a record low turnout of 30 percent for a mid-term
election. The city ran out of ballots in 12 of 23 polling places.
The Connecticut Republican Party also is seeking town-by-town voting
results and records under the Freedom of Information Act, looking for
mistakes and discrepancies that could provide a reason to seek a
court-ordered recount. Healy said Sunday the party is gathering
as much information as possible, but the decision to concede or
challenge rests with Foley.
"Tom has been very thoughtful. He's been calm and cool," Healy said.
Malloy, who narrowly lost a Democratic primary for governor in 2006,
has told his staff to refrain from criticizing Foley's refusal to
concede. In his only public statement, Malloy has expressed
confidence he is the winner, but he added, "I appreciate and respect
Tom Foley's perspective."
Foley
to announce today whether
he'll concede or fight on
Mark Pazniokas, CT MIRROR
November 8, 2010
Republican Tom Foley said Sunday night he intends today to either
concede defeat or outline sufficient grounds to challenge results
showing Democrat Dan Malloy winning the race for governor.
"People will know where we're going," Foley said.
Foley is holding a press conference at 1 p.m. in Hartford to discuss
his lawyers' review of election results completed Friday that showed
Malloy winning by 5,637 votes - just under one-half of one
percent. An automatic recount is ordered only when the margin is
2,000, so Foley and his lawyers have been examining the chaotic results
in Bridgeport, where a shortage of scannable ballots forced city
officials to use thousands of photocopied ballots that had to be
counted by hand.
"I've been working pretty hard. We had a pretty big operation going
around," Foley said of the examination of the election results. "I've
been pretty involved as a candidate."
With the delivery Friday afternoon of results from Bridgeport, the
secretary of the state's office announced that Malloy won with 566,498
votes to 560,861 for Foley and 17,586 for Independent Tom Marsh.
The town-by-town results showed Malloy winning a three-way race for
governor with just under 50 percent of the vote. It was Malloy, 49.48
percent; Foley, 48.99 percent; and Marsh, 1.54 percent.
The Connecticut Republican Party also is seeking town-by-town voting
results and records under the Freedom of Information Act, looking for
mistakes and discrepancies that could provide a reason to seek a
court-ordered recount. But the primary focus remains on
Bridgeport, said Chris Healy, the Republican state chairman.
"What we've concluded is the operation was consistently bad and
consistently outside the law that required better care and custody of
these ballots," Healy said.
Bridgeport ordered only 21,000 ballots for nearly 70,000 registered
voters, betting on a record-low turnout of 30 percent. Half the polling
places ran short, forcing the city to use the photocopied ballots. At
the request of Democrats, a judge also ordered the polls to stay open
an extra two hours. The late-cast ballots were segregated. If an
appellate court rules them invalid, it only affects about 100 votes.
Photocopied ballots cast at the JFK School were not counted Tuesday
night, as required by law, after a key polling worker fell ill. The 336
ballots were placed in a sealed bag and opened Thursday night to be
counted. If the votes are invalidated, Malloy still wins by a margin
that does not trigger a recount. The question Sunday was has
Foley's campaign found wider problems? He declined to say.
Healy acknowledged that the Republicans need to find more than
discrepancies. They must find irregularities of a scale that raise
doubts about the outcome.
“If we added it all up with all the mistakes, would it affect the
outcome of the election? I think that is a reasonable way to look at
it,” Healy said.
In 2006, Republicans discovered that 300 more votes were cast in
Norwich than voters had been checked off as having voted. The
congressional race that year was settled by just 83 votes.
Was it sloppiness by the staff? Or was it evidence of fraud?
"How do you find out how they voted? It is an alarming thing. Those are
the things that drive you crazy," Healy said. Ultimately, Republicans
did not make an issue of the discrepancy.
Healy said the party is gathering as much information as possible, but
the decision to concede or challenge rests with Foley.
"Tom has been very thoughtful. He's been calm and cool," Healy said.
Malloy, who narrowly lost a Democratic primary for governor in 2006,
has told his staff to refrain from criticizing Foley's refusal to
concede.
In his only public statement, Malloy has expressed confidence he is the
winner, but he added, "I appreciate and respect Tom Foley's
perspective."
Independent seen as
spoiler in governor's race
Ken Dixon, CT POST Staff Writer
Published: 06:34 p.m., Saturday, November 6, 2010
Tom Marsh, the Independent Party candidate for governor, may
have siphoned away enough votes from Republican Tom Foley to give the
governor's race to Democrat Dannel Malloy. Marsh, the Chester
first selectman - a long-time Republican before changing parties this
year - doesn't believe he's the spoiler of the 2010 gubernatorial
campaign.
But Republican State Central Committee Chairman Chris Healy said
Saturday that it's as plain as the numbers on the page: Marsh, 17,586
votes; Foley's deficit to Democrat Dannel Malloy, 5,637.
"I don't like it very much, but what are you gonna do?" Healy said in a
phone interview. "If people were responding to his message, it was very
similar to Tom Foley's message, so certainly that's a sad conclusion of
this campaign."
For months during the early part of the gubernatorial campaign this
year, Marsh ran as a Republican, before he changed parties and became
the Independent Party's standard bearer for the state's highest office.
"Tom being a Republican first selectman of Chester and talking about
lifting the burden off local communities and cutting the size of
government certainly had an impact on the election, I would say, to Tom
Foley's detriment" Healy said. "But he got on the ballot legitimately
and he campaigned legitimately and these are some of the `what ifs?' of
any close election."
Marsh said in a Saturday afternoon interview that he has received a few
e-mails from Republicans who believe Foley would have won if Marsh
didn't take away votes. But Marsh doesn't agree with the premise. He
thinks he took away support equally from Foley and Malloy.
"You can't just cherry pick," he said. "I'm quite certain it was an
even split. I know for certain I took away Malloy votes in Chester,
where I took 16 percent of the town vote. Everybody in town, through
this whole thing, has been good about it."
What Foley thinks
Foley, in a phone interview Saturday, said that in some respects, Marsh
was closer to Malloy in campaign proposals, particularly the need to
raise taxes.
"I don't know the answer to the question of whether he took support
away from me," Foley said.
"When we looked at our internal polling, it looked like Tom was taking
support away from Dan and that he was not hurting me as much as he was
hurting Dan."
Foley's polls showed Marsh shifting away support from Democrats at a
rate of three-to-one, compared to Republicans.
"I was proud of the fact that I beat Tom Marsh in his hometown," Foley
said with a laugh.
In Chester, Marsh got 261 votes, Malloy 765 and Foley 617.
Marsh did best in his running mate Cicero Booker's hometown of
Waterbury, collecting 584 votes. The Independent Party duo topped 300
votes in Wallingford, Milford, Manchester and Bristol. They scored 113
votes in Bridgeport. Roy Occhiogrosso, Malloy's campaign adviser,
said Saturday that there's no way to really find out where the damage
was done without actually talking to those who cast ballots for Marsh.
"Some votes would have gone to Tom and some would have gone to Dan,"
Occhiogrosso said.
"Some people might not have voted at all. It's always speculative
unless you talk to the people who voted for Marsh. All of the polling
data indicated a close race and none of the polls even included Marsh.
Dan was up a couple points until the end, when he was down a couple
points. Dan might have won by more in Marsh hadn't run."
Marsh anticipated being crushed on Election Night. He and Booker,
a Waterbury alderman, received only a fraction of the more than a
million votes split nearly equally by Foley and Malloy. But the
17,586 votes allow the Independent Party to avoid the state's prolonged
petitioning process in 2012.
Marsh, who had to collect more than 7,000 signatures this year to reach
the ballot, said he believes the local Chester Democratic and
Republican leaders were nice enough to only put up a few lawn signs of
his better-financed opponents.
What a vote cost?
While Malloy participated in the state's public financing program and
had $8.7 million to spend, Foley invested about $11 million of his own
fortune and spent about $12.5 million, according to the latest filings
with the State Elections Enforcement Commission posted Saturday. Marsh
raised and spent about $10,000, spending about 57 cents per vote.
Malloy collected 566,498 votes, at a cost of about $15.36 per vote.
Foley got 560,861 votes at a cost of $22.29 per ballot.
Marsh's overall aim was to get 1-percent of the total votes cast to
give the group minor-party status and automatic-ballot lines in the
next election. That target of about 11,000 was easily reached.
"The election more than met the objectives set early in the campaign.
The Independent Party qualified for ballot status in every
Constitutional office race, as well as numerous state legislative
races," he said.
"We now set about the work of building on that success and expanding
our grassroots organization.
"I congratulate Dan Malloy on his hard- fought victory and wish him
well as he begins the task of addressing the significant challenges
facing Connecticut," Marsh said in a statement.
Marsh was crowded out of the race for the GOP gubernatorial nomination
by better-known and wealthier candidates including Lt. Gov. Michael
Fedele of Stamford and Foley, who won the primary.
Foley
refuses to concede; says 'it may
well take a recount'
CT MIRROR
Keith M. Phaneuf, Arielle Levin Becker
November 5, 2010
Republican gubernatorial candidate Tom Foley refused to concede the
election Friday and continued to cast doubt on vote counts that showed
Democrat Dan Malloy winning the race by more than 5,000 votes.
"It may well take a recount to get an accurate count," Foley said
during a mid-morning press conference in the lobby of the Hartford
building that houses the office of his campaign's counsel, former U.S.
Attorney Kevin O'Connor. "There's no automatic recount, but there may
well be plenty of basis for a recount."
Though Foley stopped short of pledging to wage a legal challenge, he
said his campaign has identified several irregularities and improper
procedures that it wants to research further.
"Until we know what an accurate vote count is, we are not going to make
any decisions," he said.
But Foley also told reporters that he was less confident that he would
win the election than he was a few days ago, saying that vote totals
being reported in Bridgeport were less favorable to him than his
campaign had anticipated.
"But I am determined, and I think the voters of Connecticut, the
citizens of Connecticut, should be as determined that we have an
accurate count of how they voted on Tuesday," he said.
What will make him confident in the results?
"We're not sure what it's going to take to have confidence," he said.
"The voters of Connecticut will benefit if I can say with confidence
that I believe in these results."
Because both candidates have formed transition teams, Foley said taking
another couple days to parse the results would not hold up either side
from preparing to take office.
"We are being laughed at around this country," he said. "I've even had
calls from [overseas] about this vote and what our public officials
have done here. I don't want to create a situation where a result is
declared here and then it's changed. That could be even worse than
where we are."
Malloy issued a statement Friday afternoon reasserting that he is "100
percent confident" he has won by "a margin comfortably outside what is
required for a recount," but added that he and running mate Nancy Wyman
appreciate and respect Foley's perspective.
"As is the case with more than a few other races in other states across
the country, this race is taking a few extra days to play out.
Nancy
and I think it should be allowed to play out in an orderly fashion and
we support the process established by law," Malloy wrote.
"We're as anxious as everyone else is to get the final numbers," he
added. "We're also continuing our intensive efforts to create an
administration that is up and running, and ready for the challenges
awaiting us when we take office on January 5. To do otherwise would be
irresponsible."
Foley took particular aim Friday at Secretary of the State Susan
Bysiewicz, who released unofficial statewide results on Wednesday that
showed Malloy ahead by more than 3,100 votes and called Malloy the
"apparent winner" -- all while thousands of votes remained uncertain.
Foley noted that Bysiewicz's office altered the final vote count
reported on its website for Torrington on Thursday to reflect about
2,000 additional votes for Foley.
The GOP nominee's campaign also objected to the prolonged delay in
getting final results from the state's largest city. Bridgeport
officials did not provide final numbers until about 5 a.m. Friday, more
than 50 hours after the polls closed and 35 hours after the results
were due, by law, to Bysiewicz's office.
"I think it is very unfortunate that the citizens of Connecticut had to
wait three days to get even preliminary results," Foley said.
"Connecticut deserves better from its public officials."
And Bysiewicz's office still hadn't received the Bridgeport results by
late Friday morning, according to a written statement from spokesman Av
Harris, who added that the office would spend considerable time
reviewing them -- once received -- before reporting the totals.
"As of 11:30 a.m. we still have not received the return from
Bridgeport," Harris wrote. "Once the return is received by our office,
the data will be entered to our computerized database. Then the
result
will be tabulated. Then the figures will be double- and
triple-checked
to make sure any errors are eliminated. When we are confident
that we
have a complete and accurate election result, then we will release it
to you. Secretary Bysiewicz will not have anything to say until
then.
I appreciate your patience."
Foley said his campaign would seek a meeting with Bridgeport election
officials to review all of that city's election results, adding that it
also would invite the Malloy campaign to participate.
On Thursday, Foley's campaign raised questions about the validity of
the ballot count in Bridgeport, particularly about a bag of ballots
that weren't counted for two days after polls closed Tuesday night.
"It is unclear where these ballots originated, where they have been for
the last two days, and whether they are still valid ballots," Foley
said in statement released by his campaign Thursday.
But it turned out the bag had been sealed by a polling place moderator
after a poll worker fell ill and couldn't participate in counting the
ballots Tuesday. It was opened Thursday night and the ballots -- like
the rest of the Bridgeport vote--overwhelmingly favored Malloy.
Foley's running mate, Danbury Mayor Mark Boughton, told reporters
Thursday afternoon that there was no need to declare a winner while
vote counts were still in flux.
Boughton said it would make sense for Bysiewicz's office to double- and
triple-check numbers coming from moderators. He said he believed the
winner could be determined in the next day or two.
"Let's take our time folks, let's slow down a little bit, let's get it
right," said Boughton, who expressed concern about Bridgeport workers
who had been up for 36 hours and were counting ballots.
Bysiewicz spokesman Av Harris said the office had two teams
double-checking and triple-checking vote totals Thursday and corrected
figures on the website as necessary. The final corrections were made at
noon or shortly after, he said, and everything on the website reflected
up-to-date figures.
Late
Connecticut Governor Ballots
Favor Democrat
NYTIMES
By DAVID W. CHEN
November 5, 2010
Dannel P. Malloy, the Democratic former mayor of Stamford, inched ever
closer on Friday morning to being declared the winner over Thomas C.
Foley, the Republican candidate, in their bitter and bizarre battle to
become the next governor of Connecticut.
In an early morning news conference, the mayor of Bridgeport, Bill
Finch, declared that his city, after myriad delays and embarrassing
problems, had finished counting all of its ballots. And the result, he
told reporters, was that Mr. Malloy had 17,800 votes, and Mr. Foley
4,075 votes — a margin that unofficially would give Mr. Malloy a
5,000-vote lead statewide.
The vote count, Mr. Finch said, did not include the roughly 100 ballots
that were cast after 8 p.m., when a state judge allowed 12 polling
sites to stay open an extra two hours because of a lack of ballots. But
in the latest revelation that has made Connecticut an electoral
laughingstock this year, Mr. Finch also noted that the vote did include
336 ballots that were found, unopened, in a bag at a polling site.
The ballots were scheduled to be taken to Hartford later Friday morning
by State Police, and delivered to Susan Bysiewicz, the secretary of
state, who is the state’s top election official. She is then expected
to make an announcement later declaring Mr. Malloy’s victory.
Of course, if the last four days are any indication, one never knows
what may go awry.
Ever since the polls closed on Tuesday night — or, more precisely, ever
since the polls closed two hours later than normal in Bridgeport
because of ballot troubles — Mr. Malloy and Mr. Foley have played
political chicken over who will actually become the state’s 88th
governor.
The two were separated, it would seem, by a few thousand votes. But
beyond that, voters across the state were experiencing symptoms of
political whiplash, given all the confusion and contradictions over the
past three days.
“I’m hoping that Connecticut is not becoming Florida,” said Thomas J.
D’Amore Jr., a political consultant who was chief of staff to Gov.
Lowell P. Weicker Jr. “Or California. For all of the ribbing that
California takes with so-called Governor Moonbeam, he is beginning to
make California look like the Land of Steady Habits. At least they seem
to know who they’ve elected to office.”
State and local election officials managed to add to the chaos on
Thursday. At first, Ms.Bysiewicz declared that she would have the
official results at noon. But that was delayed, and then delayed again,
when state officials learned that a Bridgeport election official had
gone home to take a nap only to be summoned by a police officer to
return to work.
The drama, perhaps predictably, was prolonged when election officials
said there were too many ballots from Bridgeport to be counted before
the end of the business day. The work would resume on Friday.
Some officials criticized Ms. Bysiewicz, a Democrat who had once been
considered the leading contender for governor, before opting to run for
attorney general, only to be disqualified by a state court. She, in
turn, blamed Bridgeport officials.
Regardless of the results, Republicans said they expected Mr. Foley, a
wealthy financier who spent $10 million of his own money on the race,
to explore every legal option.
“I’m sure there’ll be lively litigation over it,” Ms. Bysiewicz said on
a radio program Wednesday.
The first sign of trouble came on Election Day, when officials in
Bridgeport, the state’s largest city, ran out of ballots a few hours
before the polls closed at 8 p.m. They had been banking on low turnout
and did not order more. So Ms. Bysiewicz, over the objections of
Republicans, persuaded a state judge to extend voting hours at 12
Bridgeport polling locations until 10 p.m.
Mr. Foley led the returns most of the night. But Mr. Malloy then
declared victory, sort of, in a speech after 1 a.m. Not to be outdone,
Mr. Foley declared victory, too, and then said he was going to bed.
On Wednesday, Ms. Bysiewicz declared that Mr. Malloy was indeed the
winner, by 3,103 votes, unofficially, based on information provided by
election officials in every town. But Mr. Foley was having none of it.
Declaring that his own numbers indicated that he had won, he even
called a radio program on Wednesday, when Ms. Bysiewicz was on as a
guest, and chastised her.
“It was a bit out of character for him,” said Richard Foley, a former
Republican Party chairman in Connecticut, who has known Thomas Foley
for 20 years (they are not related). “He is not given to flights of
fancy. This was not his normal M.O.”
Mr. Malloy, hoping to give his candidacy an aura of inevitability, held
a defiant news conference later on Wednesday in Hartford, and announced
a transition team, led by a former official in the last Democratic
administration to run the state, in the 1980s. Not to be outdone, Mr.
Foley announced his own transition team, led by a utilities executive
and a former state representative.
By Wednesday night, the story took another twist. The Associated Press,
which had originally called the race for Mr. Malloy, withdrew its
declaration and said Mr. Foley held the upper hand.
By Thursday, though, The A.P. had revised its numbers, based on more
information from New Haven, yet another Democratic stronghold.
Gary L. Rose, chairman of the government department at Sacred Heart
University in Fairfield, said the confusion made him wonder, “What is
happening to the quality of our politics in this state?”
“Bring back the bosses,” Dr. Rose said, half-jokingly. “They sure
stabilized things, and things ran better.”
Connecticut voters, meanwhile, could barely keep up. Over burgers and
beer at the White Horse Country Pub and Restaurant in Marble Dale,
patrons watched big screen TVs that announced periodically that there
was still no answer.
Michael Garrity of Washington, who classified himself as “an unemployed
salesman who would vote for Mickey Mouse as long as he was a Democrat,”
said he voted for Mr. Malloy and “was overjoyed” when he heard on the
radio that he had won.
“But then I heard he didn’t win,” Mr. Garrity said. “And my heart sunk.
Then I heard he won again. Then didn’t win.
“It’s just too weird. Now I’m just sitting here drinking wine, and
waiting.”
WESTON FORUM HAS
THE BEST
REPORT HERE
On Wednesday morning, 9:30am, the numbers in our local races showed
these
interim results: updates an hour later from Connecticut POST
added in 135th for Easton and the 26th for Ridgefield
--------------------------------
--------------------------------------
WESTON FORUM ELECTION NEWS
WATCH RESULTS ONLINE
TONIGHT AT CT-N
CHECK OUT THE BALLOT
HERE
RESULTS IN WESTON POSTED AT THIS
LINK AS SOON AS THEY ARE AVAILABLE FOR ALL OFFICES ON THE BALLOT
FROM THE CT
SECRETARY OF THE STATE: Statement
of Vote page here
Lavielle is probable winner in state
rep contest
Wilton Bulletin
Written by Jeannette Ross
Tuesday, 02 November 2010 20:47
Wilton Republicans have declared Gail Lavielle the winner of the race
for state representative in the 143rd District. “I hope that today
marks a new change of course for our district,” Ms. Lavielle said. “I
can’t think of a group of ladies and gentlemen I’d want to represent
more.”
...The Wilton Republican Town Committee did not have totals for Norwalk
District B, saying only Ms. Lavielle won that district by 38 votes.
“We have a new state representative,” said RTC Chairman Al Alper. “She
worked very hard for that.”
“It was a hard-fought race,” Peggy Reeves said. “I want to congratulate
my opponent for winning in Wilton. I have loved serving the people of
the 143d District.
“It was a difficult year to be an incumbent. I wish my opponent the
very best of luck.”
------------------------------------
Click here to go to the LWVCT Online Voter's Guide
- no state-wide LWV debates for Governor and
possibly for U.S. Senator, either.
CONNECTICUT ELECTION SEASON
2010: This year we will stick to strictly reverse chronological
order, by office
DEATH PENALTY?
For example, altered
historical fact issue.
And there is always the shadow of Washington, D.C.
"mid-term election"
curse...
Did someone mention
Campaign
Finance Reform or De-form? Which campairns are we paying
for? Tea Party influence in CT?
Health Care in CT?
- EDUCATION FUNDING: For
Weston, a mostly non-issue
since we don't get much, but perhaps one the next Governor and
Legislature needs to consider.
2010 Primary story:
FROM THE SECRETARY OF THE STATE:
Statement
of Vote page here
OUR UNOFFICIAL TALLY: Number of votes cast total/percent of
registered voters, Weston - est.
6700 registered voters and 3851 voted = 57%
W I N N E R S I N W E S T O N
Governor/Lieutenant Governor - FOLEY/BOUGHTON
United States Senator - BLUMENTHAL
Representative in Congress - HIMES
State Senators 26th &28th Districts BOUCHER26 & MCKINNEY28
House 135th - SHABAN
Secretary of the State - FARRELL
Treasurer - WRIGHT
Comptroller - ORCHULLI
Attorney General - JEPSEN
Judge of Probate - O'GRADY
Registrar of Voters - MORAN (2053) & SMITS (1917)
V O T I N G D I
S T R I C T O N E (Most of Weston - the
State Senate District #28)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
V O T I N G D I S T R
I C T T W O (the smaller area in the southern
part of town, State Senate District #26)
John
Shaban and Carl Bernstein
debate - 2 lawyers go at it.
Weston candidates square off at debate
Weston FORUM
Written by Liz Skalka
Wednesday, 27 October 2010 11:42
More job growth, a lower deficit and a more efficient state
government — while the goals are common, how to achieve them is still a
matter of debate between candidates vying for the 135th House District.
Carl Bernstein and John Shaban running in the district, which includes
all of Weston, Easton, and part of Redding, along with candidates in
Redding’s other House district (the 2nd), squared off in a Redding
League of Women Voters debate at the Redding Community Center last
Wednesday, Oct. 20, responding to questions submitted by audience
members about taxes, state government, education and transportation.
Weston’s Carl Bernstein, a Democrat, and Redding’s John Shaban, a
Republican, are jockeying for the 135th District seat being vacated by
John Stripp, who is not seeking re-election. Gabriel Rossi is also on
the ballot as the Green Party-endorsed candidate, but he did not
participate in the Oct. 20 debate.
The 2nd District candidates at the debate were Bethel Democrat Jason
Bartlett, the incumbent, and his challenger, Republican Dan Carter,
also of Bethel. The district includes parts of Danbury, Bethel and
Redding.
While they were able to reach a consensus on some issues, opinions
about others spanned differing personal and party ideologies.
Candidates were first asked by league moderator Charlotte Garrell to
describe themselves and why they chose to run for office.
“As a citizen, I have an obligation to serve my community,” said Mr.
Shaban. Mr. Shaban is a Greenwich law firm partner. He’s chairman
of Redding’s Water Pollution Control Commission and vice chairman of
that town’s Zoning Commission.
Mr. Bernstein, a New York litigation attorney, touted his active
involvement in the Democratic Party.
“This is an extension of what I believe is my ability to serve,” said
Mr. Bernstein, who noted he once ran for the New York State Assembly.
Revenue and deficit
The candidates responded to a question that broadly addressed taxes,
revenue, the state’s deficit and state government.
Mr. Bernstein said he’s reluctant to raise taxes, but would consider it
a solution of “last resort.”
He advocated “making the state as job-friendly as possible” through
special economic zones. He also suggested working with universities to
keep employment within the state. In terms of improving state
government, it must be streamlined in order to be more effective and
user-friendly, he said.
Mr. Shaban said his focus is on “people and business — that’s it.”
“Would I raise taxes?” he asked. “That’s like bleeding the patient …
You can’t raise taxes and expect businesses and jobs to come back.”
He seeks to create a “predictable and stable environment” for
businesses to grow. Mr. Shaban added that government size and spending
has increased more than the population has.
Republicans can’t talk about slashing and burning without stating
specifics, Mr. Bernstein responded.
Mr. Bartlett agreed with Mr. Bernstein that parts of state government
need to be consolidated. He suggested merging agencies such as Homeland
Security and Public Safety. State employees should also make
concessions, he said.
Education cost sharing
The candidates were asked about their views on the Education Cost
Sharing grant, the state’s largest funding program for kindergarten
through grade 12.
“I see my job as getting every dollar Easton-Redding is entitled to,”
Mr. Bernstein said.
“Let’s keep dollars here, don’t send them up to Hartford,” Mr. Shaban
said. He added, “The focus should be on hiring talented people.
Teachers first, bells and whistles second.”
SustiNet
Another discussion centered around SustiNet, the state health care plan
for Connecticut. In 2009, the SustiNet law established a board to
recommend details and plans for implementation to the legislature by
January 2011.
Mr. Shaban said the program has some great ideas but “has the potential
to put government in the insurance business.” We will be “nickel, dimed
and quartered to death with government-run insurance,” Mr. Shaban added.
SustiNet is “critical to help Connecticut and those people with
pre-existing conditions,” said Mr. Bernstein, who does not see it as
government entering the health care business.
Business
Candidates were asked specifically about business regulations, but the
discussion expanded to how business should be grown.
Mr. Shaban said taxes and regulations are speed bumps. “Regulations are
just part of the problem. The biggest problem is taxes,” he said.
Mr. Bernstein is in favor of business enterprise zones, but added the
state needs better public transportation and highway infrastructure to
really have businesses thrive.
“We have a great opportunity to grow business here and I’d like to take
more advantage of it,” Mr. Bernstein said.
“I think we’re all saying the same thing, but the devil’s in the
details,” Mr. Shaban said. Mr. Shaban was also in favor of enterprise
zones in Bethel, Danbury and Georgetown.
Other topics
Minimum wage: Mr. Shaban agreed with the idea that the only reason to
lower minimum wage would be to encourage business growth in enterprise
zones, but added that minimum wage adjustments would not solve
employment issues. Mr. Bernstein said he was shocked with what
Republicans had suggested, and described minimum wage as a “safety net
to live with some degree of decency in the state.”
Danbury Branch rail line: Mr. Shaban said he would be in favor of
making improvements to Metro-North’s Danbury branch to help revive
industry along the rail line. Mr. Bernstein said capacity should be
increased.
Agriculture: Mr. Shaban said state agriculture should be run like any
other business — with an eye toward profit — while Mr. Bernstein said
though he hadn’t given a lot of thought to agriculture, he agreed it
should be profitable.
Closing remarks
“I understand what concerns people,” Mr. Shaban said. “I’m done sitting
on the sidelines.”
Mr. Bernstein said, “I want to do everything to streamline government
and bring an effective voice to government.”
This was the first and only debate among the candidates.
There is a wide division between making laws and following them.
Harry Reid aide off campaign after
reports of sham marriage
YAHOO
By Rachel Rose Hartman
Tue Oct 26, 9:07 am ET
An aide for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) covered up an
illegal seven-year marriage to a Lebanese national who was the subject
of an Oklahoma City Joint Terror Task Force investigation, Jana Winter
reported Monday night for Fox News.
Reid's office told Fox on Monday night that Reid had not known of the
sham and that the aide, Hispanic-media press secretary Diana Tejada, is
no longer with the campaign.
Reid spokesman Jim Manley also noted that the alleged conduct took
place several years before Tejada had worked for Reid.
Tejada reportedly admitted to receiving payment in exchange for
fraudulently marrying Bassam Mahmoud Tarhini in 2003 so he could attain
permanent U.S. residency. She also reportedly lied to federal
immigration and FBI agents and submitted false federal documents to the
Department of Homeland Security.
Tarhini was deported for the fraudulent marriage in March 2010, but no
charges were filed against Tejada.
The news broke just one week before Reid faces the fight of his
political career against Republican nominee Sharron Angle.
Manley, in a statement to Fox News, suggested the story is "a
desperation measure by partisan Republicans, who have stooped to
slinging mud about junior staffers to score points in the waning days
of [Angle's] campaign."
Candidates
for governor differ over state DEP staffing
Keith M. Phaneuf
October 18, 2010 (we just noticed this today)
NEW HAVEN -- Connecticut's gubernatorial candidates split Monday over
how to make the environmental watchdog process more efficient without
putting the state's populace and natural resources at risk.
During a Yale University forum sponsored by the Connecticut Fund for
the Environment and nearly a dozen other environmental advocacy groups,
Democrat Dan Malloy stopped short of pledging more staff for the
Department of Environmental Protection, but questioned whether it could
improve responsiveness with current employee levels.
Meanwhile, both Republican Tom Foley and Independent Party nominee Tom
Marsh said they believe that with appropriate leadership, the DEP could
do its job with staffing at current levels or below.
The format for Monday's forum, which took place before about 150 guests
in the university's School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, also
pressed the candidates about clean energy, brownfield remediation, open
space preservation and clean water issues.
"Whatever we do (with the DEP) has to address appropriate levels of
staffing," Malloy said, adding that while Connecticut's next governor
must improve the agency's ability to process permit applications in an
efficient and timely manner, there are complaints within the department
that it lacks sufficient staff to do so now.
The DEP, which has been overseen by Republican governors since 1995,
has been "purposely underfunded" for years, Malloy said, adding this
problem cannot be ignored in the quest to create new jobs.
"It's fundamentally important that we hold ourselves to high standards,
and timeliness is one of those standards," he said, adding that state
government needs to focus on creating jobs and operating government
more efficiently. "We have to understand that all of the things we want
to do in Connecticut ... are going to require that we change how we do
business, but not that we sacrifice the environment."
But Foley said the DEP has both a reputation and a track record of
responding slowly to permit applications from the business community,
and the problem doesn't stem from staffing issues.
When asked by National Public Radio journalist Nancy Cohen, the forum's
moderator, to address a nearly 10 percent staffing reduction the DEP
has faced since 2003, Foley said "I have complaints all over state
government that there aren't enough staff. But that's attitudinal. We
simply need to do more with less."
Foley added that he has heard complaints from businesses that
application requests have taken close to two years to process, a delay
that is driving businesses and jobs away. "No permit requires two
years. I can promise you that's not a responsive organization," the GOP
nominee said, adding that "I really think the answer is better
management, better leadership, setting goals."
Foley, who has been a strong advocate of privatization as a means to
reduce state spending, refused to rule out employing private
contractors to handle environmental inspections currently being
performed by state employees. "We should get the best deal we can," he
said. "If we can get the same level or quality for less, we have an
obligation to the taxpayers and the citizens to turn it over to a
private contractor."
Marsh echoed the other two candidates in calling for a "systemic change
in how we do business," but with a $3.3 billion deficit forecast for
the fiscal year that begins in less than nine months, he would not rule
out asking the DEP to do more with less.
Marsh did say, though, that the legislature and Gov.M. Jodi Rell made a
"deplorable" decision in propping up more than $950 million in spending
in this fiscal year's budget with borrowing to be paid off with a
surcharge on state utility bills, and by raiding about 35 percent
of a
clean energy investment fund.
"We have to bring integrity back to our budgeting process," he said,
adding that while the next governor cannot "wave a magic wand" and
reverse this and other raids on special funds immediately, that would
be a priority in a Marsh administration.
The format for Monday's event was designed by the Fund for the
Environment to force the candidates to focus solely on issues and to
eliminate the prospect of angry exchanges.
Each candidate was brought separately into the auditorium in Kroon
Hall, given five minutes for an opening statement, and then invited to
participate in a 15-minute discussion with Cohen, who specializes in
environmental issues.
The three candidates did reach common ground in several areas,
emphasizing remediation of polluted, former industrial sites, typically
referred to as brownfields, to both spur job growth and protect the
environment.
Malloy and Foley also agreed that while they support investments in
fuel cells and other environmentally friendly or "green" technologies,
they oppose the development of new wind turbine stations on Long Island
Sound.
Both major party candidates also said they believe state government
should continue with an open space preservation program, even amidst a
large state budget deficit, calling it a top environmental priority and
a sound financial investment.
EX-REP. SHAYS GOES ON THE AIR AGAINST
HIMES
CT MIRROR
Tuesday, Oct. 12 10:35 a.m.
Ex-Rep. Chris Shays is back on the airwaves in Connecticut's 4th
congressional district, even if he's not on the ballot. Shays has cut a
TV ad for state Sen. Dan Debicella, a Republican from Shelton who is
trying to oust freshman Democratic Rep. Jim Himes.
Himes narrowly wrested the seat from Shays in 2008, and he's tried to
adopt Shays' independent label in his showdown with Debicella. The new
Shays ad takes direct aim at that strategy.
"Voting with Nancy Pelosi 94 percent of the time does not meet my
test for independence, and I can't imagine it meets yours," Shays says,
as side-by-side photos of Himes and Pelosi appear on the screen before
returning to Shays sitting in a comfy living-room setting, where he
makes a pitch for Debicella.
Thanks to HIMES campaign for list - not an endorsement of candidate,
however!
AARP Debate
October 13, 2010 at 10:30AM
Bridgeport Holiday Inn
1070 Main Street, Bridgeport
Please call HIMES HQ for tickets: (203) 987-3333 (Thanks to e-mail from
HIMES, we have this list)
World Affairs Forum Debate
October 21, 2010 at 7:00PM
Downtown Stamford Holiday Inn
700 E. Main Street, Stamford
No tickets, first come-first served
CLOSEST
TO WESTON!!!
League of Women Voters Debate
October 24, 2010 at 4:00PM
Wilton High School, Clune Auditorium
395 Danbury Road, Wilton
No tickets, first come-first served
Bridgeport Regional Business Council
Debate
October 26, 2010 at 8:00AM
Housatonic Community College
900 Lafayette Blvd., Bridgeport
Please rsvp (203) 335-3800, Walk-ins welcome as space permits
Business Council of Fairfield County
Debate
October 28, 2010 at 9:00AM
UCONN Stamford
1 University Place, Stamford
Advance registration is REQUIRED
$25 for members, $35 for non-members
Greater Norwalk Chamber of Commerce
Debate
October 28, 2010 at 12:00PM
Norwalk DoubleTree Inn
789 Connecticut Ave, Norwalk
Advance registration is REQUIRED, please call: 203-866-2521
Worry and surprise, born of
uncertainty. We'll have the answer soon.
September 29, 2010 Q-Poll stirs unease in Democrat's U.S. Senate
camp and pleasant surprise for Republican candidate for Governor.
Latest Quinnipiac Poll: Tom
Foley Closes In On Dannel Malloy In Race That Is Too Close To Call
Hartford Courant
By Christopher Keating on September 29, 2010 6:41 AM
Republican Tom Foley is quickly closing the gap against Democrat Dannel
Malloy in a race for governor that is now too close to call, the latest
Quinnipiac University poll shows.
Malloy is ahead by 3 percentage points, but the margin of error of plus
or minus 3 percentage points makes the battle too close to predict in
an increasingly nasty race.
One of the key shifts is that the all-important unaffiliated voters -
the largest voting bloc in Connecticut - have moved toward Foley in
recent weeks. The race had previously been a flat-footed tie among
independents, but the latest survey shows Foley ahead by 6 percentage
points among independents.
A longtime business executive from Greenwich, Foley has poured more
than $4 million of his own money into the race against Malloy, who is
receiving up to $6 million in public financing.
The latest Q-Poll, which was released at about 6:40 a.m. Wednesday,
shows Malloy ahead by 45 percent to 42 percent with 12 percent
undecided. Another 22 percent say they could change their minds before
election day on November 2.
In the previous poll that was released in mid-September, Malloy had
been leading by 9 percentage points with 8 percent still undecided and
26 percent saying that they could change their mind before the election.
The gubernatorial poll results came out a day after the Q-Poll had also
shown Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Richard Blumenthal's lead
narrowing to 3 percentage points over Republican nominee Linda McMahon
-- again, shrinking to within the margin of error.
Meeting with reporters at 10 a.m. Wednesday at the state Capitol,
Quinnipiac Poll Director Doug Schwartz explained the new results this
way: "Similar to yesterday, when we found the Democrat in the Senate
race leading by 3 points, we also find the Democrat in the governor's
race leading by 3 points. In both races, we found a narrowing of the
gap. The Republican is gaining ground."
Schwartz added that in the last gubernatorial poll two weeks ago, Foley
had trailed by 9 points. "Now he trails Malloy by just 3 points. It's
too close to call."
"One of the key differences between the senate and governor's races ..
is that there are many more undecideds in the governor's race than in
the Senate race," Schwartz said. "Twelve percent of voters in the
governor's race are undecided, compared to 4 percent in the Senate
race. This makes sense because in the governor's race the candidates
are not nearly as well known as they are in the Senate race. More than
3 in 10 voters said they don't know enough about either Foley or Malloy
to form an opinion. So there is more room in the governor's race for
movement."
Schwartz said that in the Malloy-Foley race, about one-third of the
voters are "persuadables" -- with "12 percent undecided and another 22
perecent of voters who say they could still change their minds." That
means that the effect of upcoming debates may be greater on the
Malloy-Foley race than on Blumenthal-McMahon, Schwartz said.
In both the Senate and governor's races, the reason for the narrowing
is that "there's been a shift among independents," Schwartz said.
"Malloy and Foley were tied two weeks ago among independents. Now Foley
has a 6 point lead among independents."
While many politicians and political observers are obsessed with polls
in the heat of the campaign season, Malloy's campaign manager says he
views it differently.
In response to the survey showing that Foley is closing the gap,
campaign manager Dan Kelly, said, "We don't pay much attention to
polls. The same poll had Dan down by 3 the day before the primary, a
race he won by 14 points. Dan tells us to campaign as if we're in
second place, 10 points down. So that's what we do.''
Malloy and Foley have clashed sharply in television commercials in
recent weeks, and several new ads are hitting the airwaves today.
Foley is broadcasting a new commercial this week that was being shown
Wednesday on the morning news programs. The ad mentions that Malloy
sought a pay increase as Stamford's mayor, saying, "Malloy raised taxes
year after year. ... Dan Malloy: a career politician whose policies
kill jobs.''
Foley has particularly focused on the loss of 13,843 jobs in Stamford
since the peak employment year of 2000. Malloy has repeatedly stated in
commercials that he helped create thousands of jobs as mayor, but state
labor statistics show that there was a net loss of more than 5,000 jobs
during his 14-year tenure leading the city. In addition, the
unemployment rate - which measures the employment of Stamford residents
as opposed to the overall number of jobs in the city - jumped by 58
percent during the Malloy years.
In a new ad, Malloy focuses on employees who had once worked at a
factory that Foley owned at The Bibb Company in Columbus, Georgia. The
company's longtime textile mill closed about two years after Foley left
the firm as chief executive officer in 1996. Lt. Gov. Michael Fedele
aired a similar commercial during the primary, but Foley countered that
some of the workers who appeared in Fedele's commercial had never
worked at the factory and others thought they were being interviewed
for a documentary about the mill.
In another new, anti-Foley commercial by the Democratic Governors
Association that aired before 7 a.m. Wednesday, a narrator says that
Foley "devastated a community and thousands of lives'' in Georgia as he
and his company "made millions.''
Folely is also airing a 30-second commercial that features his wife,
Leslie Fahrenkopf Foley, an attorney who attended Yale University and
the University of Virginia who says that she has worked with many
impressive people during her career. She adds that there has been "no
one more impressive than Tom Foley - so I married him.''
Malloy, Foley and Independent Party candidate Thomas E. Marsh of
Chester faced off for the first time in the general election campaign
on Tuesday night in a debate that focused on public education. They
spoke on a stage in front of a live audience at a public school in
Middletown.
Today, the three candidates are scheduled to discuss tourism in another
forum at the Connecticut Convention Center in Hartford. The televised
debates begin next week on Fox Connecticut in a debate at 7 p.m.
Tuesday that is co-sponsored by The Hartford Courant at The Bushnell
Center For the Performing Arts in Hartford.
LWV scraps three gubernatorial
debates
Mark Pazniokas
September 24, 2010
Ignored by Republican Tom Foley, the League of Women Voters said today
it was pulling the plug on three televised gubernatorial debates
planned for Bridgeport, Stamford and Danbury.
But there still will be at least four gubernatorial and three U.S.
Senate debates televised between Oct. 4 and 29, though none will
include minor-party candidates.
The Independent Party's candidate for governor, Tom Marsh, had met the
League's criteria for inclusion in the cancelled debates, as has the
party's Senate candidate, Warren Mosler, for a series of Senate debates.
The criteria includes evidence of a significant campaign and public
support, including having raised $50,000. John Mertens, a minor-party
candidate for Senate, is on the ballot, but he did not meet the
League's criteria.
"We cleared their hurdles, and they invited us. We were ecstatic," said
Alice Marshall, a spokeswoman for Mosler, a successful businessman.
"Warren is running to get out a message about full employment and
prosperity, and this would have been a chance to be heard."
Mertens, a Trinity College professor, said minor-party candidates often
make points and introduce issues shunned by the major-party candidates.
"They don't answer questions in debates. They are rehearsed on how not
to answer questions. The real answers come from third-party
candidates," Mertens said.
The League's Senate debates have not been cancelled, but they are in
jeopardy, as Democrat Richard Blumenthal and Republican Linda McMahon
have not agreed to attend...
We
note the following three (3) statements from Stamford ADVOCATE article:
- "He's only been here two
years. You can't change a country overnight," Carlo Leone said in
reference to President Obama's record..
- State Sen. Andrew McDonald, D-Stamford, said he does not
believe McMahon has the experience to serve in the Senate and has not
told voters what she will do to solve problems. "When will she
actually start to articulate meaningful solutions to the problems we
have?" McDonald said. "She's got no public record." McDonald and
other Fairfield County Democrats have in past years opposed fellow
legislators' efforts to hike income taxes on households earning around
$250,000, arguing they could be considered upper middle-class residents
of the state.
- "The President is in Connecticut today to put the
administration's stamp of approval on Richard Blumenthal," McMahon
spokesman Ed Patru said...
Your polling choices: Malloy, Foley
and 'someone else'
Mark Pazniokas, CT MIRROR
September 15, 2010
Independent gubernatorial candidate Tom Marsh says his exclusion from
today's Quinnipiac University poll is "unacceptable," but the poll's
director says it is good polling practice.
Douglas Schwartz, the poll's director, said polls that prompt voters
with a question about minor-party candidates get results that
exaggerate their support.
Instead, Quinnipiac records the preferences of voters who say they
intend to vote for someone other than Democrat Dan Malloy or Republican
Tom Foley. In today's poll, the vote for "someone else" came to 1
percent.
Among unaffiliated voters, "someone else" got 2 percent.
Marsh can lay claim to any support registered in the name of someone
else: He is the only other candidate for governor on the ballot.
Marsh, the first selectman of Chester, ran for the GOP nomination, then
dropped out to run as the nominee of the Independent Party. He says he
has been invited to participate in 10 gubernatorial forums this fall.
In an interview in March, he told the Mirror he is running as a
small-town official frustrated with how local officials fare at the
State Capitol.
"It all rolls down hill," Marsh said. "We're the tail on the dog here."
Marsh said he resented listening to legislators talk about a need to
entice municipal officials to experiment with regionalization. He sees
no one in Hartford with any business advising municipalities.
"The first thought was, 'I'm doing a lot of complaining. Why not give
it a shot and get on the podium and say your piece?' " Marsh said.
By jumping to the Independent Party, a conversation that was going to
end after the Republican State Convention in May has continued.
Stalking Craigslist
NYPOST
By JACOB SULLUM
Last Updated: 12:24 AM, September 8, 2010
Posted: 11:55 PM, September 7, 2010
Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal may never have served
in Vietnam (despite his recollections to the contrary), but he is a
hero in the war on prostitution. Armed with nothing but sternly worded
letters, indignant press releases and a seemingly inexhaustible store
of self-righteousness, Blumenthal played a key role in pressuring
Craigslist to shut down its "adult services" section, which he called a
"blatant Internet brothel."
On Friday night, the online classified ad service replaced the
hyperlink to the controversial section with a black rectangle labeled
"censored." If Blumenthal has anything to say about it (and you know he
will), no one will ever pay for sex again.
Strictly speaking, prostitution is none of Blumenthal's business -- and
not just because consensual sex between adults, whether or not money
changes hands, is beyond the proper scope of government. As
Connecticut's Division of Criminal Justice explains on its Web site,
the state's attorney general "has no jurisdiction whatsoever over
criminal matters and no authority to prosecute criminal violations of
the law."
Although fighting prostitution is not part of Blumenthal's portfolio as
attorney general, it is part of his campaign for the US Senate, in
which he portrays himself as a crusader who is unafraid to challenge
"the biggest special interests." With an estimated $122 million in
revenue this year, Craigslist is not all that big, but it dominates the
online classified-ad business and runs one of the country's most
popular Web sites.
Conflating prostitution with slavery and child rape, Blumenthal accused
Craigslist of profiting from horrendous crimes. "We recognize that
Craigslist may lose the considerable revenue generated by the Adult
Services ads" if it closes the section, Blumenthal and 16 other state
attorneys general wrote in an Aug. 24 letter to the company. "No amount
of money, however, can justify the scourge of illegal prostitution, and
the suffering of the women and children who will continue to be
victimized, in the market and trafficking provided by Craigslist."
Blumenthal ignores both the law's role in fostering coercion and
violence by driving the business underground and the protection that
services like Craigslist can provide by allowing prostitutes to screen
customers and avoid walking the streets. But to fully appreciate the
audacity of his charge that money blinded Craigslist to the suffering
of sex slaves, note that the company started charging for adult service
ads in 2008 at the behest of law-enforcement officials. The idea was
that fees would thin the section, while requiring a credit card and a
valid phone number would deter criminal activity.
Craigslist also hired dozens of lawyers to screen ads for compliance
with the company's terms of use, which prohibit "offer or solicitation
of illegal prostitution." Craigslist CEO Jim Buckmaster reports that
"more than 700,000 ads were rejected by those attorneys in the year
following implementation of manual screening" in May 2009, while
Village Voice Media's Backpage.com (where the ads are far more
explicit) saw a big increase in business.
No doubt many of the masseuses, companions and erotic dancers
advertising on Craigslist were still selling sex, but they were a
little more subtle about it, which is all that the law requires of such
ads. Look up "massage," "escorts" or "entertainment, adult" in a
big-city phone book, and you will see ample evidence that Blumenthal's
crusade is really a matter of taste.
As an "interactive computer service," Craigslist had no obligation to
screen ads -- under federal law, posters are exclusively responsible
for such content. By taking precautions that were bound to be less than
completely effective, the company invited further demands from bullying
busybodies like Blumenthal, who deemed last week's capitulation merely
a "step in the right direction."
The ads that offended Blumenthal already have begun migrating to other
Craigslist sections (which are unscreened and generally free) or to
less fastidious competitors. As company founder Craig Newmark remarked
about a CNN ambush interview aimed at revealing him as a virtual pimp,
"The point was what?"
PUBLIC ENEMY NUMBER ONE OR TWO?
Coyote killed in Rye Brook confirmed rabid
Stamford ADVOCATE
Debra Friedman, Staff Writer
Published: 11:03 p.m., Wednesday, September 8, 2010
A coyote shot and killed by Rye Brook police in New York Monday was
confirmed rabid Wednesday by the Westchester County Department of
Health. It is the first report of a rabid coyote in Westchester County,
officials said.
Police shot the coyote after it became aggressive toward a police
officer and a coyote trapper who were trying to capture the animal
following three coyote attacks on human that occurred Sunday. In one of
the Sunday night attacks, a sick looking coyote lunged at a 2-year-old
before her father, Jared Zuckerman, 28, of Greenwich, pulled her away
and was bit in the back of his leg by the animal. A 14-year-old boy was
also scratched by the coyote an hour earlier in Rye Brook, but scared
the coyote away by hitting it in the face.
It was not clear Wednesday if the coyote killed was the animal involved
in the attacks, but police said the coyote was similar in description
and behavior. All three attack victims were treated in the hospital
following the incidents and received rabies vaccines.
When administered early enough and before symptoms develop, rabies
treatment is 100 percent effective, according to health officials. Once
symptoms occur, in humans or animals, it is fatal.
Westchester County officials urge anyone who may have had contact with
the rabid animal to contact the health department and seek immediate
treatment. Officials said if residents notice any unusual or aggressive
behavior of wild animals, they should contact their police department.
Greenwich father and daughter shaken after N.Y. coyote attack
Debra Friedman, Greenwich TIME
Published: 09:54 p.m., Tuesday, September 7, 2010
While authorities in Rye Brook, N.Y., believe they killed
the coyote that attacked three people over the weekend, a Greenwich man
who saved his daughter from the aggressive animal is still not sure how
to feel about the turn of events.
"I don't know if I am relieved," said Jared Zuckerman, when asked how
he felt that the animal was killed. "We've been told we are sharing
nature and sharing spaces. I don't know what was going on out there."
It was around 8 p.m. Sunday night when Zuckerman took his two-year-old
daughter outside to play on his father's driveway on Hillandale Road in
Rye Brook.
"We were sitting outside at the bottom of the driveway of my father's
house, kind of just playing and hanging out, when I caught something in
corner of my eye," Zuckerman said. "By the time I turned around to look
at (my daughter), it was lunging with its teeth (showing)."
Zuckerman said he grabbed his daughter, putting her underneath his arm
and turned as the coyote growled and bit the back of his leg causing a
superficial wound.
Zuckerman continued slowly backing away while making loud noises until
he approached his father's garage and the coyote retreated to the
backyard.
"It definitely shook me up," Zuckerman said. "I think it is unfortunate
that any of it had to happen. You always want to feel safe in your own
home. It is one of those things that definitely makes you more aware of
what is going on."
Zuckerman and his daughter were two of three people attacked by the
aggressive coyote Sunday night, according to Rye Brook police. A
14-year-old boy was also lunged at while he was playing at Eagles Bluff
around 6:50 p.m., but scared the coyote away after striking it in the
head.
The coyote believed to be responsible for both attacks was found Monday
morning behind 257 North Ridge St. As police and a trapper attempted to
catch the coyote, the animal displayed aggressive behavior and charged
the officer, leading him to shoot the animal, police said.
The coyote appeared to be similar to the animal involved in Sunday's
attacks, police said. The animal will be tested by the Westchester
County Department of Health to determine if it is rabid, according to
police.
The attacks took place three days after a Glenville resident reported
encountering an aggressive coyote while running in her neighborhood.
Donna Gaudioso-Zeale, director of the Greenwich Hospital's Center for
Healthy Living, said a coyote came out of the woods and began following
her on Thursday night. In defense, Gaudioso-Zeale started barking,
growling and running after the coyote, which she said seemed to stop it
from following her. The incident was reported to Greenwich Animal
Control.
Lt. Kraig Gray, spokesman for the Greenwich Police Department, said he
understood that the coyote problem in nearby towns could cause concern
among town residents, but urged people not to panic, especially now
that the coyote causing the trouble is dead.
"Coyotes are part of the natural landscape here, but people should
continue to be aware of any out of the ordinary behavior," said Gray.
Animal Control officers said it is extremely rare for coyotes to act
aggressively toward humans. The best way to avoid contact with coyotes
is to keep food and small pets out of yards in the evening, police said.
Police first began issuing warnings about coyotes in June after two
girls from Rye were attacked by a coyote during separate incidents.
Neither girl was seriously injured, but the incidents prompted the city
to start a trapping program.
Rye Police Commissioner William Connors said there is no way of knowing
if the coyote killed Monday was responsible for the June attacks in his
jurisdiction.
Connors said his department will continue to stay vigilant and he urged
residents to do the same. "We've continued our trapping program,"
Connors said. "We urge people to exercise caution and take all the
standard actions we've recommended in the past."
Gray said Greenwich residents should also follow previously released
guidelines and never hesitate to call police or animal control to
report aggressive behavior. "It is reasonable for people to be extra
vigilant," Gray said. "If there are any sightings or issues, people
should continue to call police."
Greenwich road runner bests wily coyote
Lisa Chamoff, Stamford ADVOCATE
Published: 08:42 p.m., Friday, September 3, 2010
GREENWICH -- When Glenville resident Donna Gaudioso-Zeale went out for
a run in her neighborhood Thursday night, she got more than just
exercise.
Gaudioso-Zeale, director of the Greenwich Hospital's Center for Healthy
Living, found herself faced with a menacing coyote.
While Gaudioso-Zeale often hears and sees coyotes in her neighborhood,
she said the one that came out of the woods on Glen Ridge Road near the
Merritt Parkway seemed ready to attack.
Gaudioso-Zeale said she was concerned, especially after coyotes
attacked two young girls in two separate instances in nearby Rye, N.Y.,
this past June, and because there's a bus stop on Glen Ridge.
With
each step Gaudioso-Zeale took, the coyote followed. "When I backed up,
it got more aggressive and I knew I couldn't outrun it," she said.
In
defense, Gaudioso-Zeale started barking, growling and running after the
coyote, which she said seemed to stop it from following her. Luckily,
just as the showdown got intense, a motorist pulled up and
Gaudioso-Zeale jumped into the car.
Gaudioso-Zeale later reported the incident to Greenwich police and
animal control. Police spokesman Lt. Kraig Gray said area patrols
likely will be informed.
Paul Rego, a wildlife biologist with the state Department of
Environmental Protection, said the incident was "unusual, but not
unheard of."
"Very often, it's cases where the people have a dog with them, and it
seems like the coyotes are interested in the dog in particular."
There have been reports in recent years of dogs being attacked by
coyotes in Greenwich. In 2003, three dogs in Riverside were killed by
coyotes, including a bichon frise owned by pro football Hall of Famer
Frank Gifford and his wife, Kathie Lee. Attacks on humans are rare,
police officials have said.
Rego said there has been a gradual increase in the state's coyote
population. "There may be a gradual change in coyote behavior where
they're more habituated to developed areas," Rego said.
Police advise residents to call 911 if they witness a coyote attack.
All other concerns can be reported to Greenwich Animal Control or the
DEP's hot line at 860-424-3333.
INQUIRING MINDS WANT TO KNOW
"Why didn't Eliot Spitzer run for the U.S. Senate?" Because he
only wanted an excuse to go to D.C. Or maybe there was no seat
available in New York (r)?
Amid Nasty Campaign, Politicians Take A Respite At Crocodile Club
By CHRISTOPHER KEATING, ckeating@courant.com
September 1, 2010
BRISTOL — Because Connecticut politics this year has become especially
nasty, politicians welcomed a brief respite Tuesday with the restart of
a light-hearted political roast.
The event was the 129th meeting of the Crocodile Club — a long-running
luncheon that has traditionally attracted the top politicians in the
state.
The club has been dormant since 2003, but politicians said that this
year was the right time to resume the tradition because many insiders
believe it is the most exciting political year in Connecticut since
1970 — which featured a three-way battle for the U.S. Senate and an
open seat for governor when incumbent Democrat John Dempsey did not
seek re-election.
The luncheon Tuesday drew about 400 people to the ballroom at the Lake
Compounce amusement park, and they dined on the trademark menu — right
down to the watermelon.
In an event similar to the famed Al Smith Dinner at the Waldorf Astoria
in New York City that attracts presidential contenders, some of the
state's top politicians sat on the stage and delivered speeches that
were limited to five minutes. The two gubernatorial contenders —
Republican Tom Foley of Greenwich and Democrat Dannel Malloy of
Stamford — delivered remarks, along with their respective running
mates, Danbury Mayor Mark Boughton and state Comptroller Nancy Wyman.
Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, who has attended the luncheon
dating to the late 1980s when he served in the state legislature,
worked the crowd before delivering jokes and offering self-deprecating
humor later in the program.
"I'm here without subpoenas,'' Blumenthal told the crowd. "I noticed a
few of you were not laughing.''
"When I left my house today, I told my wife, Cynthia, that I was coming
here and that I was going to be funny,'' said Blumenthal, who is often
known for his formal nature. "She started laughing hysterically, and my
bet is that she is still laughing.''
Known also for his long hours, Blumenthal mentioned that he has been
campaigning everywhere for the U.S. Senate — at fairs, parades, senior
centers and other venues.
"Just this week, I went to two job openings, three can openings and
four garage openings,'' Blumenthal said.
"I just want to say that of all the places I have been, I have to
confess that I have never been invited to a professional wrestling
match,'' Blumenthal said as the crowd laughed. "And I thought for sure
I would get an invitation this year. But, oh well, it's not really my
cup of tea, anyways.''
Blumenthal then sat down and listened to his opponent — Republican
Linda McMahon, who had been seated next to him in the front row on the
dais.
McMahon, a former World Wrestling Entertainment executive, stepped to
the lectern and said that Blumenthal could attend "any WWE event any
time'' that he chooses.
"You don't have to be invited,'' McMahon told Blumenthal. "You just
have to purchase a ticket.''
McMahon then said that she had been reading recently about what
Republicans had been saying about President Barack Obama.
"They said his popularity is dropping,'' McMahon told the crowd. "They
said he was political kryptonite for Democrats. They said they never
wanted to see him set foot in this state. Oh, I'm sorry, these were the
John Droney notes.''
That was a reference to the former state Democratic chairman who had
said recently that Obama has been damaged politically and should not
come to the state as the headliner at a fundraiser for Democrats.
She continued by saying, "As was mentioned, I am Linda McMahon, and
some of you might have seen some of the mailers that I have sent out.
But contrary to popular opinion, I am not running for postmaster
general. I am running for United States Senate.''
"I've spent so much money on this campaign that Ned Lamont told me I
should be governor,'' McMahon said as the crowd laughed.
McMahon added that it was fitting that the attendees had gathered to
raise money for the carousel museum on Riverside Avenue in Bristol.
"I love carousels. Don't you?'' McMahon asked. "They remind me of
Democrats — just going round and round and round and never seeming to
get anywhere.''
McMahon said she was surprised to see Blumenthal on the stage.
"Howdy, stranger,'' she said. "When I looked around and saw Dick
sitting here today, I thought, this must be the political equivalent of
Groundhog Day — except that Dick came out of his bunker, saw his shadow
and we've got eight more weeks of campaigning.''
The annual Crocodile Club meeting had been dormant due to the
retirement and eventual death at age 86 of the longtime organizer, J.
Harwood "Stretch'' Norton, but organizers resumed the event Tuesday
with the permission of Norton's family.
State Republican Chairman Christopher Healy, who was sitting on the
dais, said in an interview that it was a fine idea to restart the
Yankee tradition.
"We need more of these collective events in which we can have a few
jokes at our own expense,'' Healy said. "Politics should be more fun
than it is. It's a small state, after all.''
The emcee was radio personality Ray Dunaway, who first attended the
luncheon back in the early 1990s.
"People just like tradition in this state,'' Dunaway said. "It's been
eight years. Stretch really was the event. It was all about Stretch.''
Stretch Norton was the great-grandson of the original founder, Gad
Norton, who started the club in 1875 in an effort to thank lawmakers
who had passed legislation to change the boundary line between
Southington and Bristol. That maneuver placed Norton's property in
Bristol and allowed him to vote there, which prompted a long-running
dispute between the towns and caused some Southington officials to
boycott the Crocodile luncheon even 100 years later.
Copyright © 2010, The Hartford
Courant
Abortion Issue Runs Through Some Key
Connecticut Campaigns
By DANIELA ALTIMARI, altimari@courant.com
8:34 PM EDT, August 22, 2010
Abortion is a surprising subtext in a number of key political
campaigns in Connecticut this year.
No one expects the outcome of any race to turn solely on the issue,
especially in an election cycle dominated by the economy. Yet the
success of several candidates who oppose legalized abortion in this
reliably blue state has galvanized activists on both sides of the
divide.
The shift is most visible within the Republican Party, where
traditional Yankee moderation on social issues has not held sway with a
number of GOP candidates on the issue of abortion. Among those clear
about their anti-abortion stance are Martha Dean, a candidate for
attorney general, and Mark Boughton, the GOP nominee for lieutenant
governor. Dean and Boughton both beat primary opponents who support
abortion rights. (On the Democratic side, abortion foe Michael Jarjura
lost his party's nomination for state comptroller to Kevin Lembo, who
was endorsed by NARAL Pro-Choice Connecticut.)
"'In Connecticut, traditionally the Republican voter has been
pro-choice,'' said Jillian Gilchrest, executive director of NARAL
Pro-Choice Connecticut, "but this is a different kind of campaign and a
different kind of election year.''
The success of Dean and Boughton prompted Peter Wolfgang, executive
director of the Family Institute of Connecticut, to call 2010 "a
breakthrough year for the pro-life movement'' in the state.
"Connecticut is not going to elect a Henry Hyde or a Rick Santorum in
the next year or two,'' Wolfgang said, citing two widely known
anti-abortion advocates on the national level. "But there is movement
in our direction. … Below that veneer of New England Republican
enlightenment, there is still a wellspring of pro-lifers to be found."
'Not A Side Issue'
Dean handily beat back a challenge from her fellow Republican, the
NARAL-endorsed Ross Garber, to win the party primary earlier this
month. She said she does not expect her anti-abortion stance to play a
major role in her race against Democrat George Jepsen, who favors
abortion rights.
"This is not an issue for the attorney general's office,'' Dean said.
"Abortion policy is under the exclusive purview of the legislature.''
But, she added, it's not a side issue, either. "I would never
characterize life as a side issue,'' Dean said. "I think voters want to
know who candidates are as individuals. They want to know about their
personal beliefs. I've been very open about who I am out of respect for
the voters. I've been open about a variety of issues I have no impact
over as attorney general. It gives voters an insight into your
character, it gives them some insight as to the thinking process you go
through."
Although Dean's stance is clear, others walk a more delicate line.
Republican Linda McMahon, a political newcomer running for U.S. Senate,
defines herself as "pro-choice, with a caveat." She supports requiring
minors to obtain parental consent before undergoing an abortion and
also favors a ban on a medical procedure known as "partial-birth
abortion."
McMahon has been lobbied by both opponents and supporters of abortion
rights. Woody Bliss, chairman of the Connecticut chapter of the
Republican Majority for Choice, has spoken with her several times and
plans to meet with her again soon. The group had donated to the
campaign of her now-vanquished GOP opponent, Rob Simmons, a strong
advocate of abortion rights.
Whenever Bliss meets with a candidate, he says, he tells that candidate
that more than 70 percent of state residents define themselves as
"pro-choice.''
"I counsel them: 'You may have religious convictions or [whatever] but
that dog doesn't hunt in Connecticut,' '' Bliss said. "We try and sit
down and talk to them, especially newly running candidates, and become
a source of information to them [and] educate them.''
Wolfgang, too, has met with McMahon, former CEO of World Wrestling
Entertainment. "She may be a harbinger of things to come in the
abortion issue,'' Wolfgang said. "Simmons staked out a position so
extreme on abortion that all Linda McMahon had to do was be a little to
the right of him.''
Yet Wolfgang said he is in "watch and see mode" when it comes to
McMahon's candidacy. "She reached out to me early and often and she's
running one of the most professional campaigns I've seen,'' he said.
"The questions that linger have to do with the WWE and its effect on
the popular culture."
NARAL called McMahon "an untested wild card" and has embraced her
Democratic opponent, Richard Blumenthal.
Himes-Debicella Race
The abortion debate is likely to resonate strongly in the state's 4th
Congressional District, home to an affluent base of voters who tend to
favor fiscally conservative, socially moderate candidates. Republican
U.S. Rep. Chris Shays, who favored abortion rights but also opposed
"partial-birth abortions," represented the district for more than two
decades before losing to Jim Himes in 2008.
Both Himes and his current GOP opponent, Dan Debicella, identify
themselves as "pro-choice." But the Himes campaign senses softness in
Debicella's support for abortion rights. When he served in the state
Senate, Debicella was one of three senators to vote against a bill
requiring all hospitals, even those run by the Catholic church, to
offer emergency contraception to rape victims.
"I think the Himes campaign will want to highlight that vote,'' said
Gilchrest of NARAL Pro-Choice Connecticut.
Himes is doing just that.
"Dan Debicella's vote against making emergency contraception available
to rape victims is radical and wrong,'' said Himes' campaign manager,
Mark Henson. "The economy is our main focus, but that's not the only
area where Debicella is wrong for southwest Connecticut: he votes
against the environment, he votes against consumers, he's against Wall
Street reform, and he votes against the interests of women and
families."
Suburban women are a key voting bloc in Connecticut, and a new group
affiliated with the Himes campaign aims to capture their support. Himes
"is also a firm believer that women should have complete control over
their reproductive rights, without interference from politicians or
government,'' states a press release announcing the creation of the
group, Women for Himes.
Debicella's campaign manager, Jason Perillo, accused the Himes camp of
misrepresenting Debicella's views.
"Jim Himes is trying to draw a distinction between himself and Dan
Debicella that doesn't exist in order to distract voters from his
failures on the economy,'' Perillo said. "Dan Debicella has been a
strong advocate for women. He co-sponsored laws that help police
departments convict rapists and that double the minimum sentence for
abusive spouses. He is pro-choice. He proposed legislation to increase
funding for rape crisis centers and increase breast cancer care
funding.''
Debicella won kind words, if not the endorsement, of the Family
Institute's Wolfgang.
In Wolfgang's view, Debicella isn't the perfect candidate. But the
Family Institute's goal is "to build a bench of serious candidates who
are pro-life, or open to the pro-life message, who can eventually get
to Congress,'' he said, citing as examples Debicella and Republican Sam
Caligiuri, running for Congress from the 5th District.
Wolfgang said he is aware of the realities facing Connecticut
candidates who run on a platform that opposes rights to an abortion.
"A sure-loser, pro-life candidate who says all the right things then
goes down to noble defeat won't save a single unborn life,'' Wolfgang
said. "But a Caligiuri victory, even a Debicella victory, can. That's
why 2010 is such a breakthrough year for the pro-life movement in
Connecticut.''
Silly season about to start: Polls are
tight, campaign funds uncertain in Conn. races
New Haven Register
By Mary E. O’Leary, Register Topics Editor
moleary@newhavenregister.com
Sunday, August 22, 2010
Enjoy the cessation of telephone robo-calls, campaign literature
overflowing your mailbox and diving for the mute button to block out
those endless television ads. The peace and quiet is not likely
to last long, now that the contenders for the governor’s race and U.S.
Senate contest are lined up at the starting gate. The voters
eventually will tune in and, unlike the intraparty fights, there are
real difference between the candidates who want to lead the state and
those eager to replace U.S. Sen. Christopher Dodd in Washington.
Less than a quarter of the eligible Democrats bothered to participate
in the primary voting earlier this month, and just under one-third of
the Republicans did. Taken together, those 309,283 residents are only
about 15 percent of registered voters, but they determined the main
contenders in the fall. As expected, Republican Linda McMahon
easily beat two GOP opponents, while former Stamford Mayor Dan Malloy
soundly defeated his Democratic opponent, Ned Lamont, by surging from
behind in the last few weeks of the campaign.
The only unknown is how much money will flow to Connecticut in attempts
to sway the electorate. The U.S. Senate race, in particular, is being
projected as possibly the most expensive in the nation’s history.
It is also the first Connecticut race unfolding after the Citizens
United decision by the U.S. Supreme Court, which gave corporations the
same status as individuals, allowing them to support issues directly
from their coffers.
“The Democratic Senate Campaign Committee will be weighing in, just as
the National Republican Senatorial Committee, MoveOn.org, the whole
circus is going to be here,” predicted Scott McLean, chairman of the
political science department at Quinnipiac University.
McMahon already has put $24 million of her own money into her campaign.
She is willing to increase that to $50 million. Attorney General
Richard Blumenthal, the Democratic candidate, has raised some $3.5
million, $483,000 of it from political action committees, and is only
beginning to campaign seriously.
McMahon can be expected to keep hammering at misstatements by
Blumenthal on his service during the Vietnam War and his decision to
take PAC money, which he avoided as attorney general. The
Democrats will have things to say about McMahon’s leadership at World
Wrestling Entertainment, the misogynistic themes it is said to have
promoted and the steroid investigations into the business.
National pundits such as Charlie Cook and Chuck Todd are predicting a
close Senate race here and a heavy investment in the expensive New York
media market, which McMahon entered during the primary.
The latest Rasmussen Report has Blumenthal at 47 percent to 40 percent
for McMahon. It has the race in the leaning Democratic column, dropping
it from a solidly Democratic win.
“Our opponent is trying to buy herself a Senate seat, spending a
record-breaking $50 million for a negative campaign,” said Mindy Myers,
Blumenthal’s campaign manager. “People want more than the politics as
usual she’s offering.
“All the money in the world can’t hide the fact that she made her
millions at the expense of the health and safety of her workers and by
peddling violence and sex to children.
“We expect to be outspent in a tight race, but we’re not going to be
outworked. Dick Blumenthal has a record of standing up for the people
of Connecticut against even the most powerful special interests, and
people know they can count on him to stand up for them in Washington.
That’s going to make the difference.”
Shawn McCoy, deputy communications director for McMahon, put the
campaign in a different light.
“Connecticut voters are deeply worried about the economy, and they are
looking for a senator who knows how to put people back to work. Dick
Blumenthal has rapidly dropped in the polls because he’s admitted he
doesn’t understand why unemployment is so high, he’s never created a
job and he thinks lawsuits create jobs.
“Linda is a proven job creator who has the real-life business
experience we need to get our economy moving,” McCoy said.
In the governor’s race, Malloy now is guaranteed $6 million to spend in
a little over 10 weeks, up from the $3 million basic grant he qualified
for in the general election under the Citizens Election Program.
The General Assembly, controlled by Democrats, made the change Aug. 13,
overriding Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell’s veto, after the courts threw
out a trigger mechanism tied to high spending by candidates not in the
election program. Under the original program, Malloy counted on getting
up to $6 million in increments, depending on the amount raised by
Foley, who decided not to participate in the program. Malloy got
$2.5 million in public campaign financing for the primary after raising
$250,000 in contributions of no more than $100. The Citizens Election
Program is an attempt to end special interest contributions, encourage
grass-roots involvement in elections and level the playing field for
those challenging wealthy candidates.
Foley, a multimillionaire from Greenwich, lent his primary campaign $3
million and raised $799,354, with individual contributions of up to
$3,500, to win in the three-way primary contest. He recently said
he will spend what it takes to get his message across by Nov. 2, but
there is an unanswered proposal that both candidates keep the spending
to $3 million if they agree not to run negative ads. A major
fundraiser for President George W. Bush — he raised at least $100,000
for the president — Foley is not expected to have any problems
gathering the money he needs, which leaves open the question of how
expensive the governor’s race will get.
In the 2006 gubernatorial campaign, Rell spent $4 million at a time
when she already had high name recognition and was extremely popular.
She easily beat her Democratic opponent, New Haven Mayor John DeStefano
Jr., who spent $4.7 million. Republican John G. Rowland, with
Rell as his running mate, spent $6.6 million in the 2002 election and
$6.9 million in 1998.
It is not know if direct corporate spending will play a role, in
addition to traditional PACs and other independent campaign spending by
interest groups.
Dave Levinthal, communication director for the Center for Responsive
Politics, said there has been little in the way of outside groups
weighing in, “but that doesn’t mean they won’t come in September and
October.”
Having a lot of personal money to put into a campaign doesn’t always
guarantee success. The prime local example is millionaire Lamont, who
outspent Malloy in the Democratic primary 4-to-1, with $8.6 million of
it his personal money, and yet lost by 16 percentage points.
Tyler Evilsizer, lead researcher at the National Institute of Money in
State Politics, said an institute study found that self-funders had an
extremely poor success rate: Only about 11 percent won races from 2000
to 2009. Based on data collected prior to May 2010, that trend appears
to be continuing.
Incumbents usually win 92 percent of the time, but if they are
self-funders that drops to 73 percent, according to the study. The
institute said self-funders bet on themselves to the tune of $925.1
million in the last decade, representing about 12 percent of campaign
spending. Those who provided the majority of the money for their
campaigns represented only 8 percent of candidates.
Beth Rotman, head of the Citizens Election Program, said there were
almost no expenditures by independent groups in 2008, and only a
handful in the last governor’s race, in 2006. But, given all the
open seats this year, “if we are going to see them play a healthy role,
we’d see it now,” Rotman said. She said it’s good that, in the
governor’s race, Foley and Malloy should be on an equal footing.
McLean agreed that, in Connecticut, “money isn’t everything,” noting
McMahon had to spend $24 million to get 49 percent of the primary vote
when only 30 percent of eligible Republicans showed up at the polls —
an expensive endeavor. He foresees the national Democratic Party
coming to the assistance of Blumenthal to help against McMahon.
“Blumenthal and Malloy are going to have more than enough to run
competitive campaigns,” he predicted.
Jennifer Duffy, however, in her analysis in the Cook Report, said that
given the size of McMahon’s financial resources, the Democratic Party
will be limited in what it can send Blumenthal’s way, balancing it
against other candidates’ needs in this important midterm election.
“It’s possible that an outside group could get involved on Blumenthal’s
behalf, but there are no signs of that yet. Blumenthal is personally
wealthy, but he has shown no interest in spending his own money on the
race at this point. Ultimately, he may not have a choice, if Democrats
can’t or aren’t willing to make a significant investment here,” Duffy
wrote.
NOTE:
No tie on Tom Foley a week later!
Odd couple on Republican ticket
covering new ground
CT POST
Published: 01:16 p.m., Friday, August 13, 2010
Here are some thoughts while waiting for the primary losers to cart off
their lawn signs, so we can reclaim partial vistas of our summer flora.
Who said that the (so-very-male) pretenders to political glory in
Congress and the governor's office have to wear ties, as if they were
on job interviews?
Yeah, they are kind of looking for employment, or at least job titles.
But wasn't it decided a long time ago that voters identify more with
people who look like themselves? Doesn't that explain the whole Linda
McMahon-as-viable-candidate scenario?
Do the image makers -- you know them as the people who have softened
McMahon, the zillionaire crotch-kicking P.T. Barnum of our time, into a
thoughtful grandma so very concerned about our futures -- really think
we want to see our top-of-the-ticket candidates wearing ties on the
hottest days of the year?
Pity the poor, perspiring Attorney General Dick Blumenthal, saying
howdy to the line workers at Pratt & Whitney in East Hartford after
their shift last Wednesday afternoon.
If it wasn't 100 degrees, it was close enough for government-contract
work and there's the one-time anointed Democrat, the master of
one-minute receiving-line schmooze, wearing a tie.
It was such a long distance from last January, back when there were ice
floes on the Connecticut River down past his backyard and Chris Dodd
announced he was retiring from the U.S. Senate.
Blumenthal trumped him in the same news cycle, proclaiming he would
seek the seat he had coveted for so long, back more than 20 years, when
Sen. Joe Lieberman proved the state attorney general's office was a
stepping stone to the Senate.
Dodd's proclamation broke up such a huge log jam of Connecticut
Democrats, for a while, but they and their lawn signs are littering
Connecticut's Boulevard of Broken Political Dreams.
Ned Lamont, now a four-time elective-office loser, wore a tie in his
concession speech when he lost the Democratic gubernatorial primary.
Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz was hoist with her own petard,
an old phrase from Shakespeare that, by the way, means blown up with
your own small bomb.
Desiring of Lieberman's anticipated 2012 vacancy -- surely he's
unelectable now and ready to make big bucks on K Street -- via
Blumenthal's attorney general job opening, Bysiewicz was flummoxed when
the state Supreme Court said she failed to meet the required years of
legal practice.
By then, she couldn't even fight for her current job, because House
Majority Leader Denise Merrill, sensing that the state budget crisis is
going to be so very gnarly next year, bailed out of the Legislature and
is running for secretary of the state.
Blumenthal, who's been in recovery mode for months since McMahon fed
The New York Times that video of him remembering someone else's Vietnam
experience, just couldn't loosen up and join his blue-collar Pratt
brothers and sisters with an open shirt.
Sheesh. Who can I blame? Those high-price image consultants who have
only 13 weeks now to make Blumenthal more electable, while McMahon,
with nothing to lose but 50 million bucks, romps throughout the state,
spreading campaign cash like fairy dust.
I guess it's time to say that both McMahon and Blumenthal -- and
Lamont, for that matter -- are from Greenwich.
Dannel Malloy, the former 14-year Stamford mayor who won the Democratic
gubernatorial primary, was another one who resorted to the suit and tie
the morning after his victory. And he keeps wearing the same green
ties, over and over and over.
The day after winning the GOP gubernatorial nomination, Tom Foley, the
zillionaire corporate takeover artist from, yes, Greenwich, showed up
at O'Rourke's Diner in Middletown Wednesday lunchtime wearing, yep, a
suit and tie, as Brian O'Rourke himself was flipping eggs-over-easy on
the blazing sidewalk.
Foley, showing signs of the inexperienced politician, didn't have a
public schedule the day after defeating Lt. Gov. Mike Fedele of
Stamford by a fragile 3 points.
Foley's booby prize is Fedele's running mate, Danbury Mayor Mark
Boughton, who, like Fedele and indeed, Malloy, participated in the
voluntary public-financing program.
Foley, who has written personal checks to his campaign totaling at
least $3 million, is now in the position to continue dissing the
funding program that got him his running mate.
Since this is the first time that the governor's race has used the
financing program of 2005, much new regulatory ground needs to be
broken. It seems to me that Boughton may not even be able to show up at
Foley fund-raising events, because the public-financing law prohibits
it.
Maybe Foley can get Boughton working for him behind the bar at his next
cocktail fundraiser, or planting "Foley-Boughton" lawns signs in the
hinterlands. But he'll have to wear a tie.
UNITED STATES SENATOR: Linda McMahon v. Dick Blumenthal
SEN. BLUMENTHAL DOES FANCY BOOKKEEPING, TOO. LIKE ""
OF THE DEBT!!!
In this contest, there is no incumbent, only millionaires. Hey,
after the dollar is worth zip, we'll all be millionaires!
Check
this out!
Blumenthal joins the ranks of
self-funded candidates
Deirdre Shesgreen, CT MIRROR
April 28, 2011
Sen. Richard Blumenthal has joined the ranks of self-funded
candidates--those who use their own money for all or a substantial
portion of their campaign treasury--albeit unintentionally, according
to his latest campaign finance report.
Blumenthal lent his 2010 Senate campaign slightly more than $2.5
million, of some $8 million spent. He was forced to reclassify most of
that as a contribution, however, by a federal law that requires
repayment of candidate loans within 20 days of the election. Only
$250,000 is exempt from the law, and is still on the campaign's books
as a debt.
"Quite honestly, there were efforts to raise money during that [20-day]
period but it wasn't enough to pay the loan off," said Michael Cacace,
Blumenthal's campaign chairman in the 2010 contest.
Asked if Blumenthal realized that was a potential outcome, he said, "We
knew what the law was and we were hopeful that we would raise the money
to repay him." He said Blumenthal will try to raise donations to repay
himself the rest of the loan--the $250,000 that he's allowed to carry
over--in the next several months.
Blumenthal's staff said he was unavailable Thursday.
Connecticut's 2010 Senate campaign drew national attention over the
self-funding issue, but not because of Blumenthal's loan. Republican
candidate Linda McMahon, co-founder of the WWE wrestling entertainment
empire, poured $50 million of her own cash into the race, making it the
most expensive Senate contest in the nation last year.
Even as McMahon pumped her own millions into the race, Connecticut
Republicans raised questions about Blumenthal's loans because the total
amount he put up was more than his reported net worth. The total value
of Blumenthal's assets, according to his financial disclosure form, was
between $599,000 to $1.36 million.
Blumenthal's wife Cynthia, a member of the wealthy Malkin family,
reported assets of between $55 million to $107 million. But she was
limited, like any other individual donor, to giving her husband only
$4,800 for the election.
Republicans raised questions about whether Blumenthal had lied on his
financial disclosure forms or was somehow illegally funding his
campaign--an assertion Blumenthal's aides sharply dismissed.
They noted that the financial disclosure forms don't take into account
certain assets, such as a candidate's home. And Maura Downes,
Blumenthal's campaign spokeswoman, later said he had borrowed against
the value of his house.
Cacace elaborated on that for the first time Thursday, saying
Blumenthal transferred his interest in the Greenwich house that he and
Cynthia own to his wife. She then paid him the value of that share,
which he pumped into the campaign.
"He transferred his interest in the marital home to his wife, who paid
him his share of the house," Cacace said. That allowed him to make the
loan.
"It in point of fact was very much the lion's share of his net worth,"
Cacace said.
Scott Brown campaigns for McMahon
Scott Brown comes
to Milford as living proof that Senate hopes of longtime AG can be
dashed
By Ted Mann, New London Day Staff Writer
Article published Oct 10, 2010
Milford - U.S. Sen. Scott Brown told several hundred supporters of
Linda McMahon at a midday rally in front of City Hall Saturday that
they have a "great chance" of replicating his feat: defeating a
Democratic attorney general to gain a Republican seat in the Senate.
"She's right here," he said to a crowd of roughly 250 supporters,
pointing back at McMahon, the Republican who is waging a tough campaign
against Democrat Richard Blumenthal.
Brought to Connecticut to invigorate Republican voters and
independents, Brown held rallies with both McMahon and Republican
gubernatorial hopeful Tom Foley on Saturday, and he did his best to amp
up the crowd.
"I'm ready to get down and do 50 (pushups) right here," Brown
exclaimed, after he and McMahon entered the rally as a disc jockey
played the theme from the movie "The Natural." "I am pumped."
McMahon is attempting a reprise of the coup Brown pulled off in a
special election in January: upsetting a once-favored, longtime
Democratic attorney general for election to the Senate.
McMahon, the former CEO of World Wrestling Entertainment, is facing off
with Blumenthal, while Brown knocked off Martha Coakley, the attorney
general in Massachusetts, to win the seat left vacant by the death of
Sen. Edward Kennedy. McMahon told the crowd that she had been
written
off in the early going, after the popular Blumenthal jumped into the
race when Sen. Chris Dodd announced he wouldn't seek re-election.
"He was a shoo-in, and nobody even gave the state of Connecticut a
second thought," she said. "Well, look what's happened."
McMahon has closed Blumenthal's once wide lead into a dead heat in some
public polling, though a series of recent polls released in the last
several weeks showed Blumenthal maintaining a nearly double-digit
advantage.
McMahon's campaign staff, however, was brimming with confidence before
the rally began, and have said they expect a tough fight to the finish
on Nov. 2. McMahon emphasized her background in a brief speech,
declaring, as Brown did in winning his election in Massachusetts,
common cause with average voters.
"I connect with the people of Connecticut," McMahon said. "I've walked
in your shoes."
Her backers must not be "complacent," she added, urging those at the
rally to vote for her, and to tell 10 friends each to do the same.
"We need to take control of our country and our government again," she
said.
Cheers and chants
The crowd was spirited as they listened to an array of warm-up
speakers, capped by a plea for participation from David Cappiello, a
former state senator who is McMahon's campaign manager.
When McMahon and Brown emerged from the City Hall doors and approached
the podium, there were loud cheers and chants of her first name, while
a smaller group of Blumenthal supporters in the back of the crowd booed.
The rally was remarkably brief. While supporters were already beginning
to gather two hours before the candidate appeared, Brown spoke for just
five minutes, and McMahon for only seven.
The crowd also heard from Jim Beringer, a Vietnam veteran who said he
was motivated to volunteer for McMahon after reports that Blumenthal
has at least several times stated that he served in Vietnam during the
war. Blumenthal was a member of the U.S. Marine Corps Reserve; he did
not serve overseas. Blumenthal has apologized for those remarks,
which
he characterized as rare and isolated misstatements.
"There is no confusion in my mind about where I was in that tour,"
Beringer said of his experience in Vietnam. "And I have never misspoken
about my military service."
There were counter-protesters, too, including union carpenters holding
a "Carpenters for Blumenthal" sign, and others who held signs
denouncing McMahon's record as an employer and the tea party movement.
"Tea Party = racism," one sign said, while another alluded to the
steroid scandals that have plagued the WWE. "Steroids ain't vitamins,"
it read.
But the vast majority of the crowd was made up of McMahon supporters
such as Benigno Deju, who stood with a blue "Linda" sign held high over
his head. Deju is a native of Cuba, he said, who returned to the
country as a believer in Fidel Castro's revolution, but fled two years
later, dispirited by life under Communism. Like others at the
rally,
he said he believed that the Obama administration's efforts to reform
health care and the financial sector represented a move in the
direction of socialism.
"I vote for freedom, and anything to stop the destruction of this
country that's happening now," he said. "I would be for anyone who is
against what this president is trying to do."
Tom Scott, a former state senator and radio host, took aim at Obama,
but also at Blumenthal. He compared the attorney general to the small
plastic man atop a wedding cake. Blumenthal is like "a plastic
figurine, a phony," Scott said. To re-elect him, he declared, would
bring on "six long years of Chris Dodd II."
The crowd booed.
Sen.
Scott Brown to campaign for
McMahon
Ted Mann, New London DAY
Article published Oct 1, 2010
U.S. Sen. Scott Brown, R-Mass., will campaign for Republican Linda
McMahon later this month as she seeks to duplicate his feat: knocking
off a formidable Democratic attorney general in a race for the Senate.
The McMahon campaign announced Friday that Brown would campaign with
McMahon in Milford on Oct. 9. Brown had already announced plans to
campaign in the state for Republican gubernatorial hopeful Tom
Foley. McMahon is facing off in a tight Senate contest with
Attorney General Richard Blumenthal.
Brown defeated Massachusetts A.G. Martha Coakley in January in a
special election to fill the seat left vacant by the death of longtime
Sen. Edward M. Kennedy.
Climate change: Candidates differ on
causes, vague on cures
Deirdre Shesgreen, CT MIRROR
September 27, 2010
WASHINGTON--Linda McMahon and Richard Blumenthal differ sharply on a
range of environmental issues, starting with the big one: climate
change. But neither of the U.S. Senate candidates has a strong position
on what should be done about it.
Their differences begin with the basic question of what causes global
warming, a phenomenon that many scientists say is linked in large part
to the emission of heat-trapping greenhouse gases. Such pollution is
caused by, for example, the burning of fossil fuels such as coal.
McMahon, the Republican nominee and former CEO of World Wrestling
Entertainment, says the "science is mixed" on what has caused global
warming, although she does not dispute that the climate is indeed
changing.
"I just don't think we have the answers as to why it changes," she
said. "I'm not a scientist, so I couldn't pretend to understand all the
reasons. But the bottom line is we really don't know."
Blumenthal's take? "The science is irrefutable," said the state's
Democratic attorney general. "And we would be irresponsible to ignore
it."
When it comes to possible solutions, things get murkier. Congress
tried, unsuccessfully, to tackle this issue last year with a broad
climate and energy bill that included a controversial cap-and trade
system. The House-passed legislation aimed to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions by setting caps on emissions and outlining a regulatory
framework that would allow companies to buy and sell pollution
"allowances."
The goal of the bill, which included many other energy-related
provisions, was to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 83 percent (using
2005 levels) by 2050.
Soon after the House passed that legislation, Blumenthal joined with
other attorneys general in signing a letter that called the House bill
a "strong foundation" for legislative action and calling on the Senate
pass its own climate bill. The letter mostly urged the Senate not to
pre-empt stronger state laws limiting greenhouse gas emissions and
addressed other state implications, but it also generally calls for an
aggressive approach to the issue.
The cap-and-trade legislation, and other scaled-back versions with
weaker approaches to reducing greenhouse gases, has completely stalled
in the Senate.
McMahon said she strongly opposes any cap-and-trade bill and argues
that Blumenthal's expressed support is tantamount to backing a national
"energy tax." That's shorthand for the GOP's contention that the
proposal would result in increased utility bills and other energy
expenses, as companies seek to cover the costs of a new regulatory
system, such as purchasing pollution permits or implementing new
technologies to reduce their emissions.
The Congressional Budget Office concluded the House bill would cost the
average household $175 a year by 2020, but some critics have suggested
that is a low-ball estimate that doesn't take into account more
aggressive caps in the legislation's later years.
"I don't believe at this time, given where we are with our economy,
that cap-and-trade is the right thing," McMahon said. But she was vague
about what steps she would favor, suggesting only that she might
support offering government incentives, such as tax deductions, for
companies that voluntarily purchase and install the technology to
reduce emissions.
Blumenthal sharply rejected McMahon's suggestion that he supported an
energy tax. "She is using phony numbers concocted by right-wing think
tanks designed to scare people and protect the special interests," he
said, referring to the conservative Heritage Foundation's analysis of
the House-passed bill.
But when asked whether he still supports the climate change bill,
Blumenthal said: "We should avoid a false debate about legislation that
is dead."
He said he would support "reasonable and sensible measures to stop the
pollution that causes climate disruption" but declined to say what kind
of control on carbon emissions he would support.
Blumenthal instead said he would push for a comprehensive energy policy
that promotes "green energy jobs and technology, as well as making
polluters pay." He said in particular he would promote a legislative
approach that rewards Connecticut for its reliance on cleaner energy
sources, such as nuclear power and natural gas.
Ambiguities notwithstanding, the two candidates' positions on climate
change reflects a broader split in their outlook on the environment.
As attorney general, Blumenthal has a track record of suing
corporations and government agencies to win strict enforcement of
environmental laws. He clearly supports an aggressive federal and state
regulatory system.
McMahon, by contrast, recently identified the federal Environmental
Protection Agency and the Department of Energy as two agencies that
might be bloated and in need of scaling back. And in her economic
platform, she calls for the "review and repeal" of all federal
regulations that "inhibit growth," although she doesn't identify any
specific rule she'd like to see repealed.
These big-picture differences play out on a host of environmental
policy questions.
Blumenthal and McMahon, for example, sharply diverge on the question of
offshore drilling. Blumenthal said he supports the current moratorium
on deepwater drilling, put in place by the Obama Administration in the
wake of the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. He noted that it's not
a permanent ban, just a temporary halt until "we determine what caused
the BP disaster, so we can learn from it and avoid making the same
mistake again."
McMahon said she opposed the moratorium, arguing that it's "stopping
any and all production and taking jobs."
Recent news reports have suggested the economic impact of the
moratorium has been limited so far, but Gulf Coast officials fear
continuing it until its scheduled Nov. 30 expiration could increase the
toll.
Asked what steps might be taken to avoid a similar mishap, McMahon said
the drilling rigs should be "re-inspected and re-certified to make sure
they're not cutting corners on safety issues" and then allowed to get
back to work.
Furthermore, McMahon said, the government should allow a significant
expansion of offshore drilling and energy exploration in other parts of
the U.S. "I believe that as part of a national energy policy, as well
as energy independence, we should as a country explore our natural
resources in an environmentally responsible way," she said.
That includes, for example, drilling in Alaska's Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge, which foes argue would destroy a pristine wildlife
habitat and supporters say would provide an immense oil boon without
environmental damage.
Blumenthal said the idea of opening ANWR for oil exploration "reflects
a looking-backward approach" to energy policy. "There are no jobs for
Connecticut in ANWR," he said. "There are jobs for Connecticut" in new
technologies, such as fuel cells and renewable energy sources, like
wind and solar.
More generally, Blumenthal said his support for offshore drilling would
depend on "where, how, and what would be done." He called for better
federal oversight of any such drilling efforts, noting that the
Interior Department's failings helped in part to pave the way for the
BP disaster.
There are at least two environmental issues where Blumenthal and
McMahon's positions converge: nuclear power and renewable energy. Both
say the federal government should foster an expansion of these two
energy sources, favoring, for example, loan guarantees to help the
nuclear energy industry construct new plants.
On the politically and logistically difficult question of how to
dispose of the nation's nuclear waste, McMahon said she is "not an
expert" and isn't sure of the best solution. Blumenthal said he would
support sending nuclear waste to the federal repository at Yucca
Mountain in Nevada, although that project has been long stalled and may
well be dead. (The current Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid, is from
Nevada and opposes it, as do many other lawmakers who would see nuclear
waste being transported through their states on the way to the Nevada
site.)
If the federal government finds a more suitable site, "so much the
better," said Blumenthal. "But right now, Connecticut is bearing the
cost and ... the risk of storing casks of waste at Millstone."
On renewable energy, McMahon said the federal tax code should be
"aggressively supporting" innovation in this field. Similarly,
Blumenthal says he would push for "clean energy business zones," that
provide tax credits, grants and other assistance to clean-energy
companies.
No matter who wins in November, these issues are likely to be at the
top of the 112th Congress's agenda, since lawmakers have punted and
stalled on everything from a climate change bill to renewable energy
proposals to a BP oil spill response in this Congress.
Blumenthal as outsider: Running away
from Obama, congressional Democrats
Mark Pazniokas, CT MIRROR
August 17, 2010
Richard Blumenthal distanced himself Monday from the Obama
administration and the state's Democratic congressional delegation with
a forceful denunciation of Washington in a speech to the Connecticut
AFL-CIO in Hartford. The Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate was
cheered as he arrived, but his anti-Washington theme drew little
applause from a labor audience that had warmly greeted the man
Blumenthal hopes to succeed, Sen. Christopher J. Dodd.
"People just think Washington isn't working for them," Blumenthal said.
"It's preoccupied with the special interests. It's gridlocked by
partisan acrimony. Washington isn't listening, and Washington isn't
working for ordinary people."
In January, Blumenthal entered the Senate race hours after Dodd's
retirement announcement by offering a testimonial to the five-term
senator. But on Monday he did not mention Dodd, who spoke to the
AFL-CIO delegates earlier in the day.
"If there were awards for being duplicitous, Dick Blumenthal would be a
gold medalist," said Chris Healy, the GOP state chairman, who says Dodd
has "afforded Blumenthal every courtesy and political consideration."
Blumenthal's remarks were a continuation of a theme he's been sounding
in recent days. Dodd said he wasn't bothered by Blumenthal's
criticism of Washington and, by implication, of him as the chairman of
the Senate Banking Committee and a key player in helping pass President
Obama's legislative agenda.
"No, I understand politics," Dodd said. "I just think there is a danger
in all of that, because you've got to get a vote out. You've got to get
your base out."
Dodd said Obama gets too little credit for the passage of landmark
legislation, such as the health-care and financial-services reform
bills, or helping stabilize the economy with stimulus spending that
helped Connecticut balance its budget.
"An awful of worthwhile things have happened in the past 20 months, and
I'm not sure anybody knows about it," Dodd said. "And if you don't talk
about it, don't count of the other side talking about it."
Dodd said that Democrats in this year's mid-term election cannot count
on anything close to the turnout that Obama generated in 2008, when
Democrats won all five U.S. House seats in Connecticut.
Blumenthal did not soften his rhetoric when told of Dodd's cautionary
remarks.
"Sen. Dodd and I agree on many things, but we also disagree on many
things," Blumenthal told reporters. "I'm not reluctant to say that I've
never been a part of Washington. I've never been an insider. And I'm
happy to be running to stand up for ordinary people."
Blumenthal is trying to follow Joseph I. Lieberman's example of using a
record as an activist attorney general as a springboard to the U.S.
Senate. Lieberman served six years as the state's first full-time
attorney general before ousting Lowell P. Weicker Jr. from the Senate
in 1988. Blumenthal was elected as attorney general in 1990,
ramping up the profile of the office with an aggressive approach to
class-action lawsuits and public relations.
"Connecticut is a small state, but we've led national battles, because
I've boxed above my weight by reaching out to members of other parties
and to independents, as well as to Democrats," Blumenthal said. "That
is my persona. That's in my DNA. And I m going to remain a fighter for
the people of Connecticut, first, last and always."
He is opposed by Republican Linda McMahon, whose $22 million budget to
win the GOP nomination was more than Dodd has spent on campaigns in his
Senate career. McMahon did not speak to the AFL-CIO, whose leaders say
they invited her by letter and email. McMahon's staff say they could
not find an invitation.
Ed Patru, the communication director for McMahon, said even before
Blumenthal's AFL-CIO speech that he was pandering by casting himself as
a political outsider.
"Ever get the sense that Dick Blumenthal is willing to say just about
anything to get elected - no matter how absurd and unbelievable?" Patru
said in an email to reporters, calling him a "big-government liberal"
suddenly trying to sound like a conservative Republican.
Healy was sharper in his criticism after reading of Blumenthal's
remarks.
"Dick Blumenthal believes if he just counts to three and says, 'I am
not a career politician, I am not a career politician, I am not a
career politician,' he will be delivered as a freshly scrubbed populist
who is fed up with the partisan politics and grid-lock of Washington,
D.C.," Healy said.
Blumenthal says he would have opposed the Trouble Asset Relief Program
that bailed out Wall Street. He also objects to the stimulus package as
doing too little to help the middle-class.
"I believe that the stimulus was wrongly structured, because it failed
to provide jobs and paychecks to ordinary Americans. It unfortunately
was inadequately designed to invest in infrastructure, in roads and
bridges and schools," Blumenthal said.
Asked how the state could have balanced its budget given the influx of
stimulus money for Medicaid, education and other programs, Blumenthal
said, "That's an entirely separate question. I would have opposed the
stimulus as it was structured."
Connecticut is ready to rumble
NYPOST
By MAUREEN CALLAHAN
Last Updated: 5:10 AM, August 15, 2010
Posted: 1:10 AM, August 15, 2010
Of this season’s crazy, contentious, wide-open Senate races — in Ohio,
Florida, California, Arizona, Nevada — none is as wild as what’s going
on in Connecticut. In one corner: Democrat Richard Blumenthal, 64,
state attorney general since 1991 and favored to win, up by over 40
points in the polls until this spring, when he was caught lying about
having served in Vietnam. In the opposing corner: Republican Linda
McMahon, 61, until last fall the CEO of World Wrestling Entertainment
(WWE), billionaire and political neophyte.
Since spending $22 million of her fortune, McMahon beat out GOP
contenders Peter Schiff (campaign slogan: “Schiff Happens” — seriously)
and former congressman and decorated Vietnam vet Rob Simmons, who’d
been drafted by the party to run. Ultimately, he lost the party’s
backing — to McMahon — for the primary. Simmons suspended his cash-poor
campaign in May, then re-entered a few weeks ago, showing up at
Connecticut commuter hubs and passing out potholders, a sadly literal
example that, for him, there was no issue “too hot to handle.”
McMahon won Tuesday’s primary with 49% of the vote and has since shrunk
Blumenthal’s formerly capacious lead to 7 points. She spent three hours
on Wednesday morning, beginning at 6 a.m., sitting in front of a
camera, doing interviews via satellite with outlets nationwide. She has
suddenly become a political supernova, one to watch, and she has done
it by positioning herself as the quintessential outsider, sick of
politics as usual, quid-pro-quos, the ever-expanding reach of the
federal government.
And mailers. Lots of mailers.
“I got interested after getting 20 or 30 of them,” says Rick Wagner, a
middle-aged independent. He and his wife Carole, a Republican, have
come to hear McMahon address a small group of voters and businesspeople
at the Chamber of Commerce in Simsbury, a suburb of West Hartford in
which everything — from law offices to Starbucks — is housed in
gut-renovated, centuries-old white clapboard houses. Except for a
vagrant by the side of the road asking drivers to “pull over to impeach
Obama!” everything is eerily orderly. The men are well-moisturized, the
women well-manicured, the 50-something hostess in a headband and “Mad
Men”-style sundress. Yet the 12 or so people in this basement office —
stuffy despite two softly whirring fans on the floor — are very
concerned.
What does Linda think about health-care reform? “I’d like to repeal
it,” she says.
Illegal immigration? “I don’t believe in amnesty, but you can’t deport
everyone,” she says. She’d like to see stricter fines and penalties for
employers, maybe make illegals carry electronic key cards with them
everywhere.
What’s the key difference between her and Blumenthal? “He’s clearly
liberal big-government,” she says. “I’m clearly conservative
small-government. It’s a real clear choice in that regard.”
On what committees would she like to serve? “Health, education,” she
says. But what she’d really like is “to be involved with defense.”
She stands in the center of the room for nearly 40 minutes, in her
sleeveless green watercolor-print dress, gold metallic flats, chunky
stone necklace and expensively highlighted hair. She does not perspire,
politely declines repeated offers of a glass of water. She is
on-message.
“I hate the old, ‘I’ll do you a favor, you do me a favor,’ ” she tells
the rapt group. “It should really be about: What’s the right thing to
do?”
Linda McMahon and her husband, WWE founder Vince McMahon, live in
Greenwich. Born and raised in North Carolina (she still speaks with a
southern drawl), she met Vince when she was just 13; he was 16. By the
time she was 18, they were married. Vince went to work with his father,
a wrestling promoter, in Maryland, and Linda worked as a receptionist
in a law firm. They had a son, Shane, in 1970. In 1976, when Linda was
pregnant with daughter Stephanie, the McMahons filed for bankruptcy.
“We were just starting our wrestling promotion business,” she says
today. “Our house was auctioned off. I used food stamps for one week. I
said, ‘I’ll find some other work.’ We rented a house and had a couple
of friends who loaned us their credit cards. We just sucked it up. It
built character. It taught us lessons that we never forgot.”
More than 30 years later, she is said to be buying herself a Senate
seat.
“When I’m being outspent 9 to 1, it’s out of control,” says her former
challenger Rob Simmons, a few days after the primary. “We’re only 3
million people in Connecticut. Spending $24 million to get to the
primary — nobody has ever spent that amount of money on any race here.”
Simmons raised $3 million in all, and says he was told by party bosses
that they were backing “self-funders” such as McMahon because “they
didn’t want to overtax their voters” for contributions. Connecticut
hasn’t had a Republican in the Senate since 1988, and Chris Dodd’s
announcement that he was retiring, coupled with Blumenthal’s Vietnam
blunder, suddenly put the seat in play. “I’ve always felt the primary
qualification for the Senate,” Simmons says of his ex-opponent’s
abilities, “is to get elected.”
There is much in common between McMahon and Blumenthal: personal
wealth, political connections, the attempt to come across as a renegade
operating outside the system, ready to make entrenched pols on the Hill
hear the American people and heed their demands.
Yet Blumenthal began working in DC in 1969 for the late Daniel Patrick
Moynihan. He later clerked for Supreme Court Justice Harry Blackmun.
His wife comes from wealth that rivals McMahon’s, her family has real
estate holdings that include the Empire State Building. As of this
week, however, he said that he would not be using personal money to
fund his campaign.
Nor is McMahon the outsider she proclaims to be. Along with her
husband, she has donated to candidates of both parties, but their
biggest donation, for $15,000, was to the Democratic Congressional
Campaign Committee. Such donations, she says, were born “primarily of
relationships you have with — for instance, part of my Democratic
donations were to [White House Chief of Staff] Rahm Emanuel, whose
brother Ari is the president of William Morris Endeavor Agency in
California. He has represented the WWE for years and years and years.
So Ari would call and say, ‘My brother’s running for office. Would you
mind making a contribution?’ Fine. Or, ‘My brother’s going to be in
town, would you sit down with him?’ So it was a personal, business
relationship there.”
The McMahons’ closeness to various lawmakers came under scrutiny when
the WWE was the subject of a congressional investigation after wrestler
Chris Benoit killed his family, then himself, in 2007. The
investigation focused on the use of steroids, drugs and on general
safety practices within the organization, which is unregulated. Two
years later, the committee said that the WWE hadn’t taken proper
measures regarding steroid use, but there was no substantial fallout.
“Linda pats herself on the back for having deregulated the industry,”
Mike Benoit, Chris’ father, told The Post. “The thing is, Linda’s the
CEO of a company that’s got the worst health-care record in North
America.”
“The relationships they built with Congress saved them,” says Chris
Nowinski, a former WWE wrestler and friend of Benoit’s. It was Nowinski
who convinced Mike Benoit to have his son’s brain tissue tested. The
coroner found that Benoit had suffered from chronic traumatic
encephalopathy — also common in boxers and football players, in which
repeated head trauma results in progressive degeneration of the area of
the brain that governs impulse control.
“Many other athletes who have been diagnosed with this disease have
committed suicide or become violent,” Nowinski says. Those in the WWE,
he says, are further jeopardized by the company’s employment practices:
Every single wrestler, from the $500-a-week cub to a WrestleMania
superstar, is hired as an independent contractor. That means no health
insurance, no eligibility for unemployment or Medicaid or worker’s
comp. The McMahons pay for in-the-ring injuries — they covered
Nowinksi’s $20,000 operation to put his nose back together — but sick
wrestlers often find themselves dropped from the organization.
“When I sat down with Linda — she’s a nice person,” Nowinski says. “But
given the decisions they’ve made with workplace safety, it’s hard to
believe that they care.”
As for culture-war stuff — the opposition going after the WWE for its
admittedly salacious, sometimes offensive content — McMahon has the
ultimate rejoinder: Even Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama campaigned on
televised WWE events.
Campaign-wise, McMahon has learned from both Clinton and Obama. Just as
Clinton did during her initial run for Senate, McMahon has embarked on
what she calls her “listening tour,” popping into local shops and
speaking at intimate events, soliciting the concerns and feedback of
the electorate. Her website and its operations are nearly identical to
Obama’s in 2008: she even has a URL, MyLinda2010.com, that echoes
Obama’s MyBarackObama.com.
As Obama was, she is fond of saying her tour will allow voters to “kick
the tires a little bit,” see what she’s about, and that this campaign
will be won as a “grass-roots effort” with “boots on the ground” and
volunteers going online, downloading scripts and voter phone numbers,
making campaign calls from their homes.
Perhaps most like Obama, she is seen as a candidate whose ambitions
outstrip her experience, who is buoyed by charisma and confidence, who
is vague on the issues and needs to study up. She supported Obama’s
policy in Afghanistan, she says, “but I don’t get the briefings. I’m
still not sure.” She thinks the health-care bill should be repealed but
also that “there is a group of people who don’t have access to health
care, and we should look at how to provide that without totally
recreating our health-care system.” McMahon remains a staunch supporter
of off-shore drilling, but we should “make sure that safety measures
are in place, make sure that companies are not going to be cutting any
corners.”
McMahon says that she and Blumenthal have so far agreed to three
debates, but that he has not yet responded to an invitation to appear
with her on “Meet the Press.” The Connecticut Senate race is one of a
handful that the venerable Sunday show would like to highlight, given
its weird, tumultuous course. There is also the very real chance that
the Connecticut race — like those in Nevada, California, Ohio, Florida
and several others — turn control of the Senate back to the
Republicans. (More likely, however, is the Republicans gaining control
of the House — though loss of such key Senate seats and the ouster of
majority leader Harry Reid would be a direct rebuke to the president
and the Democratic Party.)
Though McMahon very likely could become the junior senator from
Connecticut, it’s hard to discern what’s animating her decision to
enter politics now. She doesn’t speak of political heroes, or moments
of change or unrest that altered her political consciousness, or
thinkers that she agrees or disagrees with, or a specific policy or
injustice that she feels compelled to try and change. Her children are
grown; her husband absent the night she won the primary, “in California
producing his TV show, where he is every week.” Perhaps she is bored
after decades running the WWE; perhaps she is running because, based on
name-recognition and finances, she just can.
When McMahon first thought about running, she says, she never
considered a state seat. Why not run first for, say, the House of
Representatives, which will likely go to the Republicans this year
anyway? “Well . . . I think that . . .” She pauses. “The Senate is
where I want to be,” she says. “I’ve done business all over the country
and several parts of the world. The Senate is the place I would prefer
to be.”
U.S. CONGRESS, 4TH DISTRICT: Dan Debicella v. Jim Himes
4th Congressional
District Debate Oct. 24, 4-5:30pm at Wilton High School - issues
In
this contest, Jim Himes is the incumbent - however, his opponent,
Dan Debicella got to the Lunch Box first! Remember the
independent thinker former Congressman Chris Shays? Mr.
Shays was defeated last time by Mr. Himes. At left, Chris Shays.
Himes,
Debicella square off again in Fourth District
Posted on 10/24/2010
By TOM EVANS, Hour Staff Writer
WILTON
Domestic issues were on the table on Sunday afternoon in a candidates'
debate at Wilton High School as Republican Dan Debicella continues to
challenge Rep. Jim Himes, the Democratic incumbent, for his seat in the
4th Congressional District.
Sunday's debate, held at the Clune Performing Arts Center, was
sponsored by the League of Women Voters of Wilton, Norwalk, Stamford,
Weston, Westport, Bridgeport Area, Darien, Fairfield, Greenwich, New
Canaan, Redding and Ridgefield.
Kay Maxwell, currently the executive director of the World Affairs
Forum in Stamford, served as moderator Sunday. Maxwell, who served as
the 16th president of the League of Women Voters of the United States,
read questions from the LWV as well from the roughly 200 people who
gathered Sunday.
A couple of dozen sign-carrying supporters from both camps engaged in
verbal jousting outside the building before the debate. Democrats
chanted "keep Jim Himes" while Republicans shouted over the "keep" with
"heave."
Social Security was the first topic on the agenda, and Himes said there
is "tough work to do," especially when dealing with $80 trillion in
unfunded liabilities in Social Security, and another $40 trillion in
unfunded liabilities in the Medicare system.
"Seniors rely on this money, and we rely on the promise of a Social
Security system that will have money when we retire," Himes said.
"Personally I will look at the retirement age because we live longer.
People who are wealthy and live on a high income may be asked to scale
back their Social Security payments. One . . .
of the things Dan and I agree on is that there should be no
privatization of Social Security."
Debicella said one of the benefits of Democracy is making a choice
every two years "and I think I've got better solutions."
"Two things I would rule out when dealing with Social Security are
privatization and raising taxes," Debicella said. "We don't need to
slash Social Security benefits. In 1983, both parties came together for
moderate changes. We can't divert Social Security money. We have to
make the promise of Social Security one that continues to be kept."
Debicella took the first crack at a question about cap and trade as a
means to reduce pollution.
"The cap and trade act is an energy tax," Debicella said. "Companies
will sell the energy at higher prices to you. We have to get off
foreign oil. The government is not good at picking winners or
predicting the future. Solar (energy), fuel cells can all help us get
off foreign oil and help the environment."
Himes was quick to point out that "nowhere is the gap between Chris
Shays (whom Himes defeated for the 4th seat in 2008) and Dan Debicella
wider than on the environment.
"Dan Debicella has the single worst record of any congressman the last
10 years," Himes said. "I believe our reliance on foreign oil is one of
the most significant threats to our security. (Debicella) is someone
who says climate change is irrelevant."
Despite distinct differences, the two candidates have some common
ground, including a woman's right to choose.
"I grew up with a single mom, and I've seen up close the challenges
women face," Himes said. "I've watched friends and family struggle with
the (abortion) decision, and that's a decision that should be made by a
woman facing that crisis, not by white men in suits."
Debicella clarified his position on rape contraception, saying he would
not require any Catholic hospital to carry the kits, nor would he force
any Catholic doctor to go against his faith in performing an abortion.
"I believe every woman has the right to do with her body what she
will," Debicella said. "I believe everyone has the right to emergency
contraception. I don't want the government telling women what to do
with their bodies."
While Debicella does not support a military draft, and he is in favor
of troop draw-downs in Afghanistan to follow those in Iraq, he wants to
be sure Al-Qaeda camps have been dismantled and the Taliban cannot
again rise to power.
"I want no nation building in Afghanistan," Debicella said. "But we
must make sure Al-Qaeda is not re-forming in failed states like Yemen
and Somalia and Pakistan."
Himes also does not favor a draft, but said he is "intrigued by the
idea" of his congressional colleagues having to make military
deployment decisions when their sons or daughters are among the troops.
"What if we all had a stake in going to war?" Himes mused. "Maybe all
those decision-makers would not have been so quick to go to war in Iraq
if their children (were drafted). Afghanistan is a complicated and
antiquated society, and we need just enough presence there to go after
Al-Qaeda. We can use the money to Afghanistan for nation-building right
here."
On the "don't ask, don't tell" policy of sexual orientation in the
military, both candidates said the lifestyles of these heroic men and
women should not be an issue and the discriminatory policy should be
removed.
Debicella was first up to handle a question about "WikiLeaks," where
possibly sensitive military information, including troop movements, has
been released to the public.
"This kind of leaking is abhorrent," Debicella said. "A responsible
press corps that has information that puts troops at risk doesn't
release it. If they do release this information, they can and should be
prosecuted."
Himes' response was "ditto."
Himes-Debicella: Much to agree
on, but lots of room for debate
Uma Ramiah, CT MIRROR
October 24, 2010
It wasn't so much the issues that divided Jim Himes and Dan Debicella
at their Sunday night debate. Instead, the two 4th District
Congressional candidates took shots at each others' voting history,
campaigns and even integrity.
"Let's mark 15 minutes as the first time Jim Himes has lied to you
today," said Debicella, in response to the claim that the League of
Conservation Voters had rated his environmental record the worst of any
state senator in Connecticut in past ten years.
"Our national energy policy should be the same as our national
environmental policy, which is we need to get off of foreign oil," said
Debicella, a state senator and the Republican nominee. Instead, he
would encourage government incentives for research into alternative
energy, whether natural gas, fuel cells, solar.
"Dan is trying to wear the coat of Chris Shays," said Democratic
incumbent Himes, referring to his moderate Republican predecessor.
"Shays was an environmental hero," he said, and Debicella is the
opposite end of the spectrum.
But Himes also supported government investment in solar and alternative
energies as a method of job creation. As the campaign has
unfolded,
Himes and Debicella have disagreed strongly on issues including health
care and the stimulus. Himes defends the health care bill, though with
reservations, while Debicella calls for its repeal. Debicella calls the
stimulus, which Himes supported, ineffective and "pork-filled."
But on Sunday night, the candidates actually agreed on a variety of
issues. Both candidates called for transparency in political
advertising. Funding sources should be disclosed, they said.
"We are now seeing hundreds of millions being spent by shadowy groups,"
said Himes, who said recent Supreme Court rulings on campaign finance
were a step back for the country.
Debicella agreed. "We shouldn't have anonymous ads attacking him or me
or anyone else."
But then it was back to the ring.
"Jim doesn't need it, he does a great job of attacking me all on his
own. He doesn't need a third party coming in and doing it." Debicella
continued, saying Himes had received donations from both Wall Street
and what he called "Big Labor."
"Dan, if you're going to climb into the mud pit, and we both agree that
it's a mud pit, don't try to stand up and say you're a little bit
cleaner," said Himes in response. "Is it true that you got thousands of
dollars from Exxon Mobil?"
"Yes it is," said Debicella.
"Thank you," came the swift reply.
Though League of Women Voters moderator Kay Maxwell was strict with the
"hold your applause" rule, cheers broke out on this and other occasions
- typically after a direct attack. The candidates generally
agreed on
abortion, each one supporting a woman's right to choose.
"The decision should be made by the woman in question and not by white
guys in suits on Capitol Hill," said Himes, to another unsanctioned
burst of applause.
"I don't want government telling women what to do with their bodies,
and I don't want government telling faiths what they should do either,"
said Debicella.
"Don't ask, don't tell," the U.S. policy towards gays serving in the
military, was up next. It, too, was a non-issue.
"It is utterly inconsistent with what this country is," said Himes.
"Fully agree. Anybody who wants to serve in our military; gay,
straight, black, white man or woman, you are a hero, period," said
Debicella. "'Don't ask, don't tell' is discriminatory and it should be
removed."
This wholehearted agreement, without caveat, was met with roaring
applause and a friendly handshake between the two candidates. Even
Maxwell was impressed.
"Equal applause on that one, I'll let that slide," she said.
And on the issue of Wikileaks, the candidates were again in complete
agreement.
"This kind of leaking is absolutely abhorrent," said Debicella.
"Anything that puts our troops at risk should not be leaked to the
general public. Wikileaks, which is now completely unaccountable, is
now leaking this info," he said.
"We live in an open society but that society has limits when you put
people in danger," he finished.
The response from Himes was short: "Ditto."
The candidates also agreed on the basics of how to fix education and
immigration. Both touted the example of charter schools and
praised
"Race to the Top," the most recent attempt at public school reform
which rewards achievement with funding. Throughout the night,
Himes
agreed that government doesn't always get it right, but pointed out
ways in which it has spurred economic growth and helped stem the
recession - from the development of the Internet to the recent finance
regulation bill.
But Debicella disagreed. "The government can't pick winners," he said.
"The government is not good at predicting the future," he continued,
referring to investment in energy, technology and even job creation.
This was a common refrain and a point of disagreement throughout the
night.
"The difference between us," said Debicella, "is that you think the
government creates jobs, and I think private sector does."
After otherwise unremarkable closing statements, a personal note:
"I want to break a couple of rules here, " said Himes. "Tonight is Dan
Debicella's birthday and I'd like to ask for a round of applause for
him."
The audience cheered. Debicella turned 35 on Sunday.
"What a way to spend your birthday," said Himes, shaking Debicella's
hand.
Security issues dominate debate
Elizabeth Kim, Greenwich TIME Staff Writer
Published: 10:20 p.m., Thursday, October 21, 2010
STAMFORD -- Though the debate centered on foreign policy, the real
sparring between two candidates for the Fourth Congressional District
was on the economy, stimulus and personal character. On questions
related to Mexican drug cartels and China, Republican
challenger state Sen. Dan Debicella, R-21, managed to squeeze in his
criticism of Democratic incumbent Jim Himes for his support of the
administration's stimulus program, while Himes sought to stress signs
of recovery and associate his opponent with the failed policies of
Republican President George W. Bush.
"If you believe we are getting it right, then Jim Himes is your man,"
Debicella told the Holiday Inn audience of several hundred spectators
Thursday night.
Sponsored by the World Affairs Forum, a nonprofit and nonpartisan
organization, the debate between Himes and Debicella lasted roughly 90
minutes and featured a relatively loose format intended to foster a
debate on global issues. The questions came from forum and audience
members. But beginning with the opening question, it became clear
that both
contestants were more focused on articulating their domestic agendas.
Asked about the recent clash along the Mexican border that resulted in
the death of an American, Himes began by noting consecutive growth in
jobs as well as GDP. Similarly, given his first chance to rebut
Himes, Debicella returned to
his refrain of calling Himes a "rubber stamp" politician and saying the
stimulus had not worked. Debicella has instead proposed lowering
spending as well as cutting the payroll tax in half.
Himes said the stimulus had not solved the recession but had been "part
of turning the economy around," adding, "You don't fix that in 20
months." He also warned that the magnitude of spending cuts suggested
by Debicella would affect the funding of Medicare.
On matters of foreign policy, the candidates were generally in
agreement with some minor differences in approach. Both agreed the
United States should start to renew its relations with Cuba and
continue to engage China as well as tap into its market. One
topic where the two differed was the war in Afghanistan, with
Debicella arguing for a "slow and measured drawdown" along with the
defeat of Al Qaeda.
In a break from President Barack Obama, Himes, who traveled to
Afghanistan last year, said, "Our mission there is wrong. The Taliban
are not the enemy. The enemy is Al Qaeda and they are in Pakistan."
On the issue of immigration, Debicella broke ranks with members of his
own party.
"My party gets this wrong a lot," he said.
Citing the experience of his in-laws from Argentina, he said, "It is
too hard to come to this country."
He added: "You need to make legal immigration easy for the people who
want to come here and live the American dream. Toward the end,
the attacks seem to turn personal, with Himes taking
issue with Debicella's alleged misuse of facts. He took strong offense
at the suggestion by Debicella that he was not a strong supporter of
Israel.
"Frankly it says something about your character," Himes said.
For the most part, the audience seemed to enjoy the barbs. During the
course of the evening, the moderator several times reprimanded them for
clapping and cheering.
In 4th CD, a two-sided debate over
health care reform
CT MIRROR
Deirdre Shesgreen and Uma Ramiah
October 1, 2010
With the public still deeply divided over health care reform and some
pundits saying it's politically toxic, it's hard to find any Democrat
in a competitive re-election race who is talking up the new law.
Except, that is, in Connecticut's 4th Congressional District.
Rep. Jim Himes, the Democratic incumbent facing state Sen. Dan
Debicella, R-Shelton, has not shied away from his vote in favor of
health care reform. Himes mentioned it, albeit obliquely, in one of his
early TV ads, and last week the freshman congressman sought to draw
attention to Debicella's call for repeal of the health care overhaul.
Debicella, too, seems to be taking a slightly different tack on the
health reform than some his Republican counterparts. While he has
embraced the GOP's vow to repeal the law, Debicella has a few caveats
that go with that campaign pledge.
To be clear, neither candidate is making health care reform the No. 1
issue of the campaign. Both say they talk about jobs and the economy
far more often. But health care is still playing a significant role, as
voters sort out the impact of the law and as Himes and Debicella seek
to define each other in the final weeks of the campaign.
In other contested House and Senate campaigns around the country, the
only Democrats talking about the health reform law are those who voted
"No," proudly touting their opposition to a key Democratic
accomplishment. Republicans, meanwhile, have sought to make the health
overhaul symbol of Democrats' "Big Government" agenda, labeling the law
"Obamacare."
"Few Democrats are talking about health care reform proactively, even
in the muted way that Congressman Himes is doing," said Frederick Yang,
a Democratic pollster who is working for congressional candidates
across the Midwest and the South this election. "I think
especially this year, Democrats are trying to run localized campaigns,
and this is clearly a national issue."
But across the 4th District's politically and economically diverse
terrain, voters are still talking and thinking about the overhaul.
Katherine Homberger, of Norwalk, says she'll vote Republican this
midterm election because the health care bill seems unreasonable to
her. "I think it's too expensive," she said. "How are they going to pay
for it?"
Another Norwalk resident, Edward Olius, said he backs the law
unequivocally. "I have insurance, but [other] people don't. How can we
not help these people, who can't even get in to see doctors?"
Debicella said it's usually the second or third issue to come up in his
conversations on the campaign trail. For his part, Himes said he has
raised it in part because many voters are still so uncertain of what
was in the health care bill, and how it will affect them.
Even so, both candidates seem to be treading carefully on health care,
while accusing each other of distorting the real impact of the law.
Himes, for example, does not offer a full-throated endorsement. While
the law's provisions to expand coverage to the uninsured and to crack
down on insurance industry abuses are very strong, Himes said, he's not
sure how well the cost-containment measures will work.
"I have always been very upfront with my critiques of the plan, and
there's lots of uncertainty," Himes said. "It's going to be up to us to
implement the cost-savings measures over time."
But whatever the law's flaws, Himes said, he thinks his constituents
would rather see Congress improve the law than repeal it.
And his campaign clearly saw a political advantage in focusing on the
more immediate elements of health care law last week, when several of
the insurance industry reforms went into effect. Those included a ban
on insurance companies' ability to deny coverage to children with
pre-existing conditions, allowing young adults to stay on their
parents' health insurance until age 26, and a prohibition on life-time
caps on insurance coverage.
"Dan Debicella wants to REPEAL those reforms," blared an email from the
Himes campaign.
Debicella says that's not true. Yes, he supports scrapping much of the
health care law, but not all of it. He specifically supports keeping
those new protections, which he said Democrats timed to go on the books
just before the election.
The elements Debicella opposes would not come into play, for the most
part, until 2014. Those include the mandate that individuals purchase
insurance, the federal subsidies to help cover the cost, and the new
health exchanges where people will be able to shop for their insurance
plans.
Debicella argues that the subsidies and other measures will hurt the
vast majority of Americans who already have private insurance, just to
help the few who do not--an argument Himes' sharply rejects.
"The biggest thing I hear [from voters] is that they don't like the law
because they don't think it's going to help them, and these are middle
class folks," Debicella said. "There's a better way to focus on cost
reduction."
Debicella said he would fully back Republican efforts to de-fund
implementation of the law and block regulations that he sees as
harmful. But, he added, "I prefer the word replace," not repeal, when
explaining his position. His substitute proposals include a tax credit
to individuals to encourage the use of preventive medicine; tort reform
to rein in the cost of medical malpractice insurance for doctors; and
more use of low-cost programs like Connecticut's Charter Oak Plan.
How voters sort out these differences, and how much weight they
give health care in this election, remains to be seen. Polls show an
intensely partisan and deep split on law, along with a significant dose
of confusion.
Yang, the pollster, said Himes's strategy of proactively raising the
issue could help gin up the Democratic base in his district. But, he
added, given the strong association between health reform and President
Barack Obama, along with Obama's sinking popularity, it's not without
risk.
INQUIRING MINDS WANT TO KNOW
Will Rep. Himes appear at the Lunch Box Tuesday September 7? How
many at "Brown Bag" lunch?
Rep. Jim Himes joins Weston first
selectman for brown bag lunch tomorrow
Weston FORUM
Written by Kimberly Donnelly
Monday, 06 September 2010 00:00
Rep. Jim Himes (D-4th) will join weston First Selectman Gayle Weinstein
for a brown bag lunch at Weston Town tomorrow, following a "tour" of
businesses at Weston Center.
Brown bag lunches with the first selectman are usually held at noon on
the first Monday of each month. But because of the Labor Day holiday on
Monday, Sept. 6, Ms. Weinstein has scheduled the September brown bag
lunch for Tuesday, Sept. 7, at noon in the Weston Town Hall Meeting
Room.
The lunch is open to any Westonite who has a comment, question, or
issue they would like to discuss with the first selectman, or with Mr.
Himes. It is an opportunity to share ideas and thoughts in an informal
setting.
Participants are encouraged to bring lunch.
Himes
tries to use Shays' old playbook
Deirdre Shesgreen, CT MIRROR
August 25, 2010
WASHINGTON -- Chris Shays is not on the ballot in Connecticut's 4th
Congressional District this year, but one of the candidates in the race
is channeling the former Republican congressman's persona.
It's the Democrat who ousted Shays two years ago, U.S. Rep. Jim Himes.
He is adopting his vanquished predecessor's sales pitch, proclaiming
himself as New England's new maverick in Congress.
Himes' campaign has released a TV ad that portrays him as a moderate
and the winner of the Aug. 10 Republican primary, state Sen. Dan
Debicella of Shelton, as an extremist.
"After just two years, Jim Himes is New England's most independent
Congressman," the ad's narrator says, touting Himes' support for budget
cuts and health care reform before launching into a sharp critique of
Debicella's voting record in the state legislature.
Political observers say Himes' strategy is no surprise -- though Shays
finds it a stretch.
"This election will come down to Chris Shays' old voters," said David
Wasserman, who tracks House races for the non-partisan Cook Political
Report. And a key question, Wasserman said, is whether those voters
"like the course Democrats are taking or whether they are wary of one
party-control" in Washington.
Gary Rose, chairman of the government and politics department at Sacred
Heart University in Fairfield, noted that nearly 40 percent of the 4th
District's voters are unaffiliated, the largest bloc.
"This election cannot be won by emphasizing one's partisanship," Rose
said. The political middle "is where all the action is."
So it's no wonder that Debicella ran an ad in the primary, juxtaposing
a photo of Himes next to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and saying he votes
with "party insiders" too much. Or that Himes responded in the dog days
of August with the current spot that tries to starkly define both
himself and Debicella. The battle lines have been drawn.
"The sweet spot of the 4th District is socially progressive,
business-oriented, and fiscally responsible, and I think that describes
me," Himes said. "It's an interesting question, if you put Chris Shays
between me and Dan Debicella, who he would be closer to."
Indeed, just as Himes is eager to tout his record bucking the House
leadership on federal spending and ethics issues, Debicella is also
vying for a centrist label.
"I'm pro-choice, I'm pro-stem cell research, I'm pro-civil unions,"
Debicella said in an interview Wednesday, as he sought to counter
Himes' ad calling him "reckless, radical and wrong for Connecticut."
The Himes ad cites Debicella's vote in the state Senate against
extending certain health benefits, such as hearing aids for deaf
children, but Debicella said he voted no because he opposed mandating
insurance coverage, not because he was against those particular
benefits.
"The whole question in this race is, are people happy with what's going
on in Washington, D.C.?" Debicella said. "And if the answer is yes,
then Jim Himes is your guy. On every single vote, he has been in
lock-step with the Democratic leadership."
Himes says this is no replay of the 2008 race, where he narrowly beat a
well-respected incumbent with a clear moderate voting record.
In the 2008 race, Himes said he found himself wooing Democrats who said
they supported Shays because of his strong environmental record, his
support for universal health care, and other such issues. This time, he
doesn't expect to have that problem.
"Having run against Chris Shays ... I am gratified the Republicans have
nominated an extremist," Himes said.
Clearly, "extremist" is not a moniker that Himes ever could have used
against Shays. But Shays, for his part, said he doesn't think Himes can
credibly claim his old maverick mantra.
"This doesn't even meet the laugh test," Shays said.
The source for Himes' ad is a Washington Post votes database, which
shows that Himes voted with his party 94 percent of the time during the
current Congress. That is indeed lower than other lawmakers in New
England. (The next closest New England lawmaker is Rep. Paul Hodes, of
New Hampshire, who has voted with his party 94.7 percent of the time in
the 111th Congress.)
But, as Shays noted, every other House member from New England is now a
Democrat, and 94 percent is still pretty high.
"That is not independence," Shays said, pointing to his own record of
voting with his party about 70 percent of the time or less. (See this
story for more on the Washington Post vote tally.)
Shays said he had been trying to stay mum about Himes' record, but now
that he is using the New England moderate label, he plans to weigh in
more forcefully in the contest. He is supporting Debicella.
Whatever Shays' role, the race is intensifying and will be closely
watched.
Rose notes that in 2010, Himes won with considerable help from the
coattails of Barack Obama, who drew thousands of extra voters to the
polls, especially in the district's largest city, Bridgeport. Without
him on the ticket, Himes is expected to be more vulnerable.
The Cook Report currently has the seat listed as likely to stay in
Democratic hands, but the report's Wasserman said it will probably move
into a more competitive category in the coming weeks.
"The noise level in this race has increased," generating more buzz at
the national party committees, he said. "I still give Himes the edge,
but I do think it's closer than a lot of people realize ... This is one
of those next-tier races that could turn a big Republican year into a
gigantic Republican year."
CT TOP OF THE TICKET, THE
GUBERNATORIAL RACE:
Tom Marsh, Independent Party v. Dan
Malloy, Democrat v. Tom
Foley, Republican
Click on Gubernatorial Candidate to read CT MIRROR
interview. In 2010 contest there is no incumbent.
Underticket news here.
All over now! In case you missed
it, play-by-play below, courtesy of the Hartford Courant
Dannel Malloy And Tom Foley Clash In
Third Televised Debate; Final TV Debate Is Next Tuesday Night
By Christopher Keating on October 19, 2010 3:27 PM
In their third televised debate, Democrat Dannel Malloy and Republican
Tom Foley clashed Tuesday in their race for governor over the state
budget, binding arbitration and who was telling the truth about Foley's
health care plan. With only two weeks left in the race, Malloy
and Foley have been battling bitterly in negative television
commercials and in debates around the state. In the first
question, Channel 3 television anchor Dennis House asked how the
candidates would close the state's projected deficit of $3.4 billion in
the 2012 fiscal year, which will be facing the new governor as soon as
he takes over on January 5 at the state Capitol.
"We're going to change direction by, first of all, changing the
rules,'' Malloy said. "We're going to play it straight on the budget.
... We're going to have a plan to get out of and overcome the difficult
times we're in.''
Foley, a longtime business executive, said he will solve the budget
deficit by reducing spending, not increasing state taxes. He said he
constantly hears "tales of woe'' from employers who complain about how
long it takes the state Department of Environmental Protection to grant
approval for various projects, which he said slows down economic
development.
"We're considered one of the most business-unfriendly states in the
nation,'' Foley said. "We need to solve our looming budget deficit.''
Foley responded that the state-employee unions "have had too much
influence over policy'' in Hartford, and he pledged that that would
change that influence if he wins on November 2.
Malloy, the Stamford mayor for 14 years, countered by saying that
Republican governors have overseen Connecticut's policies for the past
16 years. Foley, though, placed the blame on the Democratic-controlled
legislature for the state's policies over the same period.
Regarding the debate's second question on health care, Foley said the
new federal healthcare plan that was passed this year by the U.S.
Congress and President Barack Obama "will put tremendous burdens on
states, including Connecticut.''
Healthcare spending in Connecticut is about $30 billion annually,
including about $7 billion of the state budget for everything from
prescriptions for prison inmates to nursing home costs, according to
Foley.
Malloy countered that premiums for health care have gone up
consistently over the past four years, adding that profits should be
limited for the private-sector companies that handle various contracts
for the state government. "This is a big difference between my opponent
and myself. I think you need to root out excess profits,'' Malloy
said. As he has said in the past, Malloy said he would never push
for the removal of any mandates regarding health care, such as prostate
screening. He attacked Foley's "core-needs'' health plan that has been
featured recently in negative commercials by Malloy.
"Dan, as you know, I have not proposed anything that would remove
health care coverage from anybody who has it in Connecticut,'' Foley
responded. "You need to stick to the truth here.''
"You may have forgotten your healthcare plan, but I haven't,'' Malloy
responded regarding Foley's plan that would be exempt from various
mandates.
On the third question, Malloy offered a spirited defense of the state's
binding arbitration system, saying that it has avoided strikes by
police and firefighters.
"Dan's starting to sound like a union representative,'' Foley said,
adding that he has not met any union leaders this year who want changes
in the current arbitration system. "The people who are suffering from
mandatory binding arbitration are the citizens of Connecticut.''
"Tom doesn't like mandates in health care and he doesn't like
mandates'' in binding arbitration, Malloy said.
Foley then asked Malloy if he could prove that he had been untruthful
about Foley's health plan "Would you apologize to the people of
Connecticut for your untruthfulness?''
After Malloy started answering, Foley interrupted and said, "Dan, I
asked you a simple question.''
The exchange eventually ended without a resolution, and the
co-moderators moved on to the next question. The debate was held
in a theatre at the Regina Quick Center For the Arts on the campus of
Fairfield University.
The first two televised debates were major battles - dubbed by Foley as
"the brawl at The Bushnell'' in Hartford and "the grapple at The
Garde'' in New London. In between those two TV debates, the candidates
clashed during a tourism forum in Hartford over which candidate had
changed a bedpan more recently. Foley had criticized Malloy for walking
a picket line with the District 1199 union members on primary day in
August, and Malloy responded that he was trying to help women who
change bedpans for $12 per hour.
Concerning privatization of state services, Malloy said, "I'm not a guy
who runs to privatization.''
Foley said the state could save $25 million through the privatization
of services at the much-criticized Riverview Hospital, which is run by
state employees and costs more than $900,000 per student per year.
Senate Republican leader John McKinney of Fairfield and Child Advocate
Jeanne Milstein have both said publicly that Riverview costs too much.
"Dan has no significant proposals to reduce spending. He is going to
raise your taxes,'' Foley said.
But Malloy said that many services are already privatized across state
government.
"You know what Tom's plan is - to raise your property taxes,'' Malloy
said.
During exchanges on education, the candidates outlined their views.
Malloy touted his record in Stamford for pushing for universal pre-K
education.
"Dan's leaving out an important fact and that is that Stamford has the
largest achievement gap of any city in the state,'' Foley said.
"In 30 seconds, Tom made more misstatements about my record in Stamford
than I care to count,'' Malloy said. "We need to make real changes, and
I'm prepared to do it.''
Concerning high salaries at the University of Connecticut and the
Connecticut State University system, Malloy said, "I think leadership
begins at the governor's office. ... The idea that we would pay two
presidents at the same time at the same university makes no sense. ...
I support UConn. I support the four universities - Eastern, Western,
Southern, and Central.''
Regarding excessive salaries and pensions of public employees, Foley
charged that the Stamford fire chief retired with a pension of $264,000
per year.
"Actually, I'm dumbfounded. I don't know what fire chief he's talking
about,'' Malloy said. "The fire chief I appointed is still on the job.''
Concerning massive traffic congestion that has clogged lower Fairfield
County for decades, both candidates said that the state needs a better
transportation plan.
"We've been kicking it around for years and doing precious little,''
said Malloy, whose city's office towers loom over the congested
Interstate 95. After Grand Central Station in Manhattan, the main
Stamford station is the second busiest in the Metro-North Commuter
Railroad system.
"We need to clear accidents much more rapidly,'' Malloy said. "We need
to develop more stations and more parking along those stations. .. We
need to invest in the New Haven to Hartford to Vermont line. ... We
absolutely need more parking spaces for those who would opt off I-95.''
He added that the equivalent of 1 million truck trips are avoided on
Interstate 95 through the use of state ports.
Regarding three specific cuts, Malloy said the state should switch to
generic drugs, cut electricity costs by $60, streamline school building
projects to save hundreds of millions of dollars, and combine state
departments and agencies. The state should also cut 15 percent of the
estimated 600 positions that the governor controls. He also complained
about the privatization of work at the Department of Transportation,
which has been a huge bone of contention for years for union employees
in CSEA/SEIU Local 2001.
"What I've said is I'll cut everything except the safety net,'' Malloy
said.
"I'll put on a hiring freeze,'' Foley said, adding that it could save
$100 million. "We will eliminate waste and duplication. ... We will use
outside contractors wherever it is less expensive'' and quality is
maintained.
The state could save as much as $600 million by moving patients from
nursing homes to lower-cost, community-based services, Foley said.
The final question covered the Notre Dame football team's refusal to
play in the 40,000-seat Rentschler Field in East Hartford against the
UConn Huskies. UConn agreed to play in larger venues, such as the new
Meadowlands Stadium in New Jersey and the Patriots stadium in
Massachusetts.
"I actually wasn't familiar with that decision,'' Foley said. "I think
Connecticut is a great state. I don't know why they'd rather be in New
Jersey than in Connecticut.''
But Malloy said he would have pulled the plug on the Notre Dame - UConn
series if Notre Dame continued to refuse to play at UConn's relatively
small stadium. Notre Dame consistently sells out its home field in
South Bend, Indiana with 80,000 fans and a national television audience
for every game.
"If I had been governor at the time, I would have pulled the UConn
folks aside and said, let's find somebody else to play,'' Malloy said.
In his closing statement, Foley said, "Connecticut should be doing
well, but we aren't. ... I'm an outsider. I'm a problem solver. ... I
believe I can get employers to start hiring again. ... I will not raise
your taxes. My opponent has no plan to reduce spending, and he will
raise your taxes. ... I will come to Harvard, Hartford, excuse me, with
no commitments. ... I am someone you can trust. I am not a career
politician who will say anything to get elected.''
Malloy, in his closing, said, "I do fear that Tom wants to raise your
property taxes, and that's his plan. ... I stayed at Boston College,
where I met my wife, Cathy, who runs a rape crisis center. ... My mom
was a nurse, and my dad sold insurance. ... I'm asking you for your
vote. I'm asking you for your confidence.''
Conn. gov hopefuls spar
over death penalty, TV ads
By SUSAN HAIGH (AP)
5 October 2010
HARTFORD, Conn. — The two major-party nominees for governor took aim at
each other's resumes in a televised debate Tuesday and sparred over
issues ranging from the state's death penalty to the looming budget
deficit.
The live debate was held the day a man was convicted of the 2007 home
invasion killings of a woman and her two daughters. The first question
of the debate was about where Republican Tom Foley and Democrat Dan
Malloy stood on the state's death penalty, which some lawmakers have
been pushing to repeal.
Malloy, the former mayor of Stamford, said he supports abolishing
executions in Connecticut only for future crimes. He said that wouldn't
benefit Steven Hayes, who faces possible execution for the July 2007
slayings in Cheshire.
Foley, a Greenwich businessman and former ambassador to Ireland, said
Hayes and his co-defendant, who's awaiting trial, likely would be
successful in appealing death sentences if the state's death penalty
law were scrapped because they could use it in their appeals.
"It's almost certain that Steven Hayes and his accomplice in this crime
will not be put to death (if Malloy is elected governor)," Foley said.
Malloy said the longest-serving death row inmate in Connecticut has
been facing his possible execution for 22 years. He said the state
doesn't have "a workable" death penalty, and he told Foley "you can't
assure anything is going to happen."
Hayes' attorneys have said they'll argue for a life sentence.
Tuesday's debate came as a recent Quinnipiac University poll gave
Malloy a slight lead in the race to replace Republican Gov. M. Jodi
Rell, who isn't seeking re-election. An independent candidate, Chester
First Selectman Tom Marsh, wasn't invited to participate in the debate,
which was held at the Bushnell Center for the Performing Arts and was
sponsored by FoxCT and the Hartford Courant.
As with Monday's Senate debate, both major-party candidates were shown
each other's recent critical TV ads. Malloy's spot accuses Foley of
laying off workers and bankrupting a Georgia textile mill he once owned
while receiving $20 million — accusations also made during the
Republican primary.
Foley again vehemently denied the charges. He said his management
company and its employees received compensation but he didn't know how
much.
"You're misrepresenting what is happening," Foley said to Malloy in one
of their many spirited exchanges. "Why don't you be truthful with the
voters?"
"Tom, release the papers, that's all you have to do," Malloy shot back,
adding how it was unfair of Foley "to walk away with $20 million when
people lost their pensions."
Throughout the debate, Malloy tried to paint himself as an experienced,
successful problem-solver who's well-versed in public policy. He
accused Foley of being a rich CEO who's short on facts and unfamiliar
with the problems middle-class families face.
Foley also tried to portray himself as a successful problem-solver with
a proven record of turning around troubled companies. Given the
difficult fiscal times, he said, Connecticut needs someone with his
experience and skills. He frequently accused Malloy of being a career
politician who has exaggerated his successes.
Foley accused Malloy of being too cozy with state employee unions,
making it difficult for him to solve the state's budget deficit
problems. Connecticut's projected $19.1 billion general fund budget for
2012 is predicted to be $3.4 billion short.
Foley said it's widely believed Malloy has made commitments to the
unions not to lay off workers, a charge Malloy denied.
Copyright © 2010 The Associated
Press. All rights reserved.
A glimpse of
policies to come in Hartford?
Malloy proposes $50 million for development of ports. Candidate takes tour of harbors in New
London, New Haven, Bridgeport
By Ted Mann New London Day Staff Writer
Article published Sep 22, 2010
New London - From the second-level cabin of the Cross Sound Ferry Co.'s
high-speed SeaJet ferry, Democrat Dan Malloy looked out at the
industrial banks of the Thames River.
The green petroleum tanks of the Hess Corp. The glittering office
campus of Pfizer, soon to be occupied by workers for Electric Boat, the
massive submarine manufacturer across the river. Past the bridge, the
drydocks of the Thames River Shipyard, still protected on their upriver
side by the wooden skeletons of old schooner hulls, there to break the
momentum of ice floes that don't come rushing down the river anymore.
And right in the center of it all, the State Pier, the central
infrastructure of the deepest of Connecticut's three commercial ports,
which Malloy says he can help revitalize if voters make him the state's
first Democratic governor in a generation.
Malloy, with running mate Nancy Wyman and local politicians and
business owners in tow, bounced from Bridgeport to New Haven to New
London Tuesday, brandishing a new proposed port development plan that
would redirect $50 million in already authorized state borrowing to
fund infrastructure improvements and partnerships with private
enterprise to spur development in the port cities.
And the plan would do so without any new spending, Malloy claims, using
unpaid appointees and existing staff in the Department of
Transportation and Economic and Community Development. That was a nod
to the political reality of his race with Republican Tom Foley, in
which each campaign must emphasize its determination to cut a $3.4
billion state deficit while increasing economic activity and
employment, and also cutting back on unnecessary state spending.
"It's time to stop talking about it," Malloy said, standing on a
platform amid weekday recreational fisherman and union laborers on the
Tomlinson Bridge, which spans the tank-lined harbor of New Haven. "It's
time to get going."
Malloy's plan is not the first from a gubernatorial candidate pledging
to achieve multiple goals by reviving commercial shipping in
Connecticut, among them creating jobs for port workers, removing
freight traffic from clogged highways with improved ship-to-rail
connections, and supporting existing maritime industry.
Standing next to Malloy on the bridge in New Haven was the man who
defeated him for the Democratic nomination for governor four years
earlier, New Haven Mayor John DeStefano Jr., and who spoke repeatedly
of port improvements in a losing electoral battle with Republican Gov.
M. Jodi Rell.
Before Rell, former Gov. John G. Rowland's administration invested
millions in redevelopment at State Pier in New London, including some
upgrades to rail infrastructure and the pier itself.
"Listen, John Rowland hasn't been governor for a long time, and I want
to rejuvenate this effort very substantially," Malloy said.
Malloy's plan would create a State Port Authority that would coordinate
efforts of local port administrators but not usurp them. That division
of responsibilities brought favorable comment from local leaders like
John S. Johnson, who said local marine trade leaders feel they're
"under the thumb of the DOT," and urged him to include industry
representatives among the unpaid appointees to the new authority.
"I see government as a junior partner," Malloy told him.
"Connecticut doesn't need more government, we need more jobs," Foley
said in a written response to Malloy's plan. "He says his new authority
won't have any fiscal impact and then says he will allocate up to $50
million in previously authorized Special Tax Obligation bonds to pay
for it. Did I hear that right? Does he mean that it isn't really
spending if it has already been authorized or if we are borrowing the
money? This is the same tricky accounting from Hartford that got us
into this mess."
Malloy argues the bigger problem is not following through on proposals
to find new industries to fill the pier in New London with goods, or
dredge existing harbors like Bridgeport's, which was last dredged in
1964.
"The problem with Connecticut is we don't set priorities, things are
momentarily a priority so we'll see a spate of work done on it, without
the execution of a long-term vision and mission," Malloy said.
Marsh on health care: A personal view
Arielle Levin Becker, CT MIRROR
September 27, 2010
Third in a series
Tom Marsh draws from personal experience when he talks about health
care.
The Republican-turned-Independent Party candidate for governor speaks
of having no health insurance just two months before his wife was
diagnosed with breast cancer, giving him an understanding of the
pitfalls faced by people who can't afford insurance.
He recalls caring for his parents and mother-in-law at home at the end
of their lives, experiences that fuel a goal of making it easier to
keep seniors out of institutional care.
And he speaks of the challenges of finding health insurance when he
started a small business and says that, despite his tendency to favor
less government, he would consider funding a public health insurance
option if state residents want it.
If Marsh's opponents, Republican Tom Foley and Democrat Dan Malloy,
occupy two ends of a spectrum in their health care views, Marsh falls
toward the side of his fellow Republican, if a bit closer to the center.
Marsh, the first selectman of Chester, supports incentives to get
people on public insurance programs to make behavioral changes like
quitting smoking and wants to make it easier for seniors remain at
home. They're the right things to do, he says, and they can also save
the state money.
But Marsh acknowledges that the savings won't come immediately, and the
state's massive budget deficit will likely mean making choices in
health and social service spending.
Marsh would not cite specific items to cut or consolidate, saying that,
"in the realm of social services, everything seems important." But he
said some state programs are "wants" more than needs, and said he would
give lower priority to those that focus on workplace or societal rights
and special interest advocacy.
He also has faith that some money-saving changes, like getting people
to take a more proactive approach to their health, can pay off quickly.
And he said the state must begin to make more long-term changes that
pay off later.
"The other option of continuing what we're doing now and just doing it
with less money, it doesn't work," Marsh said. "And we don't have any
more money."
Crisis to Intervention
Marsh speaks frequently about changing the way government works, making
it function better, not just on more or less money.
In health care, the country has a "sick care system, not a health care
system," he says. Changing that means moving from crisis to
intervention, treating problems before they become worse and more
costly.
A big part of that shift, Marsh believes, is focusing on wellness.
Marsh wants to offer wellness training to people on state programs, and
supports requiring people receiving state assistance to take classes -
on topics that could include nutrition, lifestyle management, parenting
skills or how to create a resume. He also favors financial incentives
for people to make behavioral changes.
"Why not get people together and say, you know what, if you stop
smoking, we're probably going to save a whole lot of money later on, so
here's the program, and we're going to pay you $50, $100," he said.
"And if you complete the cessation program, you're going to be rewarded
for that."
Marsh acknowledged that wellness efforts are not likely to produce
immediate savings, although he believes they will ultimately pay off.
Rigorous research on wellness programs has been limited, although the
experiences of some employers have suggested that the programs could
save money over time. Much of the research focuses on companies and
voluntary programs, which could be difficult to generalize to a broader
population or for required programs.
Marsh believes the state could test wellness approaches through focused
pilot programs, which he calls "charter agencies." The idea would be to
identify an outcome, pursue it with more leeway to avoid red tape than
state agencies typically have, then expand or reduce the program based
on how it turns out.
Marsh would also consider reimbursing preventive care at higher rates,
giving providers incentives to accept patients with public insurance.
Many providers do not accept Medicaid because of the relatively low
rates it pays, although even people with higher-paying commercial
insurance can struggle to find primary-care providers to treat them,
part of a shortage of providers that is expected to get worse.
Prioritizing
When talking about making budget choices, Marsh points to Oregon, where
the amount of services covered by Medicaid can fluctuate.
Oregon uses a prioritized list of health services to cover its Medicaid
recipients, and the legislature can decide how much of the list to
include in the budget, although changes must be approved by the federal
government.
Even without a list, Connecticut will need to start prioritizing its
services if money is limited, Marsh said.
"To me, you look at your children and your elderly first to make sure
that they're well covered, and then in the middle, you start looking at
how can we best spend the money," he said.
Marsh suggested flexibility with cuts - if the state can't cover all
dental work for adults, for example, what about one annual check-up?
"All of that stuff has to be on the table," he said. "We have to have
basic health care for our most needy and then have a discussion once we
take care of that population, who comes next, and then what comes next
for those services."
Aging at Home
One way to save money, Marsh believes, is to shift the way long-term
care is provided from institutional care to care based at home or in
the community. Marsh's motives are not just financial.
Over about a decade, Marsh's parents and his wife's mother lived at the
Marshs' home before they died. Marsh observed changes in the long-term
care industry, and said he was struck by the difficulty of arranging
for home care, even though doing so cost less than a nursing home.
"I just thought, who wants to be sitting in the nursing home and why is
it so difficult to have competent care, or at least assistance if
you're trying to do what we thought was the right thing anyway and keep
them at home?" he said.
Marsh wants to make it easier for people to choose to stay at home as
they age, a concept called "aging in place."
Long-term care is a major piece of the state budget - the state is
budgeted to spend $1.3 billion in Medicaid funds for nursing homes this
fiscal year, although at least half gets reimbursed by the federal
government.
Just over half of the state residents whose long-term care is covered
by Medicaid receive care at home or through community-based services.
The state's Long-Term Care Plan calls for increasing that to 75 percent
by 2025, a move that one study suggests could save up to $900 million a
year.
Marsh said he would begin tackling the issue during the first week of
the next legislative session.
"What we as a state need to do is to say, 'the default should go to how
can we keep you at home as long as possible, not how can we get you out
of your house as soon as possible?'" he said.
Getting there would likely require other actions, such as making sure
there are enough workers trained in the appropriate skills to keep up
with the demand, Marsh said.
Researchers have noted other challenges. To receive Medicaid funding
for home and community-based services, people must fit into one of the
state's many waivers or pilot programs, which are narrowly defined. The
governance structure for long-term care in the state is fractured
between multiple state departments and agencies, and it can be
difficult for consumers to learn even basic information about their
options.
Saving on Coverage
To save money, Marsh would also seek to change the way state employees'
health care coverage is managed, using a model from Chester. The town,
which provides health insurance to 15 employees, uses a high-deductible
health plan and pays the deductible for its workers. The model,
referred to as a health reimbursement account, saves money because
having a higher deductible comes with lower premiums, Marsh said.
Marsh believes it could be expanded to state employees as part of
negotiations for the next labor agreement. The current one runs out in
2017.
But Matt O'Connor, a spokesman for the State Employees Bargaining Agent
Coalition, said that model would not be better than what state
employees have now. Unionized workers with similar plans have not found
them to be better for their families, he said.
O'Connor said it could also be difficult to translate something that
works for Chester's 15 employees to the state's health insurance plan,
which covers about 200,000 workers, retirees and their dependents.
It would be a simplistic analysis, he said, "to say, 'well, if it works
in Chester, it will work for the whole state's workforce."
Marsh sees virtue in the state offering a viable way for people to get
health insurance, something that could take place through the SustiNet
plan. SustiNet grew out of an effort to establish universal health care
coverage in the state with a public option. The version that ultimately
became law was scaled-back, and its future is not clear, although a
board is developing a health plan that supporters hope will be offered
to state workers, Medicaid recipients and the public.
"From a default level, I like less government," he said. "But good
government comes from providing what constituency wants and doing it
while providing them a good value. So if the state as a whole felt that
it was a worthwhile investment to provide for the common good, that we
were going to buy down the rates on things like that, I'm OK with that.
I'm not OK with saying we have to subsidize it because we don't do it
very well."
Malloy: 'Find the balance' between
healthcare and the budget
Arielle Levin Becker, CT MIRROR
September 20, 2010
Dan Malloy is fond of saying that he's not running for governor "to
balance the budget on the backs of those who are most dependent on the
government for their health and support."
Second in a series
He says the state must keep nursing homes from closing as the
population ages and ensure that a comprehensive mental health system
exists. And he considers many previously proposed cuts to safety net
programs like Medicaid "penny wise, pound foolish."
"We may have to expend additional dollars in the short run to save far
more dollars in the long run," the former Stamford mayor said during a
recent interview.
But there is a budget to balance, one in which Medicaid and the health
care costs of state employees and retirees account for one in four
dollars spent. There's also a budget deficit that is effectively the
largest in state history, raising questions about the feasibility of
even maintaining existing levels of health care spending.
Malloy is vague on how he would balance the competing demands of health
spending and budget cutting.
He would not identify specific health programs that he would consider
cutting. He said he would look to savings and efficiencies in existing
programs and seek federal money before cutting programs.
To find savings, Malloy said he would conduct a "top to bottom review"
of all state programs, which he believes will identify programs that
are not producing results. He believes the state can save money in
existing programs - as an example, he cited a 2009 audit showing that
the state could save nearly $50 million by paying lower rates to the
managed care companies in the HUSKY program.
The state has failed to go after millions of dollars in federal money,
he said, and he plans to pursue it aggressively. Other potential
savings could come from the use of electronic medical records -
something Connecticut providers have been slow to take up - and
ensuring that patients have alternatives to emergency rooms to receive
non-emergency care.
After that?
"Then we'll have to make other decisions," he said. "We're going to
have to put our financial house in order. I'm committed to that."
Although he would not say what health care programs would be considered
for cuts, Malloy was clear about what programs he does not plan to cut:
Programs that serve people who most rely on the government for their
health care.
"That's what you're electing a governor for is to find the right
balance between the necessity of maintaining a program for a specific
group of individuals and the necessity of bringing the state's
financial house in order," he said, citing his record as Stamford
mayor. "That's what I do. That's what leadership is."
Expanding Coverage
Malloy wants as many state residents covered by health insurance as
possible, and he wants to do it in a way that accesses as much federal
funding as possible. When people receive health care that they cannot
pay for, the state ultimately sees some of the bill, he said.
"Getting to the point that we wring out as much of the unreimbursed
expense is going to be terribly important," he said. "I do think that a
universal system ultimately becomes less expensive, but there is
probably a run-up in expense as you build it."
As mayor of Stamford, Malloy developed a program to use schools, which
already collect medical information about pupils, to identify children
who are uninsured but eligible for the state's HUSKY insurance program,
then help their families access it. He wants to do the same statewide.
Malloy supported a proposal last year that would have established
universal health coverage in the state with a public insurance option,
called SustiNet. A scaled-back version became law, and a board is
working to create a SustiNet plan, intended to be offered as an
insurance option for state employees, Medicaid recipients and the
public. Malloy said he expects SustiNet will play a lead role in
extending health care coverage to the uninsured.
The state can also make health insurance more affordable by using its
purchasing power to benefit municipalities, non-profits and other
employers, Malloy believes. State legislators passed bills in 2008 and
2009 that would have opened the state employee health insurance pool to
other groups, but Gov. M. Jodi Rell vetoed them, citing concerns that
widening the pool to an unknown risk group could increase insurance
rates.
Malloy believes expanding the state employees' pool would lower costs
for "a substantial number of communities," and he wants to take the
idea a step further: Offering multiple plans to make coverage available
to employers that could not afford the standard state employee package.
"What you're doing is you're harnessing the purchasing power," he said.
"Spreading that around doesn't bother me at all."
Rethinking the System
Having more people with health insurance also means more patients in a
health care system already struggling with capacity issues. Malloy
believes the state must "rethink" the health care system. And he wants
to place particular emphasis on community health centers.
The state's 13 federally qualified health centers focus on delivering
primary care and dental and behavioral health services. Their patient
base consists largely of people with Medicaid or no insurance. Last
year, 65 percent of the nearly 213,000 patients treated in community
health centers fell below the poverty level.
Community health centers are expected to absorb many of the the
millions of people who gain coverage as federal health reform rolls
out. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act includes $11
billion for community health centers nationwide, intended to help them
keep up with an increase in patient volume. Health centers in
Connecticut have also upgraded and expanded their facilities using
$25.8 million in bonding money Rell authorized for them.
Malloy said he would put substantially more emphasis on the community
health center model. He also wants to see a closer relationship between
them and hospitals.
"To the best of my knowledge, there's no one in the current
administration who's sitting down with the CHC providers and the
hospitals and saying how do we build a better system?" Malloy said.
"There's competition, there's resentment from one to the other."
As a better model to pursue, Malloy cited an example from his hometown,
where Stamford Hospital in 2007 turned over its four primary care
clinics to Optimus Health Care, a Bridgeport-based community health
center.
Demand at the clinics had been increasing, Stamford Hospital spokesman
Scott Orstad said. It posed a financial challenge, since many of the
clinics' patients were uninsured or covered by Medicaid, which
typically pays less than the cost of care.
As a community health center, Optimus was eligible to receive more
federal funding to treat the same patients, making it easier,
financially, to run the clinics.
When the plan was first announced, Malloy remembered thinking, "Gee,
this is a terrible thing, the hospital's going to get out of this
business."
Now Malloy says it is a model worth pursuing.
"We've got to be brave enough and bold enough to rethink our system of
care," he said. "We talk about continuum of care along disciplines,
mental health, aging. What we need to think about continuum of care is
along broader lines. How do we make sure that everybody gets the level
of service that's most appropriate to them? Sometimes it's going to be
in a hospital, sometimes it's going to be in a doctor's office,
sometimes it's going to be with a public health nurse, sometimes it's
going to be at a CHC facility. Ok, let's build that system."
"The Aging Tsunami"
Malloy is keenly interested in nursing homes. Stamford has a city-run
nursing home, and Malloy speaks about learning from it as mayor. He won
the endorsement of the Connecticut Association of Health Care
Facilities, an industry group, and has walked picket lines with
striking nursing home workers.
He worries about the financial conditions nursing homes face. The state
will have a problem, Malloy said, if it loses nursing home beds as it
approaches what he called "the aging tsunami." Over the next 15 years,
the number of people over 65 is expected to rise by 40 percent, while
the population under 65 declines.
Malloy believes the state needs to raise the Medicaid rates it pays
nursing homes - not at full operational expense, but enough to
guarantee that facilities can stay in business. Medicaid covered 69
percent of the patients in Connecticut nursing homes, but paid, on
average, less than 65 percent of what private payers did per patient
during the 2009 fiscal year, according to the Connecticut Commission on
Aging.
"Right now we set Medicaid rates and we don't care whether the place
stays open or not," Malloy said. "In fact, I would argue that we've
been on a pretty active campaign to close nursing homes for a long
period of time."
In some ways, Malloy is going against the tide on an issue with
significant budgetary impact. This fiscal year, the state is expected
to spend $1.3 billion in Medicaid costs for people in institutional
care, although the federal government reimburses the state for at least
half of its Medicaid costs.
Research commissioned by an alliance of public, private and
institutional leaders has suggested that the state could save up to
$900 million a year by changing how Medicaid long-term care is
delivered. Currently, 53 percent of people covered by Medicaid receive
home or community-based care. The state's Long-Term Care Plan calls for
raising that to 75 percent by 2025. That could reduce the need for
nursing home beds by close to 25 percent by 2030, according to
projections by the University of Connecticut Center on Aging.
Home and community-based care tends to cost less than institutional
care, and research suggests people would prefer it. With the state
facing a massive budget deficit, lawmakers have started embracing the
idea with greater urgency.
Malloy is skeptical.
"I just don't think that that's true," he said of the projected $600
million to $900 million savings. "And if we do that, what we end up
with is a dramatic shortage of nursing home beds to fill the void."
He wants to make it easier for people to access hospice care. There
will be a need for multiple types of care, he believes, as the
population ages and lives longer, in more compromised health.
"I want to maintain this system, and then I want to invest wisely in
alternatives to that system, understanding that those alternatives may
cover a period of time of treatment," he said.
"Penny wise, Pound foolish"
Malloy believes the state can save money by eliminating duplicate
services and bureaucracy, including in social service programs. He said
he will use data to examine what programs are effective, and eliminate
those that are not.
"I don't think all the moneys that we're spending are wisely spent and
I have a very large suspicion that the management-level bureaucracy has
grown too fast, too big too fast and is not justified," he said.
With a cost of nearly $5 billion, Medicaid has been targeted for cuts
in recent years, although the legislature has resisted some that Rell
proposed.
Connecticut covers services under Medicaid that are not required by the
federal government, including dental care for adults, which Rell
proposed cutting. Asked if he would consider such programs for budget
cuts, Malloy said, "I hope not. I hope things aren't so bad that that
has to be considered."
"That's one of those penny wise, pound foolish tradeoffs," he said.
"You have short-term gain for a long-term greater expense. And it's my
hope that I won't run the state that way."
Foley: Health care costs can be
cut 15% with no benefit loss
Arielle Levin Becker, CT MIRROR
September 13, 2010
First in a series
Tom Foley doesn't like the federal health reform law--he'd rather see
it repealed and replaced with something that cuts costs. He believes
the state budget needs to shrink by at least 10 percent. And in health
care, which accounts for nearly a third of state spending, he sees a
plum source for savings.
"It wouldn't take that much to reduce health care costs in Connecticut
by 15 percent," the Republican nominee for governor said during a
recent interview.
Foley believes the savings - up to $1 billion - could be achieved
through wellness programs, electronic record keeping, changes to the
medical malpractice system, reducing unnecessary emergency room visits,
allowing less-expensive out-of-state health plans into Connecticut, and
increasing the use of community-based care for elderly and disabled
people.
Doing so wouldn't require reducing benefits, Foley said.
But it would represent a significant reversal in spending trends at a
time when health care costs continue to rise and demand for state
medical assistance grows.
While Foley believes much of the savings can come from wellness
programs designed to impact behaviors, evidence of their effects on
health care costs is limited, and some research suggests that
clear-cut, short-term savings are hard to demonstrate. Programs aimed
at preventing conditions like obesity might be
cost-effective--producing health benefits that justify their costs--but
not cost-saving, some experts say.
And Foley wants to increase one area of state health care spending: the
rates paid to health care providers who treat Medicaid patients. He
sees it as a way to lower health care costs for the private sector,
ultimately making it less expensive to employ workers in Connecticut.
"Anything that drives down health care costs in Connecticut is
something I'd be in favor of," Foley said.
Revising Reform
That's one of the reasons he opposes the Patient Protection and
Affordable Care Act. Foley believes it will raise costs and drive
private insurers out of the market, ultimately producing a single-payer
system.
The law is "a bad deal for Connecticut," Foley said. Because the state
has a relatively low rate of uninsured residents - 10 percent in 2008,
according to the U.S. Census Bureau - people here won't see much
expansion of coverage for the added cost, he said.
"Connecticut residents are going to be paying for this program, and
there's no benefit to anyone in Connecticut because people are already
covered," he said.
But as governor, Foley said, he would do what is required to implement
the law.
"I'm not somebody who says 'hey, we're going to completely reject
this,'" he said. "I think we need to be responsible and do what we are
required to do, but I would be very diligent about making sure that
Obamacare doesn't burden us with any more costs than are absolutely
necessary."
Foley does support certain changes in the reform law, such as
eliminating the ability of insurers to exclude people with pre-existing
conditions. But he said he does not support any changes to the health
care delivery system that reduce people's choice.
Finding $1 Billion
The idea of saving 15 percent on state health care costs stems from the
federal health reform debate. Projections for an earlier reform plan
suggested such savings were possible, Foley said.
"I would assume in Connecticut, because we have such a high-cost
system, there may be more opportunities for reducing costs," he said.
Much of the savings can come from wellness programs aimed at reducing
obesity, drug and alcohol use, and promoting healthier lifestyles, he
said.
"If you can provide incentives and encourage people to take better care
of themselves, we could do a lot to bring down health care costs," he
said.
Wellness programs have gained popularity among employers in recent
years, although research suggests that cost savings can be difficult to
achieve in the first few years and experts have expressed skepticism
about their usefulness as a quick way to save money. Behavioral changes
like quitting smoking or losing weight can take time to achieve, while
large-scale prevention efforts that involve screening large groups of
people can cost more than the savings from preventing disease in the
smaller number of people who would have gotten sick.
Some studies have found savings from wellness programs, although many
of them use methods that researchers consider limited, such as
comparing outcomes for people who choose to participate to people who
did not without accounting for other differences between the two groups.
The bulk of state health care money goes to medical assistance programs
like Medicaid. In his calculations for finding $1 billion in health
care savings, Foley also includes health care costs for current and
retired state workers, which are expected to run the state an estimated
$1.13 billion this fiscal year.
But it's not clear how much additional savings are achievable there.
State workers already receive wellness programs as part of their health
plans, including a smoking cessation program and discounts for weight
loss programs and gym memberships.
"That has been done," said Matt O'Connor, spokesman for the State
Employees Bargaining Agent Coalition. "It's an ongoing process that's
been in place."
As for the prospect of cost-cutting in state employee health care,
O'Connor noted that state workers agreed to changes last year including
increased premiums, limits on eligibility for retiree health benefits
for workers with less than 10 years of state service, and requiring
workers with less than 5 years of state employment to contribute to a
trust fund for retiree health care.
"Part of what we're looking for in this next administration is a
different approach," O'Connor said. "We've been there, done that, so
now it's a matter of looking at other ways in which savings can be
achieved and are out there."
Foley sees another source of savings in shifting much of the state's
long-term care from nursing homes to community or home-based care.
The state spends nearly $2.5 billion in Medicaid long-term care costs
for about 40,000 people. Forty-seven percent of them live in nursing
homes, which tend to cost more than receiving care at home.
Research has suggested that the state could save between $600 million
to $900 million a year by "rebalancing" the way long-term care is
delivered - that is, delivering 75 percent of the long-term care in
home and community-based settings, with the remaining 25 percent in
nursing homes, by 2025.
Some industry experts are skeptical about the prospects of making such
a large shift. Foley acknowledged that the state does not yet have the
capacity to make such a sizable move toward community-based care and
must build it. He said one hitch in making changes has been the unions
representing nursing home workers.
"The unions are very powerful in nursing homes and they don't want the
Medicaid patients moving out of nursing homes," Foley said. "But it's
far less expensive to care for the elderly in community-based care and
it's better for them, they do better, they live longer. So that's a
pretty easy one for me."
"Stealth Tax"
The state's other Medicaid programs have been growing steadily in
recent years, with more than 500,000 state residents now receiving the
public coverage. The federal government reimburses the states for at
least 50 percent of Medicaid costs and has been providing a higher
level of matching funds since the federal stimulus program began.
Increasing the rates paid to health care providers who treat Medicaid
patients could reduce private-sector health care costs, Foley believes.
The existing Medicaid rates pay doctors and other health care providers
less than the cost of delivering care. Providers typically make up the
difference by charging commercial insurance plans more, a cost-shift
that Foley said raises the price of private insurance.
Foley said the government should instead pay the full cost of care for
Medicaid patients, "and let the taxpayers decide whether or not the
expense of that is something they want to cover." He acknowledged that
it would mean an increase in state spending, but said the alternative
is a "stealth tax" on people with private insurance.
"I'm against the government imposing costs on citizens that they can't
see," he said.
Changes to the medical malpractice system could also save money, Foley
believes. Many physician groups believe malpractice issues account for
considerable health care costs, although some studies suggest it has a
more modest effect on expenses.
A few changes could cut costs without requiring comprehensive reform,
Foley said. He supports a $250,000 cap on awards for non-economic
damages, similar to what California has, and cited other options
including using special courts to handle malpractice cases, employing a
non-adversarial process, and providing guidelines for compensation for
medical errors and malpractice.
Trimming Government
But even with $1 billion in health care savings, Foley said, the state
would have a long way to go toward fiscal stability. He supports
privatizing state institutions if the private sector can provide the
same or better service for less money.
His philosophy for making cuts to health and social service programs?
Start with ones that have no negative impact. The $1 billion in savings
he believes is possible would fall in that category, he says, providing
the same benefits at a lower cost.
After that: "You look at things that have some adverse impact on people
but they're not devastating," Foley said. "Where people can adjust and
people are adjusting to the new reality in the private sector...in the
public sector, though, people haven't really adjusted to the new
reality. That's going to happen one way or the other."
One cut Foley would be happy to see: The SustiNet Health Partnership.
"I'd like to see it go away," he said.
SustiNet grew out of an effort to achieve universal health coverage in
the state with a public health insurance plan. The plan that
legislators ultimately passed - and later resurrected after a veto -
was a scaled-down version, with no funding attached. More than 150
people are now developing a plan, which they hope will ultimately be
offered as a coverage option for state employees, Medicaid enrollees
and the public.
"It was created for a purpose that no longer is needed," Foley said.
"The people involved are trying to find a role for it. We don't need
new costly things looking for a purpose."
Foley also has reservations about using state money to fund stem cell
research, although he said it is not something he has examined closely.
Lawmakers in 2005 committed the state to funding $100 million in grants
for stem cell research over 10 years. The money comes from a tobacco
trust fund, but last year, Gov. M. Jodi Rell proposed putting off the
stem cell grants and using the money to help offset the budget deficit.
"That's what the private sector's for, if you're talking about coming
up with new technologies and innovation. Governments aren't good at
that," Foley said. "I'm not sure why Connecticut is subsidizing it,
because I think the private sector would pay for it if they were left
free to do it."
Independent Candidate Calls For
Tax Changes: Marsh Says Those Who Pay No State Income Tax Need To Start
Kicking In
By CHRISTOPHER KEATING, ckeating@courant.com
7:37 PM EDT, September 12, 2010
At least a third of all Connecticut tax filers pay no state income tax
at all, and Tom Marsh says that needs to end.
Marsh, the Independent Party candidate on the ballot for governor, says
"everybody who is receiving a paycheck'' should pay into the state
coffers — even if it is only $100 per year — in order to close the
state's projected budget deficit of $3.4 billion for the next fiscal
year.
"Everybody needs to have a little skin in the game,'' said Marsh, now
in his third term as the first selectman of Chester. "People need a
reason to be engaged in the government.''
Marsh's two opponents — Republican Tom Foley of Greenwich and Democrat
Dannel Malloy of Stamford —rejected his views on the state income tax.
"We shouldn't increase any taxes in Connecticut as a means of solving
the looming budget deficit,'' Foley said in an interview. "I'm
surprised. Tom Marsh has been traveling around the state a lot. I'm
shocked.''
He said Marsh should realize that Connecticut voters are not in the
mood — "and don't have the ability'' — to pay more taxes in Connecticut.
Roy Occhiogrosso, the chief strategist for Malloy, said the state needs
to create more jobs, rather than collect more taxes from those with the
lowest incomes.
"You're talking about people who are not making a lot of money,''
Occhiogrosso said. "A couple hundred bucks might not sound like a lot
of money to some people, but it is to them. ... No way.''
Marsh rejected the views of those who say it is bad tax policy to
impose a tax on the poorest residents. He pointed out that the state
legislature has raised the cigarette tax multiple times — to the
current level of $3 per pack — even though many poor people are smokers
and are forced to pay the tax. The poor also pay gasoline taxes, Social
Security taxes, sales taxes and other taxes.
"It's a false argument to say you're taking advantage of those who can
least afford it,'' said Marsh, who represents an affluent, riverfront
town of about 4,000 residents in Middlesex County.
Under the state tax law, married couples who file jointly with an
adjusted gross income of $24,000 or less pay no state income tax. But
with the maximum property tax credit of $500 for automobiles or real
estate, couples earning as high as $43,600 do not owe any state income
tax if they claim the credit.
With various exemptions and credits, thousands of Connecticut residents
currently pay nothing at all. Even though Connecticut is a wealthy
state, nearly 40 percent of all filers earned $35,000 or less in 2007,
according to public tax records. Under the state's progressive income
tax, which exempts those at low incomes, the filers below $35,000 paid
a combined total of 1.3 percent of the income taxes. At the upper end,
the top 20 percent of earners paid about 80 percent of the overall
state income tax that was collected, and the top 1.3 percent paid 35
percent of the income tax.
In trying to determine tax policy, state legislators have offered
various estimates through the years of the number of filers who pay no
state income tax. A spokeswoman for the state Department of Revenue
Services, however, said the state does not officially calculate that
number.
Marsh, who turns 51 next week, started his campaign for governor as a
Republican and later dropped out to run as an independent. He collected
the necessary 7,500 signatures to receive a spot on the ballot under
the Independent Party.
With large deficits on the horizon, Marsh says that examining the tax
structure is necessary.
"I see the freight train that is coming down the tracks and the
absolute dysfunction that the legislative and executive branches have
shown in the last couple of sessions,'' Marsh said. "We've already
maxed out our borrowing capability.''
Besides changes in the income tax, Marsh said, the state also needs to
examine the numerous exemptions to the state's sales tax. The
exemptions have been added at various times through the years at the
behest of lobbyists and legislators, prompting some legislators to call
for a comprehensive review of the various tax credits that have been
inserted into the tax code over time.
Marsh is calling for an immediate end to the sales tax exemptions on
carwashes and tax preparation services, which are currently tax free.
"Everybody in or out,'' Marsh said, adding that the list of exemptions
needs to be simplified. "This is an excellent opportunity to revisit
what we've done.''
In the same way that they rejected Marsh's views on the income tax,
both Foley and Occhiogrosso disagreed with his views on the sales tax.
As a third-party candidate with less than $100,000 for his campaign,
Marsh has been trying to spread the word about his race for governor.
He is not broadcasting any television commercials because he lacks the
millions of dollars that will be spent by his rivals, Foley and Malloy.
"We're not going to get into big media,'' Marsh said.
Foley looks to build up GOP in Conn.
Legislature
New London DAY
By SUSAN HAIGH, AP Political Writer
Sep 5, 12:08 PM EDT
HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) -- When Republican Tom Foley talks to voters about
his candidacy for Connecticut governor, he often makes a pitch for his
GOP colleagues running for the General Assembly.
Eliminating Democrats' veto-proof majority, Foley argues, is the key to
turning around the state's financial condition.
"Voters feel that there should be more of a balance in Hartford," the
Greenwich businessman said. "They've seen in Washington what happens
with an overwhelming Democratic Congress and a Democratic executive."
Democrats control the state Senate by a 24-12 margin and the House of
Representatives by a 114-37 spread - enough votes to overturn a
gubernatorial veto. Democrats would lose their veto power if the GOP
were to pick up 13 seats in the House or one seat in the Senate.
During her six years in office, Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell has seen
17 of her vetoes overridden. Earlier this month, when lawmakers
overrode her veto of a campaign financing bill, she tied independent
former Gov. Lowell P. Weicker Jr. for the most vetoes annulled during
the past 70 years in Connecticut.
Foley thinks Rell could have been more effective had there been more
Republicans in the Legislature. He hopes the party can pick up 15 to 20
seats in the House and two or three in the Senate.
"That much of a change in the margin will force the Democrats to deal
with the moderates in the Legislature and the Republicans," Foley said.
"With such an overwhelming majority of Democrats in the House and the
Senate, the president pro tem and the speaker, they can get the votes
they need just dealing with the liberals in their caucus."
Dan Malloy, the Democratic candidate for governor, scoffs at Foley's
claims that it would be detrimental to the state if Democrats
controlled both the governor's office and held a veto-proof majority in
the Legislature.
"It hasn't worked well," Malloy said of the years when a Republican
held the governorship and Democrats controlled the Legislature. "It's
been a disaster. What you need is leadership. Leadership comes from the
governor's office."
Besides talking about the need for more Republicans in the General
Assembly, Foley said he actively encouraged potential candidates to
run, organized a candidate-training session and has accompanied
candidates when they've knocked on voters' doors. He has assisted
candidates by calling voters and urging them to come to the polls, and
he has provided volunteers to help out the GOP hopefuls. He also
helped GOP candidates raise campaign contributions, including the small
donations they need to qualify for the state's public financing program
- a system he opposes for gubernatorial candidates.
"It's the most coordinated effort we've had in a long time," said Chris
Healy, chairman of the state Republicans. He acknowledged that the
campaign in the 2006 statewide elections, when Rell was running and
Democrats gained their veto-proof majority by winning some more House
seats, "wasn't as coordinated as well as it could have been, obviously."
Healy said the GOP also is united on its message: fundamental change is
needed to alter state spending trends and reduce the size of state
government.
"We believe that a Republican team in the Legislature and in the
governor's office really is the best hope we have in turning this state
around," he said.
Malloy said it's important to note that there will be diversity of
opinion among Democrats, even if the party retains its hold of the
Legislature and gets control of the governor's office for the first
time since the late William O'Neill left office in early 1991.
"It's not a monolithic party by any stretch of the imagination," Malloy
said.
Malloy said he would support any fellow Democrats in this year's
election who back the issues he's running on: establishing a
transparent government, adopting standardized accounting rules to
better control state budgets and ending "the game-playing" in Hartford.
"I'm going to run an election which is a referendum on who is going to
be governor and let the House and Senate take care of itself," he said.
Mike Vitale, a Republican candidate for the House from Wallingford,
recently knocked on doors with Foley. Democratic Rep. Mary Mushinsky
has held the seat he's seeking since 1981. Vitale said Foley's
message of changing the partisan makeup of the Legislature is
resonating with voters.
"People view what's going on in Hartford simply as a mess," he said.
"They're starting to hold the people they keep sending up there over
and over accountable for this."
Foley, Boughton say integration
‘seamless’
Greenwich TIME, AP
Saturday, August 21, 2010
HARTFORD — After a primary race filled with negative advertising and
disputes over campaign financing, the Republican nominees for governor
and lieutenant governor believe they are on the same page heading into
the general election.
Gubernatorial nominee Tom Foley and running mate Mark Boughton made
their first joint appearance Friday on the campaign trail in Danbury.
More than one week ago, they were on opposing tickets.
Foley and Boughton said their more than 10-year friendship has helped
them begin work as a team. “It’s been pretty seamless,” Boughton said.
“We’ve been able to integrate the campaigns pretty quickly, and I think
it helps that Tom and I have known each other for so long.”
Boughton, who is mayor of Danbury, was originally one of Foley’s
gubernatorial opponents before dropping out and focusing on the
lieutenant governor’s race. Just before the GOP convention in May,
Boughton chose to run with Lt. Gov. Michael Fedele, who lost the GOP
nomination for governor to Foley in the primary.
Foley, a former U.S. ambassador to Ireland, chose not to name a running
mate for the primary. In the Connecticut primary, voters can select
lieutenant governor candidates independently of their running mates.
Leading up to the primary, Foley challenged Boughton and Fedele’s
public campaign financing.
Foley, who is self-financing his campaign, claimed his opponents did
not properly qualify for more than $2 million in public grants and
filed several court injunctions to try and stop Boughton and Fedele
from receiving funds. Foley was unsuccessful in his attempts.
“Candidates agree on a lot of things and don’t agree on a lot of
things,” Foley said. “Mark and I took different routes there, but now
that we are running together as a ticket, we’re not using public
financing and we’re moving forward.”
Fedele ran television ads accusing Foley of running a large Georgia
textile mill out of business in 1998 and challenged Foley’s credibility
citing two prior arrests. Foley joked that he believed Boughton was in
another room when those decisions were made.
The GOP candidates said they are ready to face Democratic gubernatorial
candidate Dan Malloy and his running mate, Nancy Wyman, in the Nov. 2
general election.
They said they are confident voters will elect another Republican
governor despite the state’s budget deficit.
“The problem has not been a Republican governor, the problem has been
the Democratic super-majority in the legislature,” said Boughton. “The
reality is that the voters are going to want somebody who has the keys
to the safe and has the checkbook in their pocket and keeps it away
from the legislature, who will spend every nickel the state has into
oblivion on every wacky program they possibly can come up with.”
Lessons From Primary Night: Of Polls,
Prosperity, Political Attack Ads
By JON LENDER, jlender@courant.com
8:34 PM EDT, August 14, 2010
In the year 2060, older political junkies in Connecticut may look back
half a century and say they never saw a wilder primary election than
last week's. They may still talk of how Republican Tom Foley and
Democrat Dan Malloy won bruising races for their parties' gubernatorial
nominations — and maybe they'll even remember some of the lessons
learned or reaffirmed on primary day, last Tuesday.
Among the lessons:
•Attempts to predict the future in politics lead again and again to
glaring examples of how impossible it is. The avidly followed
Quinnipiac University Poll showed Ned Lamont 3 percentage points ahead
of Malloy. Malloy buried Lamont by 16 points a day later.
•Money can buy the advice of consultants and can import a staff of
youthful campaign operatives who wield a Washington-schooled certitude
beyond their experience, but it can't guarantee success. Lamont, a
wealthy cable TV entrepreneur from Greenwich, still lost the primary,
and perhaps his political future, after spending about $9 million of
his own fortune — more than three times as much as Malloy spent out of
what he received under the state's public campaign funding system.
•For all the controversy over political attack ads, issues still count.
For example, Malloy will face campaign questions about his ties with
state employee labor unions at a time when many cash-strapped citizens
are angry about those employees' generous salaries and benefits. And
Foley, a multimillionaire businessman from Greenwich who served as
President George W. Bush's ambassador to Ireland, probably will need to
confront issues that his intra-party primary opponents raised about
arrests in his past and the loss of jobs at a company he once owned
that went bankrupt.
Last week's Republican and Democratic primaries were remarkable not
only for their large number of credible contenders, but also their
contentiousness, as evidenced by some brutal TV attack ads. It happened
largely because of an unusual combination of circumstances not seen in
Connecticut in many decades: Both Gov. M. Jodi Rell and U.S. Sen.
Christopher J. Dodd decided not to seek re-election, which means those
seats are up for grabs in the same election year.
It's apparently the first time this has happened since the 1940s, the
secretary of the state's office said early this year. Both the Senate
and governor's seats were open in 1970, and neither party nominated an
incumbent for either — but then-incumbent U.S. Sen. Thomas Dodd, who
was denied the Democratic nomination, ran as an independent and lost a
three-way race to Lowell P. Weicker Jr.
Candidates rushed this year for the rare opportunity of not having to
unseat an incumbent. Three Republicans contended in the primary for
U.S. Senate to oppose the Democrats' consensus nominee, Attorney
General Richard Blumenthal. Five candidates — three Republicans and two
Democrats — battled in Tuesday's primary for governor.
In the end, former professional wrestling executive Linda McMahon
emerged as the GOP's nominee to oppose Blumenthal, while Malloy and
Foley were left standing for election as governor.
While there was drama in the Senate primary, the primaries for governor
were much more hotly contested.
The 'Q-Poll'
Probably the most electrifying event last Tuesday was a
come-from-behind victory by Malloy, the former 14-year mayor of
Stamford. The Quinnipiac poll gave Lamont a lead of 17 percentage
points in late May after the Democratic state convention. Lamont was
helped by the visibility and good will he gained from many liberal
Democrats in 2006, when he defeated incumbent U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman
in a primary but lost the November election.
But by the week before the primary Lamont's lead was down to 5 points,
then 3 in an unusually late, primary-eve Quinnipiac poll released
Monday. Poll Director Doug Schwartz called the race a dead heat at that
point because the 3 points were within the margin of error of plus or
minus 4.6 points. He noted that there were many undecided voters, that
many voters who expressed a preference said they still might change
their minds, and that the trend of support was running toward Malloy.
In other words, he said, Malloy was coming on and could win.
But Malloy won on Tuesday by 58 percent to 42 — a blowout.
How could the poll have missed by so much?
Malloy's chief campaign adviser, Roy Occhiogrosso, said he thought it
was partly because the voter turnout in the primary was so low — about
25 percent — hurting the poll's sample. Such a low turnout indicates
that a number of registered voters stayed home Tuesday after having
told Quinnipiac phone-callers that they planned to vote, Occhiogrosso
said.
"It's very difficult to capture a snapshot of the actual universe of
voters that comes out in a primary, especially when the turnout is so
low," he said. "The people you're talking to on the phone are not
representative of the electorate that will turn out. … Polling
primaries is notoriously inaccurate — not because there's anything
wrong with the poll. They had Dan down by 3 points just before the
primary, and he won by 16. Was there a 19-point turnaround in a few
days? Obviously not."
Schwartz, the poll director, agreed with Occhiogrosso and added this
for himself: "People who said that they were going to vote for Lamont
apparently didn't feel strongly enough to show up and vote, while
Malloy's voters were more committed."
Schwartz pointed out that in the last poll just before the primary, "we
did emphasize that there was a high level of voter uncertainty in
there" — that about 12 percent were still undecided and about 30
percent "said they could still change their mind."
"A lot of the late-deciders apparently broke for Malloy. … We did catch
the trend; we did say the movement was towards Malloy, and we did say
there was a lot of room for movement. … We said it was too close to
call.
"A lot of times we've nailed it right. … We nailed it with McMahon,"
Schwartz said. "We report the results, and we try to report them in a
fair and balanced way, and we try to highlight it when we see a lot of
uncertainty."
Malloy, by the way, had a quip to explain the shocking margin of
victory that eluded the pollsters: "I'm the youngest of eight children,
and all of my relatives voted for me."
Time For Issues
The primaries behind them, both freshly nominated gubernatorial
contenders went out and campaigned in a manner much calmer than in the
weeks preceding their showdowns with intra-party rivals. Foley and
Malloy spent the second half of the week meeting with reporters and
voters and talking much more quietly about what their messages will be
for the November election.
At a 20-minute press conference in Hartford, Malloy hit one theme
repeatedly: "The vast majority of voters are going to be making a
decision about who do they trust to lead them, who has the experience
and who has the values. I think that message resonates with independent
voters."
He found a way to mention it no matter what the question. For example,
Malloy was asked how he would respond to Foley's pitch to voters as an
"outsider" — that is, a businessman skilled in management who never
served in Connecticut government, and thus can't be blamed for the
current fiscal mess, which, Foley says, he is better qualified to
resolve.
"We're both outsiders," Malloy said. "We both come from a different
perspective. I ran a half-billion-dollar corporation called the city of
Stamford for 14 years. … I'm not a Hartford-based politician. I've
never served in the legislature. … Ultimately, people are going to
decide who they trust, who has the values, and who has the experience
to lead them."
Asked if he would play hardball with the state employee unions who have
supported him — buy considering layoffs, for example — Malloy said,
"everything is on the table" and everyone, including the unions, are
invited to bring cost-cutting ideas to that table.
"I've said that [with] the part of state government that I most
directly control. on Day One it has to be shrunk by 15 percent. … I've
said that we have 220 or so state agencies, [and] they have to be
reduced by a third. … We know that we have to balance this budget."
Part of Foley's message during the week was that he's got more
credibility in confronting such fiscal issues. "I can see why he's
being vague," Foley said of Malloy in an interview. "He doesn't want to
alienate the special interests that are backing him."
Foley talked more bluntly about how well-off he thinks government
employees now are. He said things have shifted drastically from decades
ago — when the pay for state work was low compared with the private
sector, and when people went into state employment for the stability
and good benefits, such as health insurance and pensions. Now, Foley
said, not only are their benefits and pensions better than those of
their counterparts in the private sector, but their pay is, too.
"Now they have the best of both worlds. That's great, but we can't
afford it," Foley said. "We simply have to bring that back in line."
The state's contract with the employee unions for benefits doesn't
expire until 2017, Foley said, adding: "We have to reopen that 2017
contract. If we can't reopen that contract and it becomes unaffordable,
people are going to have to be laid off. I think we can get the state
workforce down to acceptable levels with attrition," but the unions
need to cooperate.
Foley said he would never agree to a "no-layoff" provision, even a
temporary one such as Rell approved. "That has to remain an option," he
said.
Malloy said, "Every time I hear people who are worth hundreds of
millions of dollars talk about Connecticut's middle class that way, it
makes my day."
Foley says "the class warfare stuff" won't work. He said voters don't
want politicians "pitting people against each other. They want somebody
to lead them out of these problems."
UNDERTICKET CONTESTS
Merrill: Once An Attorney, Always An
Attorney?
Hartford Courant
Jon Lender,
Government Watch
October 10, 2010
A campaign brochure for Denise Merrill, the Democrats' nominee for
secretary of the state in the Nov. 2 election, says: "A mother,
teacher, attorney and new grandmother, Denise brought her real-world
experience to the Legislature, where she was eventually elected by her
colleagues to serve as Majority Leader."
Her majority leader's biography on the state House Democrats' Internet
website said she is "an attorney and a former high school teacher."
This might give the impression that Merrill, of Mansfield, carries a
briefcase from Capitol to courthouse, flashing between legislating and
lawyering while attending to her family roles as mother and
grandmother. But that's not exactly the picture. The fact is that
Merrill does not practice law, and has not done so since obtaining a
California license 30 years ago that now is designated as "inactive."
She obtained it via a procedure available in California, then her home
state, in which you work as an apprentice in a law firm and take the
state bar exam without needing to graduate from law school.
Merrill has never been licensed to practice law Connecticut, which has
a law saying that if a person hasn't been admitted to the state's bar,
he or she can't "assume, use, or advertise the title of lawyer,
attorney and counselor-at-law ... or an equivalent term, in such a
manner as to convey the impression that he is a legal practitioner of
law."
When Merrill was asked about this last week, she said that calling
herself a lawyer is a fair and accurate description, not resume
puffery. "I am a lawyer. ... I have been a lawyer all these years," she
said, even though she didn't use her California license to establish a
practice and never got a law license here.
"It's just like a doctor is a doctor," no matter whether she is
licensed in the state where she now lives, Merrill said.
Merrill said there's no requirement that a person be a lawyer to become
secretary of the state, which is the top elected official in charge of
running elections and registering corporations. Her Republican
opponent, state consumer protection commissioner Jerry Farrell Jr., is
an attorney licensed in Connecticut. Not everyone agrees with
Merrill's interpretation that it's fine to call herself a lawyer.
First there's Mark DuBois, the state Judicial Branch's chief
disciplinary counsel, who enforces the state law that says people can't
act as lawyers without proper credentials. Without commenting
specifically about Merrill, DuBois said you can't call yourself an
attorney if you're not licensed in Connecticut — even on a website that
doesn't offer legal services or solicit clients. "You can't hold
yourself out to be an attorney if you don't have the licensure," he
said.
What happens if somebody does that? "I send them an enforcement letter"
telling them to "cease and desist," DuBois said.
If you aren't Connecticut-licensed as an attorney but have been
admitted to the bar in another state, you need to clarify your listing,
DuBois said, adding: "You can put in an asterisk that says something
like 'admitted only in Vermont.'"
The Courant first talked to Merrill about this issue on Thursday. She
did some checking on her own, and on Friday, she said she had an
asterisk put into her biography on her campaign website. It now says:
"Before I ran for the House of Representatives I worked as an attorney*
and high school teacher." At the bottom it said: "(*Licensed to
practice in California)."
Also on Friday, the biography on her House Democrats website was
updated to say she is "an attorney (licensed in CA only) and a former
high school teacher."
Merrill said that she clarified the listings after talking with people,
including someone in DuBois' office; she said that person didn't make
it all sound quite so strict. Still, Merrill said, she made the changes
"in the interest of being absolutely sure" that no one gets the wrong
impression.
"I certainly never intended to mislead anyone," she said, adding that
she has been "very careful" when talking to people during this year's
campaign to specify that she doesn't actively practice law, and was
never licensed in Connecticut, but only in California. When a
Courant reporter researched Merrill's background during the summer and
asked about her status as a lawyer, she explained the California
situation, and the newspaper published this accurate description:
"Education: UConn, studied at San Francisco Law School, admitted to
California bar."
There's an entry for Merrill on the State Bar of California website,
where she is listed, with "Bar Number 85368' by her name, along with
her current Connecticut address in Mansfield Center and an "inactive"
status designation. The website says that Merrill was admitted to the
California bar May 1, 1979, at age 30, and that her status went
"inactive" on Jan. 1, 1980.
Merrill said she "moved back East" to Vermont "and never went back."
She said, "I could have joined the bar in Vermont" — where she taught
private school — "but then I started having kids." Merrill got her
bachelor's degree from UConn in 1988. (Is this
a typo?)
A California law licensee can return an "inactive" status to "active,"
although Merrill acknowledged that if she wanted to do that now — which
she doesn't — she might have to "jump through some hoops," such as
continuing education courses. It would take years for a person in such
circumstances to qualify for a Connecticut law license, DuBois
said. This all may sound technical to some, but it gets magnified
by Merrill's un-asterisked use of the word attorney for months on
websites, in campaign literature, although she said her current
literature doesn't mention experience as an attorney.
It also is a political year to be careful not to overestimate your
credentials: Democrat Susan Bysiewicz, the present secretary of the
state, was ruled ineligible in May to run for attorney general after
the state Supreme Court rejected her claim of sufficient experience in
the "active practice" of law; and Democratic Attorney General Richard
Blumenthal has been criticized in his U.S. Senate campaign over past
statements — unintentional, he says — indicating that he served in
Vietnam as a U.S. Marine.
Asked about Merrill's situation, Republican State Chairman Chris Healy
said, "It amazes me that someone of such high public office would lie
about her professional accomplishments, and continue to lie up until
the time it was exposed as a lie" — that is, when The Courant brought
it up to her. "It seems to fit the Democratic prototype this year, with
Susan Bysiewicz saying she's been actively practicing law for more than
20 years, and Dick Blumenthal as Rambo fighting the Viet Cong."
Healy also said Merrill and the other majority Democrats who control
the legislature haven't been truthful in their state budget solutions.
"She's used to lying, so why not claim she's a lawyer? I'm surprised
she doesn't claim she's an astronaut."
As to the asterisk in her biography, Healy said: "Who is she — Roger
Maris?"
(Maris was the New York Yankee who in 1961 hit 61 home runs to break
Babe Ruth's long-sacred single-season record of 60. An asterisk was
placed in the record book because Maris accomplished the feat in a
162-game season; Ruth did it in a 154-game schedule in 1927.)
After hearing
Healy's comments recited to her on the phone, Merrill remarked that the
GOP chief is "always tempered" in his views. "I have one thing to say
about that," she added. "I am a lawyer. How can he call me a liar, if I
am a lawyer? That's crazy."
Jon Lender is a reporter on The
Courant's investigative desk, with a focus on government and politics.
Contact him at jlender@courant.com, 860-241-6524, or c/o The Hartford
Courant, 285 Broad St., Hartford, CT 06115.
Jepsen,
Dean spar over guns,
schools -- and Blumenthal
Keith M. Phaneuf, CT MIRROR
September 23, 2010
Technically, Thursday's debate at the University of Connecticut Law
School was between state attorney general candidates Martha Dean and
George Jepsen.
But given Dean's relentless attacks on outgoing Attorney General
Richard Blumenthal and Jepsen's efforts to defend his fellow Democrat,
the hour-long forum seemed at many times more like a three-way contest.
The two candidates also sparred over gun control, states' rights,
education and the Connecticut economy.
"It's about ending the job-killing practices of the current attorney
general," Dean, a Republican lawyer from Avon, said of this year's
campaign. "There is no room for politics."
Dean charged that Blumenthal, a five-term attorney general who is now
the Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate, converted his job into a
political self-promotion machine through frivolous lawsuits against
businesses, unnecessary press conferences, and excessive involvement in
state legislative affairs.
"I really think our legislature, which is supposed to be part-time, is
really too active," she said, adding she expected to play a much
smaller role than Blumenthal has when it comes to recommending new
laws. Dean added she would "advise quietly when I think they are going
to enact laws that are unconstitutional, or truly job-killing
proposals."
But Jepsen, a former state Senate majority leader with 16 years of
experience in the legislature, responded that Blumenthal effectively
used the office to protect state government, businesses and consumers,
and that in a slumping economy, an activist attorney general is
essential.
"When times are tougher the odds grow longer," he said. "To make things
right, the public needs not another voice. It needs a true legal
advocate."
Jepsen noted the state Supreme Court arguments over the minimum
educational standard that must be provided in Connecticut public
schools likely will be played out over the next four to seven years. As
attorney general, he said, he would take an active role in seeking a
solution that closes the gap between urban and suburban schools, a
problem, "that threatens our economic future."
But Dean said that while education "has to be one of the highest values
of our free society," as attorney general she also would "vigorously
defend the state taxpayers' pocket books."
The ongoing court battle over the quality of Connecticut's urban
schools is a struggle over determining the minimum standards set in the
state Constitution, she said, and not over equalizing educational
opportunities in every public school. "We're not talking about the
ideal schools," Dean added. "We're not talking about the best schools.
We're talking about the constitutional standard, which is a minimum."
The Avon Republican also charged both Jepsen and Blumenthal with
failing to adequately protect law-abiding citizens' rights under the
U.S. Constitution to bear arms.
"I don't believe there has been a stronger anti-gun advocate in the
legislature than my opponent," Dean said.
Jepsen, who oversaw passage of many of the state's current gun control
laws while in the Senate, said only "guns that have no purpose other
than to kill people" were banned, and that weapons used by hunters and
other sportsmen remain available.
"None of these laws take guns away from law-abiding citizens, but they
do keep our streets safer," Jepsen said, adding that he was proud of
the "F-minus" rating he received as a legislator from the National
Rifle Association.
At one point in the debate, when candidates were allowed to ask
questions of each other, Dean asked Jepsen how "as a longtime career
politician in Hartford," he could have participated in one of the
largest budget and tax increases in state history -- a reference to the
2003 legislative session, which closed a nearly $1 billion budget gap
with several measures, including a roughly 10 percent income tax hike.
Jepsen fired back that this solution to the state's fiscal crisis seven
years ago was developed in consultation with several of Dean's fellow
Republicans, including then-Gov. John G. Rowland.
"I've always had a strong working relationship with the other party,"
Jepsen said.
Jepsen began his legal career working as general counsel to a
carpenter's union in Norwalk and continues to enjoy strong labor
support, prompting Dean to charge her opponent would continue an
anti-business trend in the attorney general's office.
But Jepsen noted that he continues to take heat from organized labor
for his decision to cancel arbitrated pay raises for state prison
guards while tackling a budget crisis in the Senate in 1996.
"I'm a proud Democrat," he said. "But when I think my party's wrong,
I'm not afraid to say so."
The Ridgefield Democrat went on the offensive a few times himself
during the debate, accusing Dean of hypocrisy when she said that, if
elected, she would sue the federal government to challenge future
requirements of national health care legislation that force some
citizens to buy coverage. At the same time, Jepsen added, Dean has been
criticizing Blumenthal for his own challenges of federal authority.
"I think some of Dick's best work has been in challenging the federal
government," he said, citing efforts to gain more education funding for
states complying with No Child Left Behind requirements. Dean "brings
her own agenda," Jepsen added, "and it's an activist agenda like
everybody else."
Dean and Jepsen did find some common ground during Thursday's debate.
Both agreed they would support Connecticut's existing death penalty
statute.
And they also agreed that if Hartford Mayor Eddie Perez's corruption
conviction is upheld after his appeal is heard, the attorney general
should use authority granted under state law to seek revocation of
Perez's publicly funded pension.
VICTORS IN
THEIR PRIMARY CONTESTS
Dan Malloy (l) and Tom Foley
(r) - what do they have in common, besides winning? Luck?
The State of Connecticut needs some right now!!!
Director Of Citizens' Election Program On Way Out. Rotman To
Resign For Family Reasons
By
JON LENDER, jlender@courant.com
9:43 PM EDT, August 18, 2010
HARTFORD —
Beth Rotman, director of the
Citizens' Election Program, which is at the center of a storm over
public financing of campaigns in the state, will resign by early 2011.
But the resignation isn't over the
ongoing public-financing controversy, but because she'll be moving to
Israel early next year with her family.
It was the second announcement
within a week about a top-level departure affecting the State Elections
Enforcement Commission. Last Thursday, the agency's director of
enforcement, Joan Andrews, was laid off. The agency's director, Albert
P. Lenge, said the layoff was part of a consolidation to increase
efficiency, but Andrews called it evidence of a trend toward softening
the agency's enforcement of election laws.
That was a big public controversy,
but Rotman's case was different. She said it's a matter of her home
life: Her partner is taking "an amazing opportunity" to work in Israel,
she said, and she is going also.
Rotman's profile at the 50-employee
agency has risen lately as the four-year-old Citizens' Election Program
has been playing a multimillion-dollar role in awarding taxpayer funds
to candidates in this year's gubernatorial election and other statewide
campaigns.
Rotman said Wednesday night: "I am
very proud to have worked with state leaders on key legislative and
fiscal changes that enabled the successful operation of the program for
statewide and legislative elections.
"I am extremely proud to have played
a role in encouraging program participation by creating the
infrastructure necessary to oversee and encourage candidate
participation in a voluntary program, while ensuring that the
appropriate safeguards are in place to conduct the oversight necessary
for a program that allocates public money.
"The fact that the majority of
candidates are participating in the program and are thus free from the
influence of special interest money during their election process
should restore voters' faith that in Connecticut our elected officials
will make decisions based on facts and figures and their assessment of
what is best for the state and her citizens, not on the basis of who
gave them the most money and to which special interest they feel
indebted."
Copyright ©
2010, The Hartford Courant
Final numbers
show tepid August primary voter turnout
Ken
Dixon, Greenwich TIMES
Published: 08:56 p.m., Monday,
August 16, 2010
Predictions of a robust turnout for
last week's primaries apparently melted in the heat, Secretary of the
State Susan Bysiewicz reported Monday.
Stamford had one of the highest
percentages of voter participation, with both Democrats and Republicans
supporting local candidates for governor, but even those totals were
well below projections.
Heading into the Aug. 10 intraparty
contests, Bysiewicz predicted that as many as half of the eligible
740,542 Democrats and 409,233 Republicans would cast ballots for the
high-profile governor, Congress and U.S. Senate races.
But with town clerks reporting from
the state's 169 towns and cities, only 24.76 percent of Democrats and
29.48 percent of Republicans bothered to vote. In terms of sheer
numbers, 182,098 Democrats and 125,808 Republicans voted.
Bridgeport Democrats were among the
lowest in turnout, with less than 15 percent participating. Democrats
in Stratford and New Fairfield also had a paltry showing.
In Southwestern Connecticut, only
two communities -- Stamford and Trumbull -- had turnouts above 30
percent from both Democrats and Republicans.
Stamford had two favorite sons --
Dannel Malloy, the Democratic former city mayor, and Republican Lt.
Gov. Michael Fedele -- seeking gubernatorial nominations against a duo
of Greenwich residents, Democrat Ned Lamont and Republican Tom Foley.
Malloy defeated Lamont by 16
percentage points and Foley beat Fedele by three points.
Republicans had 30 percent-plus
turnout in Shelton, Bethel, Brookfield, Danbury, Newtown, New Milford,
Redding and Ridgefield. Woodbridge Democrats topped 30 percent as well.
Party leaders said the turnout was
typically well below the 2006 Democratic primaries for governor and
U.S. Senate, which drew 43 percent of eligible voters.
"The turnout for the Aug. 10 primary
is less than what the secretary expected, but if you look at other
years where there were mid-term primaries, such as the 1994 open seat
for governor when there were primaries on both sides, the turnout was
nearly identical," said Av Harris, spokesman for Bysiewicz, who was on
vacation Monday.
This year was the second quadrennial
statewide primary to be held in early August and not in September, when
voters are supposedly more attuned to the coming fall political season
than they are during summer vacation time.
Chris Healy, chairman of the
Republican State Central Committee, noted Monday that GOP turnout was
slightly higher than Democrats. "Interest in the election favored our
party," Healy said, noting that the Republicans also had a U.S. Senate
primary, won by Linda McMahon of Greenwich.
"Many Republicans vote, whether it's
hot or if frogs are falling from the sky," Healy said, calling the
turnout "fairly good." Nonetheless, he said, he favored a return to the
traditional September primary that was abandoned by the General
Assembly after a court decision.
Nancy DiNardo of Trumbull,
chairwoman of the Democratic State Central Committee, said Monday she
believes Republicans had a higher percentage of turnout because there
was a big contrast between Fedele, a former legislator and incumbent
lieutenant governor, and Foley, who is running for his first elective
office.
House vote looms large for
gubernatorial hopeful Malloy
Democrat's
financial clout rests on fate of campaign finance law veto
By Ted Mann Day Staff Writer
Article published Aug 12, 2010
Hartford - Dan Malloy's victory in the gubernatorial primary was a
critical first test for Connecticut's public campaign financing system.
It was the first time a candidate used the Citizens Election Program to
run for a gubernatorial nomination, and also the first time it did what
its boosters always hoped it would.
The guy who spent roughly $10 million to try to seal up the Democratic
nomination, former U.S. Senate nominee Ned Lamont, was defeated by the
candidate who stuck to spending limits and used $2.5 million in public
grants to run his campaign.
But a new, perhaps larger test looms, and its first section isn't up to
Malloy or the Citizens Election Program.
The House of Representatives will convene in special session Friday to
consider overriding Gov. M. Jodi Rell's veto of the legislature's
proposal to fix constitutional problems with the campaign finance law
identified by the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
If the override is successful, Malloy will get a $6 million campaign
grant for his general election campaign against Republican Tom Foley, a
multimillionaire who is not participating in the program and could
spend freely on direct mail and television.
If the override fails, Malloy will be stuck to the existing base grant
amount - $3 million - but will not get the supplemental grants that
candidates under the original law receive if they are outspent by an
opponent. Those supplemental payments were ruled unconstitutional by
the Second Circuit.
In the afterglow of his primary win, however, Malloy deflected a
question on the subject.
"I haven't even thought about it," he said.
Malloy
wins in a landslide
Ken Dixon And Michael P. Mayko, CT POST Staff Writers
Published: 01:11 a.m., Wednesday, August 11, 2010
Dannel P. Malloy is Connecticut's newest comeback kid.
Four years after losing a primary for the Democratic gubernatorial
nomination, and two months after falling behind Ned Lamont by 17
points, Malloy easily secured a place on the November ballot for the
office he has long coveted. A landslide win over Lamont Tuesday
night
set Malloy up for a battle against another Greenwich multi-millionaire,
as Tom Foley won the Republican nod with a victory over Malloy's fellow
Stamford resident, Lt. Gov. Michael Fedele.
With 81 percent of precinct's reporting, Malloy had captured 58 percent
of the vote, compared with Lamont's 42 percent.
Malloy will be the party's standard-bearer this fall, as Democrats try
to regain the governor's office for the first time since William A.
O'Neill completed his term in January 1991. Malloy, 55, a former mayor
of Stamford, will continue his campaign with his choice for lieutenant
governor, Nancy Wyman. Though the campaigns of both Malloy and
Lamont
became increasingly bitter as the primary grew near, Malloy pledged
they would work together to "make sure the next governor of the state
of Connecticut is a Democrat."
"We have got to unite Democrats, independents and Republicans to change
Connecticut," Malloy told his supporters during his victory party at
City Steam Brewery in Hartford.
Of his own political future, Lamont said "tonight is not a good night
to ask that question ... maybe I'm not a natural-born politician."
Still, he said "tomorrow is a new day." He said he will meet with his
advisers to "talk and start healing."
Malloy called on Democrats throughout the state to come together and
"re-create the state of Connecticut."
"The next administration begins by telling the truth to the people of
Connecticut," Malloy said to hundreds of cheering supporters. "For too
long Connecticut's leadership has failed to inform the public, to bring
them in and make them partners. That's going to change. It is the
hallmark of the new Malloy administration."
Malloy said the difference between this year and 2006, when he lost to
New Haven Mayor John DeStefano Jr., is that his campaign has stayed
intact.
"I've worked really hard. We've had wonderful support across the board,
across the state," Malloy said. "We split labor support, but I think I
got the hardest workers. What really is the difference is that our team
never came apart from four years ago. It always stuck together and it
only got larger. I went from winning a convention by one vote to
winning a convention by 2-to-1. Our team never broke apart."
Lamont became a two-time statewide political loser, adding the
gubernatorial primary campaign to his 2006 loss in the U.S. Senate
election to Joe Lieberman. He caught lightning in a bottle in the
primary four years ago, using his opposition to the war in Iraq as a
wedge to defeat the incumbent, who then won the November election as an
independent.
The mood at Testo's, a large ballroom restaurant and catering hall
owned by Mario Testa, the Bridgeport Democratic town chairman, was
never charged with pending victory Tuesday. Returns never showed Lamont
in the lead and the crowd of supporters never numbered more than
300.
Lamont and his running mate, Mary Messina Glassman, appeared just
before 10 p.m. and tried to put on their best faces, urging supporters
to join the Malloy-Wyman camp.
"So we're driving over here and my cell phone goes off," Lamont began
in his concession speech. "And my daughter in the back seat says `Oh
God, I hope is not another of those Ned Lamont robo-calls.' "
"You have to keep a sense of humor about this," he said.
Lamont pledged his support to Malloy and began chanting "Don't look
back, look forward."
"That's the way you win and that's the way Dan will win -- by telling
the truth."
Lamont said the Democrats need to show voters they can deliver an
honest, balanced budget and create the first new jobs Connecticut has
seen in more than 20 years. Nancy DiNardo, of Trumbull,
chairwoman of
the Democratic State Central Committee, said earlier Tuesday night that
she expected the loser to work for the winner during the remainder of
the campaign.
"As I've traveled around the state, both our gubernatorial candidates
were saying come Aug. 11, we have to come back as one," DiNardo told
reporters at City Steam Brewery while Lamont was publicly conceding in
Bridgeport at 9:45 p.m.
When asked if he thought it was worth dropping $9 million of his own
fortune on the gubernatorial run, Lamont quipped "You had to remind me"
before adding "it was an honor to run for governor" and try to get to
Hartford "with no strings attached ... I'm proud to have invested in a
campaign to change Connecticut."
Bridgeport Mayor Bill Finch extended congratulations to Malloy and said
he and DeStefano would support him in the November election "so we can
take back the governor's mansion."
Outside Black Rock School in Bridgeport, Robert Palkl, an 82-year-old
retired toolmaker for the former Remington Arms plant, said he voted
for Malloy because taxes and schools were the big issues for him.
"I felt that he did a great job in Stamford," Palkl said.
Bridgeport councilwoman Evette Brantley sat in a lawn chair under a
maple tree near Bassick High School in Bridgeport Tuesday, where she
was stumping for Lamont.
"It has been slow here all day. I hear it's like this throughout
(Bridgeport). The most precious thing we have is our right to vote, and
the sad part is people are losing sight of this. People have died to
preserve our right to vote."
Malloy, a 55-year-old lawyer who served 14 years as mayor of Stamford,
used $2.5 million in the state's voluntary public financing program to
defeat Lamont, a cable TV executive.
Malloy held his own in Bridgeport, New Haven and Hartford, despite the
endorsements of local Democratic leaders for Lamont. While Malloy
was
the party-endorsed candidate during the May convention, Lamont, using
support from some unions and legislative leaders -- pressed for the
primary. The campaign was marked by dueling Lamont and Malloy TV
and
radio ads, in which the latter charged that Lamont laid off 70 percent
of his workers. Lamont's ads suggested there was something shady about
Malloy's home renovations and said Malloy's claims of creating 5,000
jobs while mayor were erroneous.
Lamont claimed employees of a division he sold off were placed in other
jobs, while the former chief state's attorney who investigated the work
on Malloy's home has said no wrongdoing was found in a year-long
investigation. Lamont made the concession phone call to Malloy's
fifth-floor suite at the Residence Inn in Hartford at about 9:15 p.m.
"It was pretty moving," Malloy said in an interview. "I've won a
primary and I've lost a primary. Winning is better."
Dannel
Malloy's Victory Speech In Hartford
By Christopher Keating on August 11, 2010 12:42 AM
The Hartford Courant's Matthew Kauffman reports:
Shortly after 9:45 p.m., the crowd erupted in cheers as the image of
Lamont appeared on television screens for his concession speech.
"I called up Dan a few minutes ago and I congratulated him," Lamont
said, and from there, the howls from the crowd at Malloy's party
drowned out the television speakers.
The volume then grew to a deafening roar as Malloy and Wyman arrived.
"Let me start by saying if I had known it was going to turn out this
way, I would have gotten a bigger room," a smiling Malloy told the
shoulder-to-shoulder crowd.
Malloy said he would work to unite Democrats and attract independents
and Republicans, calling on voters to join him "if you believe that we
can recreate our state, that we can grow jobs, that we can do battle
with electric rates, that we can make sure that Connecticut becomes the
success that we all dream it can be."
Primary Voter Turnout: 'Sad Sad Sad'
Hartford Courant
Helen Ubiñas
6:00 AM EDT, August 11, 2010
Looks like Connecticut voters missed the memo – not to mention the big
money ads – about this being one of the most important primaries in
years.
Early in the day, crickets seemed to be the resounding sound at some
polling places. And as the day wore on, it didn't get much better
at
some sites. Three hours before polls closed, Secretary of the
State
Susan Bysiewicz, reported an average turnout of about 20 percent.
Bysiewicz had originally projected a higher turnout than the 43 percent
in the August 2006 primary between Democrats Ned Lamont and Joseph I.
Lieberman. But candidates realized early on that that wasn't going to
happen.
"When you consider the state-wide primaries and all the money spent,
it's surprising," said Hartford Councilman Matt Ritter, who was running
against state House of Representative Ken Green. Over at Kennelly
School, state Rep. Hector Robles sometimes looked downright lonely as
he waited to greet phantom voters in his run against opponent Alyssa
Peterson. Only 304 Democratic voters at Kennelly, tweeted
Hartford
resident Emily Gianquinto. "Sad sad sad," said Gianquinto, who took an
early morning flight back from San Franciso just to vote in the primary.
And outside Hartford Seminary, some young campaign workers were trying
to figure out how to get an abundance of candidate literature into
voter's hands.
But candidate disappointment over low voter turnout was nothing
compared to the frustration – make that anger – expressed by campaign
workers for gubernatorial hopeful Ned Lamont. Outside United
Methodist
Church of Hartford, Kimberly Byrd and other Lamont campaign workers
were steaming mad when they learned they'd be paid with debit cards
instead of cash.
"You see this man right here," Byrd said, pointing to Lamont's name on
the T-shirt she'd just taken off in disgust. "He tricked us."
Justine Sessions, a spokesperson for Lamont, said she has no idea where
workers would have gotten the impression that they'd be paid in cash.
"Reimbursing volunteers with debit cards has been our policy since the
beginning of campaign," Sessions said. Most campaigns, she added, use
the cards.
But campaign workers weren't hearing it. They insisted they were
duped. Byrd said she was depending on the "cash" money for bills.
"I can't pay any light bill with this card," she said.
"You can bet he's not getting my vote now," she added. "No way. He's a
liar."
Ouch.
Copyright © 2010, The Hartford
Courant
WINNING
DEMOCRATS: Dan Malloy, Nancy Wyman, Denise Merrill, Kevin Lembo
WINNING
REPUBLICANS: Tom Foley, Mark Boughton, Linda McMahon, Dan
Debicella, Martha Dean
STOP THE
PRESSES - VOTING
IN PARTY PRIMARIES TO BE RELOCATED TO THE W.I.S.!!!
NOT A WALK IN THE PARK FOR NEXT CT GOVERNOR; Reflections,
illusions - U.S. House of Representatives & U.S. Senate. Rob Simmons still on the ballot -
story here.
Quinnipiac: Lamont up by 3, Foley by
8, McMahon by 22
Mark Pazniokas, CT MIRROR
August 9, 2010
Ned Lamont's lead over Dan Malloy in the Democratic race for governor
is just three percentage points, while Republican Tom Foley's lead over
Michael Fedele is 8 points, according to a Quinnipiac University poll
released today.
In the race for the Republican Senate nomination, Linda McMahon has
opened a 22-point lead over Rob Simmons, 50 percent to 28 percent, with
Peter Schiff at 15 percent.
Lamont leads Malloy, 45 percent to 42 percent. Foley leads Fedele, 38
percent to 30 percent, with Oz Griebel at 17 percentage points.
For the first time in three polls of likely Democratic primary voters,
Malloy is within the poll's margin of error. And Fedele has cut Foley's
lead to single digits for the first time.
The primaries are tomorrow. The poll was conducted over six days,
beginning Aug. 3 and ending Sunday, meaning it might not fully reflect
any late movement, especially in the more volatile Republican race for
governor.
Fedele has been quickly eroding Foley's lead since airing television
commercials. Among likely primary voters, Fedele has closed from 35
points down on July 15 to 15 points last week to 8 in the new survey.
Fedele claimed Sunday that his polling gives him a narrow lead.
"The Democratic governor's race between Ned Lamont and Dan Malloy is
too close to call and the Republican governor's race between Tom Foley
and Lt. Gov. Mike Fedele could produce a surprise," said Douglas
Schwartz, the poll's director.
The Democratic race has steadily tightened, with Malloy closing from 9
points down on July 15 to five points a week ago to 3 points in the new
poll. To stem the losses, Lamont increased his television buy by nearly
$1.3 million as Quinnipiac began the new survey, bringing his TV
spending to nearly $5 million, compared to about $2 million for Malloy.
A week ago, Lamont led Malloy, 45 percent to 40 percent with 14 percent
undecided. Foley led Fedele, 41 percent to 26 percent, with 13 percent
for Griebel and 21 percent undecided.
In the new survey, the undecided vote among Republicans is 14 percent,
with nearly half of all voters who expressed a preference saying they
may yet change their minds. The undecided vote among Democrats is 12
percent, with 30 percent of those who with a preference saying they
might change.
The Malloy campaign claimed the late momentum in a statement by Dan
Kelly, Malloy's campaign manager.
“The poll reflects what we’re seeing and hearing every day on the
campaign trail: Dan’s got the momentum. People increasingly see
him as the better qualified candidate, and the person best able to
provide the leadership this state desperately needs. People are
rejecting Ned’s sleazy and untrue attacks on Dan, and they’re rejecting
Ned’s attempt to buy this election.”
Over the weekend, Lamont said he thought his lead had stabilized.
"Democrats know that Ned is the only one in this race with a positive
vision for our state, the experience to create jobs, and the ability to
beat the Republicans in November," Justine Sessions, his communication
director, said today. "When they go to the polls tomorrow, we're
confident that they'll choose Ned."
In the Senate race, McMahon opened some distance on her GOP opponents,
reaching 50 percent among likely primary voters for the first time. A
week ago, it was McMahon with 47 percent, Simmons 30 percent and Schiff
14 percent.
Quinnipiac released the poll 90 minutes later than its usual release of
6:30 a.m., leaving campaign staffs and journalists hovering by their
computers for the last snapshot of voter preferences a day before the
polls open.
It had no explanation for the delay in a statement.
The poll is based on surveys of 664 likely Republican primary voters
and 464 likely Democratic primary voters. The GOP survey has a margin
of error of plus or minus 3.8 percentage points. The Democratic margin
of error is 4.6 points.
Ned
Lamont Leads By 5 Points In Latest
Quinnipiac Poll; Tom Foley Up By 15 Points Among Likely Voters
Hartford Courant
By Christopher Keating
August 5, 2010 6:59 AM
With only days remaining before Tuesday's primaries, Democrat Ned
Lamont and Republican Tom Foley still remain in the lead in races that
are getting steadily closer.
Lamont is leading former Stamford Mayor Dannel Malloy by 5 percentage
points among likely Democratic voters, according to the latest
Quinnipiac University poll. Foley is up by 15 points over Lt. Gov.
Michael Fedele and 28 points over longtime business executive Oz
Griebel of Simsbury.
"Lamont still has the edge, but with 14 percent of the votes undecided
and 43 percent who still could change their mind, it is close enough
that Malloy could pull it off,'' said Douglas Schwartz, the poll's
director.
Malloy is deploying a come-from-behind strategy as he pulls closer to
the front-running Lamont, who has led in the polls for about six
months. The two combatants have been broadcasting a series of negative
campaign commercials since Malloy started the slugfest on Friday, July
23.
Lamont did not initially respond on television to Malloy's sharp
charges, and he has admitted that lack of action - for nearly a week -
cost him in the polls. Some of Lamont's supporters believed that the
latest Quinnipiac Poll would show essentially a dead heat as the race
moved toward its finale. Lamont, however, began responding on
television starting last Thursday in an effort to combat Malloy's
surge, and he has continued the response with a steady stream of
commercials.
Malloy has repeatedly shown ads that charge that Lamont reduced the
workforce in his cable television company by 70 percent while taking a
salary of more than $500,000. But Lamont counters that the company sold
off a portion of the business, and those workers largely gained new
employment with the cable outfit that purchased the business.
U.S. Senator Joseph I. Lieberman raised the same charges about Lamont's
business during the 2006 campaign, and Lamont's then-campaign chairman,
former Stamford state Senator George Jepsen - the former chairman of
the state Democratic Party - said it was a distortion of Lamont's
business career that was false.
"Despite a two-week barrage of Dan Malloy's false, negative ads and his
repetition of four-year-old lies about Ned and his company, Connecticut
voters still know that Ned Lamont has the best experience to create
jobs and help their families,'' Justine Sessions, a spokeswoman for
Lamont, said in a statement.
She added, "While Dan's campaign grows more desperate and erratic every
day, we're sticking to our strategy and talking to the people of
Connecticut about the issue that they care most about: jobs. We've got
a robust field operation that will turn out our voters on election day,
and with just five days to go, the only poll that matters to us is next
Tuesday.''
Malloy's campaign manager, Dan Kelly, said, "This race is tightening
because as people really begin making up their minds, they're moving to
Dan. They know he turned around a city, and they think he can turn
around a state. They know Dan Malloy has the right kind of experience
to be governor.''
He added that Lamont "is pouring hundreds of thousands of dollars a day
into this race - about $8 million so far - and people are beginning to
reject it.''
Malloy is financing his campaign with public funds under the state's
landmark campaign law, and he has received $2.5 million for the primary.
The Lamont campaign says that Malloy has been distorting Lamont's jobs
record at the same time that he has been distorting his own jobs
record, too. Malloy has repeatedly said that he helped create 5,000
jobs in Stamford, but state labor statistics show that the city has
lost more than 13,000 jobs since reaching the peak employment level in
2000. The unemployment rate increased by more than 58 percent in
Stamford during Malloy's 14 years as mayor.
Some progressive Democrats say Malloy has been misrepresenting his jobs
record for years - dating back to complaints during the 2006 campaign
by New Haven Mayor John DeStefano about Malloy's statements about
creating 5,000 jobs.
Lamont has also questioned Malloy's ethics, noting that the
then-Stamford mayor underwent a criminal investigation for 17 months by
8 investigators regarding city contractors who worked on his home in
the affluent Shippan section of Stamford. Malloy, however, was never
charged in the case, which concluded in 2005. He received a letter from
the chief state's attorney that there was no evidence of criminal
wrongdoing on his part. Lamont, though, says that he would never let
state contractors work on his house if he becomes governor - and that
it is an issue of ethics, not legality.
Foley has also been involved in a major clash with Fedele in a campaign
that features blistering attacks on the airwaves. Foley has been
criticized repeatedly for his former ownership of The Bibb Company,
which operated a textile mill in Georgia before it was closed. The
commercials are a constant presence on Connecticut television, and
Foley has countered with an equal number of ads that criticize
"tax-and-spend Mike Fedele.'' Fedele, though, says he cannot be blamed
for the state's huge projected budget deficit and for the loss of more
than 100,000 jobs during the recent recession.
"Lt. Gov. Mike Fedele is coming on very strong in these final weeks,
but it may not be enough to overcome Tom Foley's huge early lead,''
Schwartz said in a statement. "In just three weeks, Fedele has cut
Foley's lead from 35 points to 15 points. Foley's negatives have risen,
probably due in part to Fedele's TV ads. There is still a lot of voter
uncertainty in this race, but with less than a week to go, there isn't
much time left for Fedele.''
In the Democratic race, Lt. Gov.-candidate Mary Glassman has started
her own TV commercials, mentioning that she has teamed up with Lamont
in their effort to lead the state.
The margin of error in both polls of the Democratic and Republican
likely primary voters is plus or minus 3.1 percentage points. The poll
also shows that both Lamont and Malloy would defeat any of the three
Republican candidates by anywhere from 13 to 25 points, depending which
candidates are in the race.
Lamont reconsiders, will debate Malloy
next week on TV, radio
By Mark Pazniokas and Keith M. Phaneuf, CT MIRROR
July 29, 2010
To defuse the escalating back-and-forth of negative ads in the
Democratic race for governor, Ned Lamont said today he has reconsidered
and now intends to debate Dan Malloy next week on WFSB, Channel 3 and
WNPR radio.
"This has gone south fast," Lamont said of the tone of the campaign for
the Democratic nomination, which will be settled in an Aug. 10 primary.
Lamont said in a telephone interview that he thinks that a debate Aug.
3 that would be simulcast by Channel 3 and WNPR would be the best way
to clear the air, rather than spend the next week responding to ads and
counter ads.
"I think that the best place to do it is during a debate," Lamont said.
After a forum today in Storrs, Lamont said for the first time he was
reconsidering his refusal to participate in another televised debate.
Less than an hour later, he said during an interview he had decided to
go head with the forum sponsored by WFSB and WNPR.
"I hope Ned will agree to a wide open format that allows us to engage
each other directly in a real conversation," Malloy said. "Ned himself
has said he doesn't like the '1 minute canned response format.' I
couldn't agree more. So let's not do that."
Details have yet to be released about the format.
WFSB and WNPR were going ahead with a one-hour Democratic forum with or
without Lamont, leaving an open invitation to Lamont to attend and turn
it into a true debate. The stations are hosting a Republican debate the
next day.
Lamont said the last week has been dispiriting.
Malloy hit him Friday with ad attacking his record as a businessman,
recycling a spot Sen. Joseph Lieberman used four years ago in their
Senate race, accusing Lamont of cutting his workforce at Lamont Digital
while paying himself a big salary.
Most of the job losses were attributed to the sale of a subsidiary that
provides cable television to private residential communities, he said.
The jobs went with the cable systems, he said.
Yesterday, Lamont aired a piece talking about a culture of corruption
during Malloy's time as mayor of Stamford, referring to an
investigation that ended with Malloy's exoneration.
Malloy aired a second negative ad, highlighting a commercial featuring
a headline about a racial discrimination lawsuit.The spot offered no
other information about the suit, which was filed by one employee and
settled in 2003.
"It was one employee. It ended amicably," Lamont said, calling the suit
the only one of its kind in 25 years in business.
"This is what politics has come to?" he asked.
Malloy said last night the commercial was intended to pose reasonable
questions about Lamont's ability as a businessman, which is central to
his campaign.
Today, when he heard Lamont was reconsidering, Malloy said,
"Let's call Channel 8 right now."
Malloy originally had expected to debate Lamont at The Garde Arts
Center in New London on Wednesday. The event, which Lamont declined to
attend, was to be televised on an affiliate of WTNH TV-8 in New Haven.
Malloy, who answered questions this morning following a gubernatorial
forum at the Nathan Hale Inn on the University of Connecticut campus in
Storrs, said he believes Lamont is feeling the pressure of new campaign
ads attacking him for avoiding a second debate.
"Rich guys are used to trying to make their own rules. ... There's a
lot of heat in the kitchen and I think he wants to be let out," Malloy
said at UConn.
Lamont used $17 million of his personal wealth four years ago in U.S.
Senate campaign.
WFSB and WNPR will broadcast a debate of the Democrats on Aug. 3,
followed a day later by a debate with the three Republican candidates
for governor, Michael Fedele, Tom Foley and Oz Griebel.
The debates will be simulcast live at 3 p.m. on WFSB, Channel 3 and
WNPR radio, then rebroadcast at 8 p.m. on CPTV and WNPR. WFSB also will
replay the debates at 7 p.m. on its digital cable channel, Eyewitness
News Now.
Weston RTC endorsed Oz Griebel (r).
No love for the Rell record at GOP debate
By Mark Pazniokas
July 29, 2010
Tom Foley and Lt. Gov. Michael Fedele frequently sparred Thursday
night, ignoring the underfunded Oz Griebel during a televised debate of
the Republican candidates for governor. But Republican Gov. M.
Jodi Rell took the most punches as Foley blamed her administration for
the fiscal crisis. And Fedele worked from the opening bell to distance
himself from his boss.
"The lieutenant governor does not have an ability to propose a budget.
The governor does. Does not have an ability to veto a budget. The
governor does," Fedele said.
It was a night when Fedele seemed grateful that Rell never got around
to endorsing his candidacy, given how sharply she was faulted for job
losses and failing to veto a Democratic budget last year.
"I don't see how you can separate yourself from what the Rell
administration has done," Griebel told Fedele
If so, he wasn't watching very closely.
"I did not agree with the administration in many cases," Fedele said,
adding that the governor should have taken a tougher stand against some
of the fiscal "shell games" played at the Capitol.
Someone stumbling upon the debate on television would have been
surprised to learn that Rell actually is reasonably popular, with an
approval rating of 60 percent. She is not seeking re-election
after six years as governor, a job she inherited in 2004 from a
predecessor of his way to prison. She was elected to a full term by a
landslide in 2006. On Thursday on the stage of the Garde Arts
Center in New London, she was merely a lame duck who is expected to
leave behind a deficit of more than $3 billion for her successor.
But she has remained on the sidelines in the run to the Aug. 10 GOP
primary, expressing some affection for Fedele and Griebel, the
president of a business group, the Metro Hartford Alliance.
Foley is the front runner for the GOP nomination. He is the first
candidate for governor endorsed by the Republican State Convention
without holding elective office. A businessman whose stewardship
of a Georgia textile company is harshly attacked in a Fedele ad, Foley
holds out his lack of experience as a virtue in this political season.
“People are angry,” Foley said. “They are upset at our current office
holders for getting us in the mess we’re in, and they don’t trust
people who are currently serving in office to lead us out from where we
are.”
Fedele, a successful businessman and former state senator, tried to
make the case, albeit awkwardly, that a little political experience
must be useful to the new governor.
“If you believe the next governor, because of the issues that this
state faces needs to be and know the personalities and egos and the
process in government, I’m the only candidate that has that,” Fedele
said.
Foley said experience, while valued in other endeavor, was less
important than boldness and courage.
“I will make the courageous decisions that need to be made to turn this
state around,” Foley said. “I make a commitment to you tonight that I
will reduce the size and cost of state government. I will close the
budget deficit without raising your taxes.”
The boldness and courage to name actual cuts apparently will have to
wait until after the election. Foley and Fedele pledged no new
taxes, a promise that fiscal analysts believe is impossible, as the
size of the projected deficit approximates the entire state payroll.
Griebel said he would consider one source of new revenue: electronic
tolls to maintain the state’s crumbling transportation
infrastructure. He said the election is about vision, ideas and
execution.
“It’s about prioritizing those services that only the state can
provide, but saying no to those we can’t afford and don’t have real
value,” Griebel said.
Greibel, who has not raised sufficient funds to advertise on television
in the closing weeks, was left out of the Fedele-Foley cross fire over
the financing of their campaigns. Foley, a Greenwich businessman
who owns a 100-foot yacht, is relying on personal wealth and donations.
Fedele has qualified for public financing of $2.5 million.
Fedele said Foley’s only objection to public financing that is he now
has competition. Foley said that Fedele, who was videotaped driving his
Ferrari to a charity event, is not exactly a pauper. A critic posted
the video on You Tube.
Looney backs Malloy in governor’s bid
By Mary E. O’Leary, Register Topics Editor
moleary@newhavenregister.com
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
NEW HAVEN — State Senate Majority Leader Martin Looney, D-New
Haven, has praised both Democrats running for governor in the
fast-approaching primary, but said Dan Malloy, with his experience as
the longtime mayor of a major city, makes him the better candidate.
New Haven’s large delegation at the May Democratic convention gave its
votes to Ned Lamont, who won the party endorsement, but the city’s
loyalty is expected to be divided in the Aug. 10 primary.
Many of the dozens crammed into Malloy’s city headquarters Sunday, from
some aldermen to past city officials, have been at odds with New Haven
Mayor John DeStefano Jr., who beat Malloy four years ago in the
Democratic primary for governor — a fight that continues to leave hard
feelings between them.
DeStefano and the big city mayors in Connecticut came out early for
Lamont, as have state House Speaker Christopher Donovan, D-Meriden, and
state Senate President Pro Tem Donald Williams, D-Brooklyn, but Looney
is the latest among leadership to back Malloy in what is expected to be
a tight race.
Calling the 2010 elections the most important and toughest year to lead
since Democrat Wilbur Cross was elected governor during the Great
Depression, Looney said the party is fortunate to have two candidates
who are “accomplished, honorable men” who want to do the best for
Connecticut.
But the majority leader said Malloy’s experience as Stamford mayor for
14 years dealing with difficult issues of education, job creation,
economic development, housing and public finance give him the edge, as
do his years as a prosecutor and defense attorney.
Democrats are desperate to take back the statehouse for the first time
since Gov. William A. O’Neill left office in 1991.
Looney said Malloy realizes painful cuts will have to be made as the
state grapples with a $3.4 billion deficit, but he will support a more
progressive revenue system with an earned income tax credit for the
working poor.
“Dan Malloy can hit the ground running. We have big problems and we
just don’t have time for on-the-job training,” said state Sen. Bob
Duff, D-Norwalk, of Malloy. Also in attendance were state Sens. Eileen
Daily, D-Westbrook, and Andrew McDonald, D-Stamford, and state Rep.
Michael Lawlor, D-East Haven.
Looney said the mayors’ support for Lamont rests on the millionaire’s
ability to match the personal spending of Republican candidate Tom
Foley, also a wealthy Greenwich resident, if Foley wins the GOP primary.
The latest Quinnipiac Poll shows Lamont continuing to lead against
Malloy. Among likely voters, that lead is nine percentage points, and
both Lamont and Malloy beat their three Republican contenders, Foley,
R. Nelson “Oz” Griebel and Lt. Gov. Michael Fedele.
Malloy made a pitch to the urban crowd that he would advance policies
that will ease the property tax burden, improve schools and lower crime.
“We cannot tolerate failure rates in our school system as we have
tolerated over the last 20 years … It is not good enough to say that we
give opportunity, we got to start guaranteeing some results in this
state,” Malloy said.
Those who lined the walls of the converted garage space on Whalley
Avenue that serves as Malloy’s New Haven headquarters included former
Westville Alderwoman Elaine Braffman and former Redevelopment Director
Bill Donohue, Aldermen Darnell Goldson, D-30, Alphonse Paolillo Jr.,
D-17, Jackie James-Evans, D-3, Michael Smart, D-8, and Andrea
Jackson-Brooks, D-4.
Malloy, Lamont Battle Over
Discrimination Lawsuit
Hartford Courant
By JON LENDER
July 27, 2010
Democratic gubernatorial rivals Dan Malloy and Ned Lamont savaged each
other Monday in their increasingly bitter campaign for the Aug. 10
party primary, over a discrimination lawsuit filed against Lamont's
cable TV company in 2002 by an African American former employee.
Their fight bled into other areas and bared the two camps' obvious
dislike of, and paranoia about, each other.
It all started with The Courant's publication of a story Monday that
said Lamont, a Greenwich multimillionaire, was sued in 2002 by a former
executive — who had worked in Lamont's cable TV company's Delaware
office and claimed he'd been mistreated on the basis of race.
Lamont denied the allegations in court filings and the case was settled
in September 2003. Lamont's campaign manager, Joe Abbey, said in
Monday's story that the "one-time personnel matter" was "settled
privately" under an agreement by "both parties … to keep the details
confidential."
However, Abbey went further in his reaction – and blamed the Malloy
camp for instigating the story in which The Courant quoted from online
public court files. Malloy campaign adviser Roy Occhiogrosso called
that a "ridiculous allegation."
That didn't stop another Lamont campaign aide from even seeing the
invisible hand of Malloy behind a reference in The Courant's story to
an earlier incident, four years ago, when the issue of possible racial
discrimination arose while Lamont was running unsuccessfully for the
U.S. Senate. The story recalled that during the 2006 Democratic Senate
primary campaign, Lamont was criticized by his opponent, Sen. Joseph
Lieberman, for having once belonged to a Greenwich country club "not
known for its diversity'' – a criticism Lamont dismissed as "sad."
A Lamont press aide wrote The Courant an e-mail saying, "It strikes me
as odd that you would mention [that 2006 episode] when the only
apparent connection is that this is another Lieberman attack the Malloy
camp is regurgitating." On Friday, Malloy had begun running a TV ad
containing criticism similar to another charge Lieberman made against
Lamont in 2006 — that he was making lots of money as some of his
employees lost their jobs. Lamont says that charge also is unfounded.
About midday Monday, Malloy issued a statement headlined: "Malloy Says
Courant Story Raises Questions Lamont Should Answer" — asking why
Lamont had settled the dscrimination lawsuit in a way that barred
public discussion, and saying "government doesn't work when it's
secretive."
Malloy also asked: "Why is the statement confidential? What did he or
his company acknowledge doing? … How much money was the employee paid
in order to keep quiet? Why does a Connecticut-based company have a
corporate headquarters in the State of Delaware? Is there a tax benefit
to doing so? What happened to all of Ned's employees? He's said
numerous times that he hired 'hundreds and hundreds' of people, yet the
company today has only 36 employees, including just eight in
Connecticut."
Malloy, in his statement, even tried to anticipate Lamont's response
and knock it down in advance. "I know what Ned will say in response:
'This is an unfair, desperate attack.' That's wrong." Then he needled
Lamont for declining to debate one-on-one before the Aug. 10 primary.
"I think Ned should answer these questions," he said, "and I'd prefer
that he do that in a debate with me."
Hours later, Abbey issued a response, parodying the Malloy headline
with this one: "Lamont Campaign says Courant Story Raises Questions
Malloy Should Answer." Abbey also said: "I understand why Dan was so
defensive in his statement saying, 'I know what Ned will say in
response: 'This is an unfair, desperate attack.' That's exactly what it
was."
Abbey asked Malloy his own series of questions, including: "How many of
… 55 civil rights complaints and 37 federal lawsuits [against the city]
were filed by employees reporting directly to you, or to your senior
staff members? … When did you first learn that three of your employees,
two of whom you named employee of the month, were embezzling hundreds
of thousands of dollars from the city on your watch, as reported by the
Courant? … Why do you continue to advance claims about your record on
jobs that have been fully debunked by the Courant?" He also asked if
Malloy still accepts campaign contributions from "companies that either
held contracts with the city or aspired to do so."
Lamont
Declines Debate; Malloy To Be
Alone
McMahon Using Same
Front-Runner's Strategy In Skipping GOP Debate
By CHRISTOPHER KEATING, ckeating@courant.com
July 25, 2010
What if they held a debate and only one person showed up?
That looks like the case next week — Democratic gubernatorial contender
Dannel Malloy may receive one hour of free television time because his
opponent, Ned Lamont, says he will not be debating.
The contest is scheduled to be broadcast at 3 p.m. on Aug. 3 on WFSB,
Channel 3, and on WNPR radio, along with rebroadcasts later that night.
Lamont can always change his mind during the next week, but he says he
has already participated in more than 30 joint appearances during the
past several months around the state. He intends to participate with
other gubernatorial candidates in a breakfast forum Thursday, sponsored
by the Windham Region Chamber of Commerce, at a hotel on the UConn
campus in Storrs.
The debate has become a hot issue after Malloy released a negative
television commercial Friday night that criticized Lamont — without
mentioning his name — for failing to debate and for his business record.
The 30-second commercial was the first negative ad of the Democratic
primary, setting off charges and countercharges between the campaigns.
The Malloy campaign said Lamont reduced the number of employees in his
cable television business by more than 70 percent; Lamont responded
that many employees left because pieces of the business were sold.
Regarding the debates, Lamont said in an interview that he prefers a
detailed discussion of important issues rather than the 30-second or
60-second responses that are traditionally required in televised
debates.
"You end up with a lot of talking points,'' Lamont said. "I like the
sort of unlimited give-and-take, which is what I do in these town
forums. … It's a real conversation. It's not one- or two-minute
answers. I love mixing it up.''
Meanwhile, Lamont is not alone in apparently avoiding the verbal
fisticuffs on the debate stage. Linda McMahon, who leads the polls in
the Republican U.S. Senate primary, is expected to duck a debate with
her opponents Tuesday night at Trinity College in Hartford.
Malloy, though, said he hopes that Lamont changes his mind and shows up
in the Channel 3 studio in Rocky Hill, where the debate organizers will
have a lectern ready up until the event starts.
"Most politicians would love to have an hour of TV time to themselves.
I would not,'' Malloy said in an interview. "I would want Ned to be
there. I would prefer that he be on the stage.''
Malloy said the failure to debate on television will "backfire'' on
Lamont and cost him votes in the Aug. 10 primary.
Lamont's spokeswoman, Justine Sessions, said, "It might take Dan a full
hour to explain how 5,000 jobs created, minus 13,000 jobs lost, equals
5,000 jobs created.''
The remark was a reference to a weekslong dispute over exactly how many
jobs were created during Malloy's 14 years as Stamford's mayor. Malloy
has run campaign advertisements that say he created 5,000 jobs, but
state labor statistics also show that Stamford has lost more than
13,000 jobs since reaching its peak employment in 2000. Stamford lost
more than 5,000 jobs in the period from June 2008 to June 2009, pushing
up the city's office vacancy rate. Lamont says Malloy has been
misrepresenting his jobs record — the same charge that New Haven Mayor
John DeStefano made against Malloy during the 2006 Democratic
gubernatorial primary.
Lamont, who is leading in the polls, has been operating a
front-runner's strategy, deciding which events to participate in.
McMahon has conducted a similar strategy in the Republican primary for
the U.S. Senate, and her opponents expect that she will not attend the
debate at Trinity College. Former U.S. Rep. Rob Simmons and Weston
investor Peter Schiff, along with candidates John Mertens and Warren
Mosler, are expected to attend.
"It's too bad Linda won't be joining Rob and I at the Federation of
Connecticut Taxpayers debate on Tuesday, July 27,'' Schiff said in a
statement. "It appears she is only comfortable in the scripted confines
of the wrestling ring, but when she's unscripted she can't handle it.
I'll tell you what, if it makes her more comfortable on Tuesday, I'll
agree to put the three podiums inside a ring.''
McMahon's spokesman, Ed Patru, responded, "Peter and Linda appeared
together many times in forums and debates over the past nine months,
including one that was televised. Republicans are familiar with the
differences between them, and the reason Linda has the support of most
Republicans is because she's made a concerted effort to meet with
voters across this state, interact with them and listen to them.''
As a fervent debater, House Republican leader Lawrence Cafero said he
did not initially grasp Lamont's views on debating.
"I don't personally understand it, but he must think it's an advantage
not to debate,'' Cafero said. "I don't understand it because he's not
an incompetent man to speak.''
But Cafero says Lamont's statements about participating in more than 30
joint appearances around the state might be sufficient.
"I think he can get away with that,'' Cafero said. "It passes the smirk
test. I get it.''
Malloy commercial
hits Lamont for refusal to debate
Mark Pazniokas, CT MIRROR
July 23, 2010
Trailing in the polls, Dan Malloy aired a television commercial Friday
afternoon that tweaks Ned Lamont for his refusal to debate in the
closing weeks of their campaign for the Democratic gubernatorial
nomination.
As attack ads go, it is a relatively gentle spot. Malloy appears on the
camera for the entire commercial, contrasting his record as mayor with
Lamont's as the founder and former chief executive of a small
cable-television company. He never mentions Lamont by name.
"My opponent refuses to debate so here are the facts," says Malloy, the
former mayor of Stamford. "I have a proven record of creating jobs,
lowering crime, cleaning up government. And I have a real plan to put
people back to work."
"My opponent doesn't have that experience. In fact, he reduced his
employees by more than 70 percent, while paying himself a huge salary.
Don't you think CEOs behaving that way is what messed up our economy in
the first place?"
Malloy is referring to job losses at Lamont Digital, which built
cable-television systems on college campuses and private residential
communities. Lamont has said that many of the job losses were caused by
the sale of the private residential systems.
The spot coincidentally debuts the same day that Republican Michael C.
Fedele aired a scathing critique of the business record of the
Republican front runner, Tom Foley. The trailing candidates in both
races now are trying to drive down their opponent's numbers over their
business backgrounds.
There is a symmetry to the two races: Malloy and Fedele are high school
classmates from Stamford, waging publicly financed campaigns. Lamont
and Foley are Greenwich businessmen, relying on private donations and
their own considerable wealth to underwrite their races.
Malloy's staff cast the spot as a reaction to Lamont's refusal to
debate in the closing weeks.
"Dan would have been happy to have this discussion at the debate in New
London," said Roy Occhiogrosso, Malloy's media adviser. "We have no
other choice, no other way to do it."
Lamont is refusing to participate in a debate at the Garde Arts Center
in London on July 27. He also has declined an invitation to debate Aug.
4 on WFSB, Channel and Connecticut Public Broadcasting.
He did debate Malloy in June on NBC30 and has agreed to appear at a
forum next week with Malloy and the three Republican candidates for
governor.
Justine Sessions, the communication director for Lamont, noted that
Malloy told The Mirror a week ago his positive commercials were working.
"They must be nervous," she said. "They don't feel like Dan's positive
message is resonating. He's not connecting with voters."
She declined to say if Lamont was ready with a piece attacking Malloy's
record. They previously have challenged Malloy's claims about creating
jobs in Stamford, saying the jobs created were offset by later job
losses.
Sessions, who had not seen the Malloy commercial, said Lamont assisted
his former employees with outplacement packages and, in some cases,
helped them become independent contractors who still do work for Lamont
Digital.
The Malloy commercial was not yet available on line. It went on the air
late this afternoon.
In 2006, Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman ran a tougher version against Lamont
in the Senate race. His advertising consultant, Knickerbocker, is the
firm behind Malloy's commercials.
"We knew this day was coming, but that doesn't lessen our
disappointment," Lamont's campaign manager Joe Abbey, said in an email
Friday night. "Connecticut families deserve better than false negative
attacks that were debunked four years ago. Just like his misleading
claims about job creation, this is another example of Dan Malloy saying
anything to win an election, no matter how untrue."
That email prompted a response from Malloy's camp.
"The facts speak for themselves: Dan Malloy turned a city around, while
Ned Lamont was acting like a typical Wall Street CEO that drove middle
class families into the ditch," Occhiogrosso said.
Lamont view
on sick leave bill unclear
By Ted Mann Day Staff Writer
Article published Jul 24, 2010
Voters who closely follow the Democratic primary for
governor will likely know that Ned Lamont opposes the legislature's
paid sick leave bill: the proposal to mandate that employers with 50
workers or more provide them paid time off when they're ill.
But Lamont's position, a key policy difference with his intra-party
rival Dan Malloy, is not as clear-cut as it has sometimes sounded.
In response to a questionnaire from the Working Families Party, the key
backers of the bill for the past several years, Lamont said that he
would sign one version of the sick leave proposal, the one that limited
the mandate to "service workers."
But in many public appearances and interviews, Lamont has seemed to
suggest categorical rejection of a state law mandating sick leave for
workers, while saying he could support a federal version of the law,
which he believes would provide the sick leave without creating
competitive disadvantages among individual states.
When a listener called in to ask about the topic during Lamont's Friday
morning appearance on WNPR's "Where We Live," the candidate said he'd
support a mandate "at the national level."
"I support what Rosa and Chris Dodd are trying to do," Lamont said,
referring to U.S. Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-3rd District, and the state's
senior senator, "not something that puts Connecticut at a disadvantage
with the first state in the country to have a mandate like this."
After a follow-up question, Lamont said: "Again, on a national level I
think it makes a fair amount of sense. To do it right now in the middle
of this knee-knocking recession when small businesses are hardly
keeping their head above water … is it a priority for me? No."
Lamont had a more forceful answer in an interview with the Connecticut
Mirror in February, as he jumped into the governor's race.
"I think we deal with sick leave just fine at the small-business level
where I live," Lamont told the Mirror. "I'm not sure I need the
government stepping in and putting another mandate on businesses like
mine."
But on the Working Families Party questionnaire, Lamont checked a box
saying he "would sign this legislation," adding a line to specify that
he would only sign a version that mirrors a version put forward by
state Sen. Edith Prague, D-Columbia, during the last legislative
session.
That version would apply the mandate for sick leave only to service
sector workers and only for companies with more than 50 employees.
Lamont has said repeatedly that "if something like what Edith Prague
put forward came across his desk, he wouldn't veto it," said Justine
Sessions, a spokeswoman for the Lamont campaign.
But if Lamont's support has been there, it hasn't seemed very vocal to
leaders of the Working Families Party, which has worked for several
years to try to convince a deeply opposed business lobby that mandating
sick leave for workers will improve worker health and productivity, and
that it won't prove an onerous burden on employers.
Hours after Lamont's WNPR appearance on Friday, Jon Green, the party's
state director, e-mailed some party members about the answer Lamont
gave. In the e-mail, obtained by The Day, Green wrote, "Unfortunately,
Ned's public statements still differ fairly dramatically with the
position he articulated to the WFP on his questionnaire."
Green suggested that the party conduct a conference call this week "to
discuss what to do about this."
Ted Kennedy Jr. endorses Lamont, cuts
an ad
Mark Pazniokas, CT MIRROR
July 22, 2010
Ned Lamont rolled out a new television ad today in which he is endorsed
by Ted Kennedy Jr.
The son of the late U.S. senator, Kennedy is a long-time Connecticut
resident who has been mentioned as a potential candidate for public
office. His father endorsed Lamont in his 2006 race for U.S. Senate.
In the commercial, Kennedy refers to Lamont and his wife, Annie, as
good friends.
"What makes Connecticut so special to me are the people that I've met
here, people like Ned and Annie," Kennedy says in the spot. "Over the
years, I've been lucky enough to become good friends with them and I
know they share the same values I believe in - the values of hard work
and giving back. I've seen Ned in action. I know he has
what it takes to bring people together and move Connecticut forward,
and that's why I'll be voting for him on August 10."
The 60-second commercial will begin airing Friday. A 30-second version
will go up next week. Lamont's campaign was unsure if Kennedy,
who has kept a relatively low profile since settling in Connecticut
after college, will do any campaigning for Lamont.
In a statement, Lamont recalled Senator Kennedy's campaigning with him
in Bridgeport.
"I'll never forget standing beside Ted's father singing 'When Irish
Eyes Are Smiling' when he came to campaign for me in 2006," Lamont
said. "Senator Kennedy always believed that our best days were ahead of
us, a belief that Ted Jr. and I share for the state of
Connecticut. As governor, I will work every day to create jobs
and make Connecticut a place where every family has the opportunity to
achieve their own American dream."
The younger Kennedy has an undergraduate degree from Wesleyan, a
master's from Yale and a law degree from the University of Connecticut.
He lives in Branford with his wife, Kiki, who is on the faculty of the
Yale School of Medicine.
"Empty Chair" debate coming?
Debate to go on, with or without Lamont
Mark Pazniokas, CT MIRROR
July 21, 2010
WFSB and Connecticut Public Broadcasting are going ahead with plans for
a Democratic gubernatorial debate on Aug. 3 - with or without Ned
Lamont.
All three Republican candidates have accepted an invitation to debate
Aug. 4 at WFSB's studios in Rocky Hill, but Dan Malloy is the only
Democrat willing to appear on the 3rd.
"We're apparently going to do it with or without Lamont," Dennis House,
the WFSB anchorman, said Tuesday night.
"I really, really hope he takes part," said John Dankosky, the news
director of WNPR, the radio affiliate of Connecticut Public
Broadcasting.
WFSB has informed Lamont they will keep two lecterns on their set until
12:55 p.m. on the day of the debate, House said. After that, they will
reconfigure the studio for a solo appearance by Malloy. House and
Dankosky will pose questions.
The decision by WFSB and Connecticut Public Broadcasting keeps alive an
awkward episode for Lamont, who had a 9-percentage point lead last week
in a Quinnipiac University poll of likely Democratic primary voters.
Dankosky said that WNPR and WFSB are committed to offer voters an
opportunity to hear from the candidates, and it is inappropriate to let
one candidate force a cancellation.
"I think it's important for both us and 'FSB to offer this," Dankosky
said.
"Our feeling is it's unfair to viewers to just give them the
Republicans," House said.
On Aug. 3 and 4, the debates will be simulcast live at 3 p.m. on WFSB,
Channel 3 and WNPR radio, then rebroadcast at 8 p.m. on CPTV and WNPR.
WFSB also will replay the debates at 7 p.m. on its digital cable
channel, Eyewitness News Now.
On WFSB's "Face the State," the station's Sunday interview show, Lamont
said he would consider participating, but his staff said after the show
that the campaign's decision was final.
Lamont debated Malloy on NBC30 a month ago, but he has refused
additional televised debates closer to the primary.
"We hope Ned will change his mind," said Roy Occhiogrosso, a media
adviser to Malloy. "Democrats have a real choice to make. The best way
to make that choice is to see the candidates side by side."
Justine Sessions, the communication director for Lamont, did not return
a phone seeking comment Tuesday night. Instead, she emailed a one-line
jab at Malloy's disputed claims about job creation during his 14 years
as mayor of Stamford:
"Dan may need the full hour to explain how 5,000 jobs created minus
13,000 jobs lost equals 5,000 jobs created."
Lamont's non-participation prompted the cancellation of a televised
debate scheduled for July 27 at the Garde Arts Center in New London.
Republicans Tom Foley, Michael C. Fedele and Oz Griebel will debate at
the Garde on July 28. It will be televised on a sister station of WTNH,
Channel 8.
Lamont has agreed to appear Friday at 9 a.m. on "Where We LIve,"
Dankosky's one-hour daily interview show on WNPR.
Judge rejects Jarjura's effort to
block public funding for Lembo
Mark Pazniokas, CT MIRROR
July 27, 2010
A Superior Court judge today rejected Michael Jarjura's effort to block
Kevin Lembo from using public financing in their Democratic contest for
state comptroller.
The terse order by Judge James T. Graham frees Lembo to begin spending
the $375,000 awarded to him last week for his Aug. 10 primary with
Jarjura, the mayor of Waterbury.
“Does the timing complicate? Of, course it does," Lembo said. "We’re
two weeks out from the primary at this point, but I’m convinced that
we’ll be able to mount the campaign that we had planned.”
Jarjura, who also has received $375,000 in public financing, said he
will not appeal.
"I've taken this as far as I'm going to take it," Jarjura said. "I feel
good that we tried to right a wrong."
Jarjura filed suit last week, claiming that elections officials
improperly approved public financing for Lembo, the endorsed Democratic
candidate.
When Jarjura's campaign challenged some of Lembo's qualifying
contributions, the State Elections Enforcement Commission allowed him
to raise additional funds after the July 16 application deadline.
"The deadline is not discretionary, your honor, it's mandatory," said
Howard K. Levine, Jarjura's attorney
To qualify for public financing, Lembo had to raise $75,000 in
donations of no more than $100.
Robert W. Clark, an assistant attorney general, told the judge
that the commission was acting within its discretion.
Nothing in the law bars the commission from giving Lembo more time,
rather than resolve Jarjura's last-minute challenge of some of Lembo's
qualifying contributions, he said.
"The statute is silent on the issue," Clark said.
The judge seemed skeptical in questioning Levine, who argued that
Jarjura would be unfairly disadvantaged if Lembo was granted public
financing.
Graham noted that the legislature created the Citizens' Election
Program to level the playing field for candidates without access to
significant campaign funds.
"How does granting an injunction here level the playing field?" he
asked.
The burden was on Jarjura to show the commission clearly acted outside
its authority and that he would be irreparably harmed if Lembo was
allowed to spend the money.
Lawyers for the state and Lembo argued that Lembo clearly would suffer
the greater harm by being stripped of all funding two weeks before the
primary.
Daniel E. Livingston, a lawyer for Lembo, told the judge that an
injunction would "effectively decide an election" in Jarjura's favor.
"It would have been extraordinary" to win the injunction, Jarjura said.
"The judge was between a rock and a hard place."
The legal challenge is the second of two attempts by Jarjura to deny
public financing to Lembo, the state's health-care advocate and a
former policy adviser to Comptroller Nancy Wyman.
Jarjura first filed a complaint demanding that the commission disallow
some qualifying contributions Lembo raised through an exploratory
committee.
He claimed that Lembo actually had become a de facto candidate for
lieutenant governor while he was raising money as an exploratory
candidate. If so, no funds could be transferred to another race.
Using discretion it says the law allows, the commission advised Lembo
to raise additional qualifying funds to render moot the status of the
exploratory funds. He continued raising money for three days.
Jarjura then sued in Superior Court, saying that the commission had no
authority to give Lembo the time to raise the additional funds.
"Deadlines are deadlines," Jarjura said Monday evening.
The case is the third filed this year with the potential to settle a
nomination for statewide office. Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz
had to abandon a run for attorney general after the Supreme Court
concluded she did not have the requisite legal experience.
Republican gubernatorial candidate Tom Foley unsuccessfully tried to
block a rival, Michael C. Fedele, from obtaining public financing.
After exploring a run for lieutenant governor, Lembo declared his
candidacy for comptroller after Wyman accepted Democratic gubernatorial
candidate Dan Malloy's invitation to be his running mate.
Jarjura, who explored a run for governor and lieutenant governor,
finally declared as a candidate for comptroller. He qualified for
primary by winning more than 15 percent of the delegate vote at the
nominating convention.
Knowing that Democratic primary voters tend to be liberal, Lembo's
campaign was quick to highlight Jarjura's political liabilities in June.
He is a cultural conservative who opposes abortion rights and is an
adviser to the Family Institute of Connecticut, which opposes gay
marriage. He also backed the hiring of John Rowland, the disgraced
former Republican governor, in an economic development job partly
funded with city money.
"I think they started it off," Jarjura said. "Every campaign will tell
you, 'No, they did it.' It was bizarre, to say the least."
Over the weekend, Jarjura sent a mailer to registered Democrats,
accusing Lembo of being a secret conservative who has misrepresented
his resume and his work running the Office of Healthcare Advocate. The
mailer directed Democrats to a web site created by Jarjura's campaign,
lembolies.com.
“Some of my opponents’ claims are just bizarre. But let me be
clear – I have never ever lied to the people of Connecticut or
distorted my record," Lembo said.
One of the claims was that Lembo, a protege of Wyman and the first
openly gay candidate to qualify for a statewide primary, was a closet
conservative, because he once worked in New York in the office of Betsy
McCaughey, a Republican lieutenant governor who later became a Democrat.
"I didn’t (and still don’t) agree with every policy position Betsy
takes," Lembo said in a written statement. "But for the record, she is
probably less conservative than the Mayor of Waterbury; she actually
supports a woman’s right to choose."
Jarjura also suggested in the mailer and on lembolies.com that Lembo,
who frequently clashes with health insurers, actually was beholden to
the insurance industry.
"Lembo forgot to tell us that his "Health Care Advocate" salary is paid
for by the insurance industry," the web site says.
That is true, but the funding is hardly voluntary or evidence of a cozy
relationship with the industry. The state funds the Office of
Healthcare Advocate by imposing a special tax on insurers, just as it
pays for banking regulators by assessing the banking industry.
This
what is being attacked...
http://www.lembolies.com/
Jarjura
challenging campaign funds
awarded to rival for comptroller post
By Mary E. O’Leary, Register Topics Editor
moleary@newhavenregister.com
Saturday, July 24, 2010
HARTFORD — Waterbury Mayor Michael Jarjura, a Democratic candidate for
comptroller, is the latest candidate for statewide office to take the
State Elections Enforcement Commission to court, as he challenges its
decision to award a grant to his opponent, Kevin Lembo.
Beth Rotman, director of the Citizens’ Election Program, was summoned
to Hartford Superior Court Friday, as Jarjura sought a temporary
injunction to keep Lembo, who received his $375,000 grant Friday
morning, from spending any of it until the court hears the merits of
the case.
By Friday afternoon, there was an agreement that Lembo could spend up
to $30,000 over the weekend, with a court hearing on the main issue set
for 2 p.m. Monday.
Jarjura said he is
challenging the extra buffer money raised by Lembo
after he submitted his application to the SEEC for a primary grant on
July 16, the final day for submission.
He had raised
$75,300 by that point, but because he had such a small
cushion, Lembo said Rotman suggested he continue to raise funds over
the weekend to increase his buffer.
“We feel strongly
that deadlines are deadlines,” Jarjura said. The
mayor said he could not find any ruling on this published by the SEEC,
whose initial grants were awarded under the CEP in 2008. This is the
first year it was available to candidates for statewide office.
Rotman felt confident the SEEC will be upheld.
With less than two weeks to the Aug. 10 primary, Lembo, the state’s
health care advocate, said his campaign had just signed off on final
proofs of a mailing Thursday night in anticipation of funds being
available Friday.
“The harm is significant,” said Lembo, if any court resolution goes
beyond Monday, as he has expenses that have to be satisfied Monday and
Tuesday in order to stay on schedule.
Rotman said after candidates submit their paperwork for a grant, they
have several days to “cure” any defects. “Lembo got the same benefit as
others before him,” she said.
“It’s routine that people have to make cures,” Rotman said. She said,
generally speaking, other common things that need to be fixed include
different addresses on a contributor form and disclosure statement or
checks written on a business, rather than personal, account.
She said applicants have to make a “good faith effort” to get all
paperwork in order by the Friday before checks are issued the following
Thursday, as the SEEC needs time to review requests. In Lembo’s case,
he was up against a final deadline for candidates in a primary.
Not everything is expressly outlined in the statutes, Rotman said. “We
have read in some appropriate allowances for human nature,” she said.
Lembo was originally going to use the $12,000 he had raised in an
exploratory committee before declaring his candidacy for comptroller as
his buffer. Jarjura, however, charged Lembo had declared himself a
candidate for lieutenant governor in May and should have filed a
candidate committee, which then could not be counted toward his $75,000
qualifying funds.
Lembo said the charges are “baseless,” and that a video of the Jackson
Jefferson Bailey Democratic fundraiser cited by Jarjura proves it.
Lembo said ultimately, they did not count any of the money raised in
their exploratory committee toward the $75,000.
Lembo’s lawyer, William Bloss, said Jarjura is mistaken in his
interpretation of the rules, but in any event, the money raised in
Lembo’s exploratory committee makes any questions about him qualifying
moot.
Three
more Connecticut candidates
receive public grants
New London DAY
Associated Press
Article published Jul 21, 2010
HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — Three more Connecticut candidates for statewide
offices have been approved for public campaign financing.
Democrats George Jepsen, candidate for attorney general; Mary Glassman,
candidate for lieutenant governor, and Kevin Lembo, candidate for
comptroller, were all approved Wednesday for $375,000 public grants by
the State Elections Enforcement Commission.
Lembo's request for public funding was challenged this week by his
primary opponent Mike Jarjura, who claimed Lembo used a portion of
donations raised from an abandoned run for lieutenant governor toward
the $75,000 needed to qualify for public funds in the comptroller race.
A Citizens Election Program official said Wednesday that Lembo
qualified without the prior contributions.
The primary election is Aug. 10.
For Aug. 10 primary: Polling place
changed to Weston Intermediate School GYM
Weston FORUM
Written by Kimberly Donnelly
Monday, 19 July 2010 15:07
NEWS ALERT: Weston’s regular polling place will change for the Aug. 10
primary elections because of construction and asbestos abatement at
Weston Middle School.
Voting will take place in the gymnasium at the town’s newest school,
Weston Intermediate School.
Town officials learned from school officials last week that the roof
replacement project at the middle school — where elections normally
take place — might make it necessary to move the polls from the
gymnasium to the cafeteria.
But, Laura Smits, the Democratic registrar of voters, said when she and
other officials did a walk-through of the building on Friday, July 16,
they then learned that in addition to the roof replacement
construction, asbestos abatement is also taking place at the middle
school.
First Selectman Gayle Weinstein said that by law, no one under the age
of 18 is allowed on a site when asbestos abatement is taking place.
Although most voters are over 18 (17-year-olds who will be 18 by the
general election Nov. 2 may also vote in their party’s primary), Ms.
Weinstein said she did not want to disenfranchise any parents who might
bring young children to the polls.
“We decided it’s not worth taking any chance with asbestos,” the first
selectman added. She also did not want to ask the schools to hold off
on the abatement, as that might cause costly delays to the construction
project.
Dan Clarke, director of facilities for the school district, said the
intermediate school could be used instead.
Although she said she wishes the town had been notified earlier, “Dan
Clarke has been very gracious and willing to do whatever it takes to
make this work,” Ms. Weinstein said.
Because a legal notice stating the polls would be at the middle school
has already been published, and because it is less than 30 days before
the election, the registrars asked for and received an emergency waiver
from the secretary of the state in order to move the location of the
polling place.
Signs will be posted along School Road the day of the primaries, and
security officers will be posted at the middle school, directing voters
who might be unaware of the change to the intermediate school.
“We want to make sure people know where the polls are,” Ms. Weinstein
said. “We want it to be as easy and to cause the least amount of
confusion as possible.”
Voting
Parking is available in the two lots in front of the intermediate
school, as well as in a rear lot near the tennis courts and playground.
Polls will be open at the intermediate school gym for the primary
elections Tuesday, Aug. 10, between the hours of 6 a.m. and 8 p.m. Only
registered Republicans and registered Democrats may vote in their
respective party primaries; those registered as unaffiliated may not
vote in a primary.
For the first time, 17-year-olds who will turn 18 by the Nov. 2 general
election may vote in their party’s primary.
Voters may register to vote any weekday between 9 and 4:30 at Weston
Town Hall.
Registering
The registrars of voters will hold a special session at Weston Town
Hall next Tuesday, July 27, from noon to 2 for the purpose of
registering electors eligible to vote in the upcoming primary.
Mail-in registration forms are available from the registrars’ office at
town hall, as well as online on the secretary of the state’s Web site,
www.sots.ct.gov, and on the town of Weston Web site, www.weston-ct.com.
Mail-in applications for new voters must be postmarked by Aug. 5, and
received no later than noon Aug. 9.
The last day to register in person for new voters and for unaffiliated
voters to declare a party is noon on Aug. 9 at the registrar’s office
in town hall.
Absentee
Absentee ballots for those who will not be in Weston between 6 a.m. and
8 p.m. on Aug. 10 are available.
Absentee ballots may be obtained in the town clerk’s office. Absentee
ballot applications may be downloaded from the secretary of the state’s
Web site, www.ct.gov/sots/.
For more information, call the Weston registrars of voters at
203-222-2686.
Statewide Candidates Meet Filing Deadline for Public Funds
http://www.ctnewsjunkie.com/
by Christine Stuart | Jul 16, 2010 5:33pm
Today’s 5 p.m. deadline to apply for public campaign funds has come and
gone for candidates waging primary battles for statewide offices.
Officials for the State Elections Enforcement Commission confirmed that
Secretary of the State candidate Gerry Garcia filed his application
Friday.
Garcia, a former New Haven alderman, was one of a few candidates
seeking donations right up until Friday’s deadline. Late Thursday
afternoon, the Garcia campaign sent an email blast to its supporters
saying the campaign was $3,000 away from the $75,000 threshold it needs
to leverage $375,000 in public funds.
The State Elections Enforcement Commission will meet Wednesday, July 21
to approve or deny applications.
Garcia’s opponent, Majority Leader Denise Merrill, applied for the
grant on July 1 and already has received the $375,000 in state funds.
Also filing on the last day were lieutenant governor candidate Mary
Glassman and state comptroller candidate Kevin Lembo. Glassman’s
opponent, Nancy Wyman, already qualified for the $375,000 in public
funds, along with Waterbury Mayor Michael Jarjura, who is running
against Lembo in the Democratic primary.
George Jepsen, the lone Democratic candidate for attorney general, also
filed his application even though he doesn’t have a primary. Jepsen’s
application was approved last week by the commission. Jepsen is the
only candidate for attorney general participating in the program.
Danbury Mayor Mark Boughton’s joint application to the commission was
approved more than a week ago. The approval of the application filed
with Lt. Gov. Michael Fedele’s campaign for governor is being
challenged in court by Republican frontrunner Tom Foley.
The state Supreme Court will hear argument about a lower court decision
to allow Fedele and Boughton to keep the supplemental grant triggered
by Foley’s spending in the campaign.
It’s unclear how this week’s U.S. Second Circuit Court
decision banning these trigger provisions — which it said
impedes the free speech of the wealthier candidates — will play out
when briefs on that decision are filed in the state Supreme Court.
The state Supreme Court has asked lawyers involved in the Foley v. SEEC
lawsuit to file briefs on the U.S. Second Circuit Court decision. Foley
is challenging a lower court’s decision to deny his injunction and stop
the transfer of supplemental funds to one of his opponents.
In addition to Fedele, Democrat Dan Malloy also qualified for the
program and has already received the $2.5 million for use in his
gubernatorial campaign.
Gubernatorial Debate
L to R: Foley, Malloy, Fedele, Lamont, Griebel. Reported in several papers that candidate Malloy and
former Gov. Weicker agree - Lamont should debate in New London!
Once again, a statewide political
campaign
moves into a courtroom
Mark Pazniokas, CT MIRROR
July 12, 2010
First, it was Susan Bysiewicz. Now, it's Michael C. Fedele. For the
second time this year, the fate of a major candidate for statewide
office is in the hands of a Hartford Superior Court judge.
Judge Julia L. Aurigemma will hear arguments at 2 p.m. today on an
effort by Tom Foley to deny $2.18 million in public financing to
Fedele, a rival for the Republican gubernatorial nomination.
If Foley is successful, he will deny Fedele the resources necessary to
launch a television advertising campaign at a crucial juncture: the
last four weeks before the GOP primary on Aug. 10.
At the very least, Foley will use the courts to score political points
over Fedele's status as the only Republican candidate for governor to
seek public financing under a program believed to be unpopular among
Republican voters. Justin Clark, Foley's campaign manager,
suggested impropriety by the State Elections Enforcement Commission and
the Fedele campaign.
With the commission's approval, Fedele and his running mate, Mark D.
Boughton, pooled their contributions to qualify Fedele for public
financing. To qualify, Fedele needed to raise $250,000 in
donations of no more than $100. By pooling, Boughton now has foregone a
chance to obtain public financing for his primary with Lisa
Wilson-Foley. The Foley campaign says that was improper.
"Only Hartford insiders like Mike Fedele and the bureaucrats at the
SEEC could take clear language and make it say something completely
different," Clark said.
Beth Rotman, the director of the commission's Citizens' Election
Program, does not appreciate her agency getting caught in a political
cross-fire.
"It is unacceptable the agency is being attacked in a very direct way,"
Rotman said. "If anything, the agency is a model of integrity."
The commission unanimously approved a basic grant of $1.25 million and
a supplemental grant of $937,500 for Fedele late Thursday afternoon.
The supplemental grant was triggered by Foley's spending.
Watching from the back row was Daniel J. Krisch, one of the lawyers who
represented Bysiewicz, the Democratic secretary of the state, in her
unsuccessful litigation to prove she had the requisite experience to
run for attorney general. He declined to say why he was there.
On Friday, Krisch filed a lawsuit on behalf of Foley, the Republican
front runner, seeking an injunction blocking state officials from
processing the grants for Fedele, the lieutenant governor.
At an emergency hearing hours later, Judge Grant H. Miller refused to
block the State Elections Enforcement Commission or the comptroller's
office from transferring the money to Fedele, who has agreed not to
spend any of the funds until after the hearing today. He was unlikely
to have access to the money before Tuesday, officials said.
The Foley campaign claimed that the elections commission had
inappropriately allowed Fedele and Boughton to pool their qualifying
contributions, but the commission noted that Foley had failed to
formally object to an advisory opinion cleared the way for Fedele
and Boughton to join their finances.
The Fedele campaign reacted angrily to the lawsuit, accusing Foley of
using the courts in an effort to hamper a challenger's campaign.
Without the public financing, Foley is unlikely at this late date to
raise sufficient funds to compete in the primary with Foley and Oz
Griebel, the president of the MetroHartford Alliance.
"It seems if he can't win by campaigning, he's trying to win by suing,"
said Chris Cooper, a spokesman for Fedele.
Foley's objections to his Republican opponent's participation in the
Citizens' Election Program are three-fold. First, Clark says
about 10 percent of the $250,000 in donations raised between Fedele and
Boughton should not be counted. The donation limit is $100 to a
campaign to qualify for public financing, but Clark says $24,000 was
raised by Fedele and Boughton by each of them receiving the maximum
donation from the same people.
"This violates the letter and spirit of the law," he said.
Another question being raised is whether non-party endorsed candidates
are allowed to team with endorsed candidates to receive public grants
as a team. Boughton is the endorsed candidate for lieutenant governor,
while Foley was endorsed by the GOP convention for governor.
"It's unclear if they are even allowed to have a joint fundraising
committee," he said.
The final objection is whether Fedele should qualify a supplemental
grant, since Clark says the law says only spending after the party's
nominating convention is to be counted towards these grants.
Clark says Foley has not spent enough money since the May convention to
qualify Fedele-Boughton for the almost $1 million additional grant.
We
think this may be a set up for another candidate to say he'll be the second coming of Lowell P. Weicker...
How about this
issue, debaters? (Spelled out by the Independent candidate second
from left photo above.)
Fedele is definite about no tax hikes,
but less certain on how to cut deficit
Keith M. Phaneuf
July 19, 2010
Michael C. Fedele has no problem drawing a line in the fiscal sand.
For the Republican gubernatorial contender from Stamford, that means
the enormous deficit looming over state government has to be closed
without higher taxes, higher fees, or additional borrowing. There are
no loopholes.
"I don't think this legislature gets any more revenue," Fedele, who has
been lieutenant governor under M. Jodi Rell since 2007, said during a
recent interview in his West Hartford campaign headquarters. "We
clearly have been spending more than we have been taking in, but the
new norm is that things are not going to be like they were."
Fedele isn't alone in insisting that tax hikes aren't the solution to
what effectively amounts to the largest budget deficit in state
history, though he insists his GOP rivals - Greenwich businessman Tom
Foley and former Greater Hartford Metro Alliance President Oz Griebel -
aren't as thorough as he is when it comes to keeping new revenue
sources out of the General Assembly's hands.
But critics say his plan lacks details and fiscal reality, and
ultimately can't be achieved.
And as certain as Fedele is about how he wouldn't cut the deficit, he
isn't as decisive about how he would eliminate the $3.37 billion budget
gap within his first six months in office. That gap equals 18 percent
of current spending and is more than three times the size of the
largest budget cut achieved by any administration and legislature up to
this point.
Nearly half of this fiscal year's $19.01 billion budget is dedicated to
state employee salaries and benefits, payments to the teachers'
retirement fund, or municipal aid. And much of the latter is tied to
teachers' and other municipal employees' compensation.
Like the entire gubernatorial field, Fedele also said public-sector
workers have to sacrifice to help balance the next budget. But how
deeply?
"I don't have an exact number," he said. When asked for any perspective
on the role cuts in personnel spending would play, Fedele added. "I
don't have an exact proportion." After several additional clarifying
questions he conceded, "They could be a major piece."
The lieutenant governor said he would do things somewhat differently
than Rell did when she reached a concession deal in May 2009 with the
State Employees Bargaining Agent Coalition.
Rell forfeited her ability to impose layoffs on most of state
government in exchange for a package now estimated to be worth just
over $900 million, with most of that total savings spread equally
across this fiscal year and last.
But nearly half of that $900 million, two-year total, didn't come out
of unionized worker's pockets. Instead $314.5 million in required
payments to the state employees' pension fund were deferred, though the
actual benefits the state must pay out were not reduced. And another
$125 million in immediate savings came from offering extra incentives
to encourage more than 3,800 workers to retire.
But these incentive programs rob pension funds earlier than planned of
dollars that otherwise would be invested and earning returns.
A new report received last month by a state commission studying
post-employment benefits shows the state's annual contribution to the
pension fund must increase by at least $217 million next fiscal year to
offset these recent losses suffered by the fund.
"Governor Rell got the best deal that she could," Fedele said, adding
that she also relied on "some economic assumptions that were too rosy.
I think you have to be pretty sure about what the economy looks like
before you sign that right (to order layoffs) away."
Fedele said he's hoping layoffs don't have to be part of his budget
solution, though he concedes that downsizing through other means,
namely annual attrition, is all but certain.
The lieutenant governor said he also would consider several temporary
and long-term measures proposed by cities and towns to help them
control labor costs. These include a short-term suspension of binding
arbitration as well as long-term changes such as revising how a
community's ability to afford municipal wage increases is calculated.
"Try it. Let's see how it works," said Fedele, who led a 2008 state
task force that studying fiscal burdens on cities and towns. "We can
always go back and change the law."
Rell took considerable heat in 2009 for proposing a wide array of cuts
to Connecticut's health care and social safety set net for the poor.
Fedele said he believes Connecticut still is far more generous than
other states, and cutbacks can be made in this area without abandoning
the most vulnerable in society.
"I think the citizens of our state can accept that," he said. "When
times were great, we did a lot of things. Times have changed."
But Fedele said he also believes much of the safety net can be retained
and run more cost-effectively by turning to the private sector. "If we
can't do something most cost-effectively than the private sector, maybe
we have to ask ourselves, 'Should we be in that business?'" he said. "I
think we're at that point."
State government already is expected to spend more than $1.1 billion
this fiscal year to deliver the majority of its social services through
contracts with community-based, private, nonprofit social service
agencies.
But Connecticut still relies heavily on state employees in some areas,
including services to the mentally ill and those with developmental
disabilities.
Besides asking the private sector to take a larger role in these areas,
state government should invest more in community-based programs that
help the elderly stay longer at home - at out of nursing homes -
through assisted living programs, the lieutenant governor said.
Nearly 7 percent of the entire state budget, about $1.3 billion this
fiscal year, will be spent on one-half of 1 percent of the population,
or about 17,300 elderly patients whose nursing home care is covered
through the Medicaid program. Fedele said he believes state government
could save $100 million in the first year, and as much as $500 million
annually five or six years down the road, with a dramatic new
commitment to home care.
But advocates for the elderly say home care often is mistaken as an
alternative to nursing home care, when - in most cases - it only defers
admission. It has value, but only enough to lessen inevitable increases
Connecticut and other states face over the next two decades as more of
the Baby Boomer generation retires.
A study released in March by the Connecticut Regional Institute for the
21st Century - alliance of public, private and institutional leaders -
echoed that position. That report projected that a dramatic shift
toward non-institutional care would save $900 million between now and
2025. But that would offset only about one-quarter of the $3.4 billion
increase in annual costs Connecticut faces between now and then.
Fedele said he believes the private sector also can help state
government chop into a Correction Department budget that topped $650
million this fiscal year by rehabilitating more non-violent offenders
in community settings rather than in prison.
That has been a common assertion among many gubernatorial candidates.
But while Connecticut's inmate population has receded from the record
mark of nearly 20,000 two years ago, research from criminal justice
planners in the Rell administration says the number of prisoners the
state must house, feed, guard and care for will remain relatively
stable over the next two years.
"Without major changes in existing sentencing trends and guidelines,
prison admits and the mean-length-of-stay of inmates should remain
relatively constant," the state Office of Policy and Management's
Criminal Justice Policy and Planning Division wrote in its 2010 inmate
population forecast.
Rep. John Geragosian, D-New Britain, co-chairman of the legislature's
Appropriations Committee, said that while Fedele isn't alone in
decrying tax hikes as part of an overall solution, that approach simply
isn't realistic.
"I don't think it's possible and I think it's irresponsible,"
Geragosian said. "Mike Fedele knows better than all of the other
candidates out there what the options are."
Geragosian and his committee attempted in March 2009 to identify nearly
$1.4 billion in potential annual budget cuts. That exercise was
launched after lawmakers reacted angrily to a new, two-year budget
proposal from Rell that would have been more than $2.7 billion out of
balance based on nonpartisan legislative analysts' estimates.
The committee's report would have closed six community colleges, two
regional campuses for the University of Connecticut and two prisons. It
also would have chopped between 10 and 20 percent in payments to cities
and towns, nursing homes and social service agencies and cut funding
for hospitals, child welfare programs, and mental health treatment
facilities.
Geragosian said the report, which wasn't recommended by his committee,
would have been rejected by the legislature, and if Fedele tried to
impose deep cuts on the poor and disabled, he would face similar
opposition.
No legislature and governor effectively have cut even $1 billion from
the annual projected cost of maintaining current programs.
Legislators pointed with pride in the fall of 2009 to the $18.64
billion budget they adopted after an eight-month battle with Rell - a
package that cut $1.15 billion off the current services projection for
the General Fund.
But that plan also hinged on state government setting new records in
achieving mid-year savings, and it ultimately spent $190 million more
than the $18.64 billion bottom line, effectively pushing the net
reduction back under $1 billion.
Fedele remained adamant not only he could save more than three times
the level ever achieved before, but he could begin reversing state
government's use of fuel tax revenue to support non-transportation
spending.
In a report issued earlier this year, the Transportation Department
projected a $926.4 million gap between the cost of planned highway,
bridge and transit projects for the next five years, and the level of
anticipated funding available.
But nearly 60 percent of the roughly $1.5 billion state government has
collected from the wholesale fuel tax since the 2005-06 fiscal year has
been spent outside of the Special Transportation Fund, according to
budget records.
The legislature's nonpartisan Office of Fiscal Analysis projected in a
May that the fund - a $1.1 billion component within an overall state
budget - would fall more than $40 million into deficit by the 2011-12
fiscal year.
"You need fiscal discipline," Fedele said, adding that while the
siphoning of fuel revenues for non-transportation purposes wouldn't end
immediately, state government could begin to move in the other
direction. "The first thing we have to do is stop raiding it. We have
to keep our hands off of it."
Fedele pledged to be a more active governor than Rell was in terms of
fighting for more federal transportation aid in Washington, D.C.
But Donald J. Shubert, spokesman for Keep CT Moving, a transportation
advocacy coalition comprised of labor and business groups, said that
while a strong Connecticut voice on Capitol Hill would help, it would
be a mistake to count on major federal funding for the next two years.
"All signals are Congress is not going to pass a major authorization
bill for about 25 months," he said, adding that new projects centered
on mass transit and supporting urban development stand the best chance
of winning federal assistance.
Fedele said he is comfortable with the state's current income tax
system, which taxes most income at 5 percent, though it levies a 6.5
percent rate on earnings above $500,000 for individuals and $1 million
for couples. A personal exemption and a 3 percent rate levied on the
first $10,000 each individual earns also ensure most households with
incomes below $35,000 pay little or no income taxes.
"Is it balanced? Is it fair? Yes," he said, disagreeing with those who
argue it is not progressive enough and that it overburdens
middle-income households.
The lieutenant governor said he is open to tax reform when it comes to
the nearly $5.3 billion in credits, exemptions and other breaks
Connecticut has on the books covering its entire tax network.
Though Fedele insisted he isn't looking to raise new revenue, if a tax
break isn't creating or preserving new jobs, or serving another vital
government purpose, it could be eliminated and the revenue used to
offer a new one that does. "Anything we do has to provide a return on
our investment," he said.
Further complicating Fedele's task, the lieutenant governor said he
also wouldn't use another tool his current boss has relied on: the
state's credit card.
Rell and the legislature authorized nearly $990 million in bonding, to
be paid off largely through a surcharge on utility bills, to help
balance this year's budget. That borrowing to cover ongoing expenses
was one of the factors cited last month when a major Wall Street credit
rating house lowered Connecticut's bond rating.
"We've done too much borrowing in this state," Fedele said. "In my
administration, discipline is the operative word."
Lamont budget plan lacks certainty on
major pieces of the puzzle
Keith M. Phaneuf, CT MIRROR
July 12, 2010
The biggest danger posed by the massive state budget deficit looming
just 12 months away, according to Ned Lamont, is the uncertainty.
Fear over what's to come paralyzes businesses, municipal governments,
and even households.
Facing the budget: Fifth in a series.
But when it comes to some of the largest pieces of the budget puzzle -
particularly income taxes and public-sector wages and benefits - the
Democratic gubernatorial contender lacks the very certainty he says
Connecticut's economy craves.
Lamont prefers to focus his budget strategy on pledges of achieving
efficiencies: lowering the cost of delivering services rather than
cutting programs; offering incentives rather than pressing for
concessions to move state employees into leaner health insurance plans;
and finding ways to acquire health care services at a cheaper price
rather than trimming social service programs.
But can Lamont eliminate what effectively represents the largest
deficit in state history without addressing its largest source of
revenue, or by - according to his critics - nibbling at rather than
cutting into its largest expenditure?
"Anything business hates is uncertainty, and this is a state that has
been, you know, a big guessing game for a long time." Lamont said. "The
business guys that I deal with sometimes ... are less anxious about
exactly the mix of spending or taxes. 'Just solve it so I know what the
state's going to look like a year from now so I can plan accordingly.'"
So will tax hikes be part of that mix if Lamont is elected?
"I don't think we've earned the right to raise anybody's taxes," he
said, taking care not to make any pledge against tax hikes. It's just
not the time to talk about them, he said, arguing budget savings and
cuts must be explored first.
"You don't get any 'read my lips' pledges from me just because I don't
quite know - I don't think state government quite knows - what it's
going to be like" one year from now, Lamont added, referring to former
President George H.W. Bush's infamous 1988 campaign pledge not to raise
taxes - a pledge that wasn't kept.
What has been a constant, since its enactment in 1991, is the income
tax. Specifically, it has been state government's single-largest source
of annual revenue, and it's expected to provide $6.7 billion, or 35
percent, of this fiscal year's $19.01 billion overall budget.
And given that the projected shortfall for 2011-12 - the first budget
Connecticut's next governor must craft - is nearly $3.4 billion, or
just over half the income tax's annual yield, many Democrats including
Lamont's chief competitor, former Stamford Mayor Dan Malloy, have said
it has to play a major role in any budget-balancing solution.
Malloy, echoing the sentiments of many Democrats statewide, has said
the current income tax system, which taxes most income at 5 percent,
but levies a 6.5 percent rate on earnings above $500,000 for
individuals and $1 million for couples, unfairly burdens the middle
class.
If Lamont is not ready to discuss tax hikes, what are his thoughts on
the basic fairness of the system?
Lamont tried a different approach.
"I think you want to have an income tax structure, more broadly
speaking a tax structure, that does everything you can to give
entrepreneurs an incentive to be here," he said.
But are you comfortable with the income tax system or not?
"I want to have a tax system that reflects our values and I want to
have a tax system that promotes economic growth."
But is the tax fundamentally unfair to middle-income households, as
Malloy suggests?
"I think that politicians spend the whole time shifting the burden,
moving the pieces of pie around and not focusing on a tax strategy, an
economic development strategy," Lamont offered.
So does that last answer mean you prefer the existing rate structure?
"I like my solution, which is to do everything we can to grow jobs,"
particularly among small businesses, he added. "At the end of the day
we're going to have a balanced budget and everybody is going to be part
of the solution."
Lamont did address one component of the income tax system, saying he
supports the personal exemption and 3 percent rate applied to the first
$10,000 taxed on each individual - two factors that enable households
earning less than $35,000 to pay little or no income taxes. "I think it
makes an awful lot of sense," he said, adding these households already
struggle just to pay property and sales taxes.
Though Lamont limited his comments on the income tax debate, most
Connecticut residents and particularly the candidate's fellow
Democrats, have fairly well-defined feelings on that tax, Douglas
Schwartz, director of the polling institute at Quinnipiac University,
said Friday.
"People do support wealthier residents paying a higher income tax, and
there's even more support among Democrats," Schwartz said.
The poll results bear Schwartz out.
A May 9, 2007 poll found 69 percent support "making Connecticut's
income tax more graduated, in which those who earn more money would pay
at higher rates," compared to 26 percent who were opposed. Among
Democrats the split was even more decisive in favor of a more
progressive tax, 82 to 13 percent.
That survey was taken two years before the Democrat-controlled
legislature and Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell added the 6.5 percent rate
on high-earners. But another Quinnipiac poll taken seven weeks before
that new rate was added found 71 percent of voters backed a legislative
proposal to impose higher tax rates at an even lower level than the
benchmark Rell accepted - specifically, $265,000 for individuals and
$500,000 for couples. Democrats who were polled favored that plan 90 to
9 percent.
Mansfield political consultant Jonathan Pelto, a former state
representative and former strategist for the Connecticut Democratic
Party, said Lamont isn't alone in not wanting to discuss tax hikes. But
the debate over income tax fairness is one that Democratic primary
voters in particular and most Connecticut voters in general want to
hear about.
"The income tax is now the fundamental taxing mechanism in Connecticut
and it's been around for 19 years," Pelto said, adding it's been many
years since voters believed candidates who said it still might be
repealed. "There is nobody left except for an ignorant fringe that
thinks that."
Pelto, who is assisting neither Lamont nor Malloy in the race, said "it
appears Ned is wary of the politically charged atmosphere," deflecting
issues "that are part of the mainstream debate."
Lamont did weigh in on a few other areas of tax policy.
The Greenwich cable company owner said he favors what is commonly
called the "combined reporting" bill, a controversial measure hailed by
advocates as the key to stopping corporate tax cheats from hiding
earnings out of state and panned by critics as the surest way to drive
businesses out of Connecticut.
The legislation, which died on the Senate calendar last year, would
require any company within a corporate group with at least one member
subject to Connecticut taxes to determine its corporate tax bill based
on the entire group's net income. Legislative fiscal analysts estimated
it would raise an extra $88 million annually.
Lamont said backing that change would enable him to eliminate the
business entity tax, a $250 annual registration charge paid largely by
small and mid-sized businesses.
The Greenwich Democrat also said his administration would look at the
more than $5.3 billion worth of exemptions, credits and other tax
breaks Connecticut has on its books, including more than $3 billion on
its sales tax alone.
Those that aren't helping to create or preserve jobs would be phased
out, Lamont said, adding that over the short-term the savings would
help close the budget deficit, though eventually it could be used to
lower sales tax and other rates.
But given Lamont's unclear plans for the income tax, or for any tax
hikes, what can he do to shrink the deficit that's nearly one-fifth of
this year's entire budget with spending reductions?
Lamont said asking which agencies or services to cut or eliminate is
"the wrong question."
"I think that the politicians going through line item by line item,
citing this is a service we need, this is of secondary importance will
get us, maybe, 10 percent of the way home," he added. "I think the
other 90 percent of the way home is fundamentally reforming how we
deliver those services."
About 30 percent of the state budget is tied to state employee salaries
and benefits. Roughly another 20 percent involves either municipal aid
- much of which supports city and town workers' pay and benefits - or
state payments into the teachers' retirement fund.
Lamont acknowledged public-sector wages and benefits, along with health
care and other social services, are among Connecticut's biggest
expenditures, and "you're not going to deal with a deficit the scale
that we're talking about unless you focus on those big pieces of pie."
Like several other gubernatorial candidates, Lamont said he doesn't
believe layoffs are unavoidable. Reducing jobs through attrition is
likely, but that will be a gradual process spread out over years, he
said.
"We have to have some flexibility to move people around, to make sure
we're running this as effectively as possible, so we don't simply have
early retirements, we don't simply have attrition and we end up with
empty desks that aren't getting the job done," Lamont said. "In
government, there's more for us to do in a recession. Unemployment,
health care, Medicaid, crime - demand is up for our services, so to
speak."
Lamont did pledge to follow state unions' suggestions and trim
management layers, particularly in the departments of Social Services
and Children and Families.
The Greenwich businessman said he believes he is the candidate labor
trusts the most, and therefore he is most likely to get concessions on
a level that past governors could not. "There's a sense that we're in
this together," he said. "I think I have the confidence of these folks."
But Lamont also said he won't seek changes to retirees' benefits. "You
keep faith in these people," he said. "You give them confidence that
the money is going to be there, because they've earned it."
And Lamont won't try to force existing employees out of health
insurance plans that critics have called generous. As an alternative,
he said, current workers might be enticed by leaner health plans if
they are allowed to keep a portion of the savings.
Future state employees likely could face reduced pay or wages, but
given the low attrition rates normally associated with a sluggish
economy, state government isn't likely to hire many new workers in the
next governor's first year.
Lamont also said he is comfortable with the existing binding
arbitration system. The Connecticut Conference of Municipalities tried
unsuccessfully to get state legislators this year to suspend the system
or to consider other changes to limit raises in new contract awards and
help communities control costs.
"I'm comfortable with it," he said. "I don't want to go to war. I want
to sit down with people and work this out."
Lamont said he would support town leaders' call for more relief from
unfunded state mandates and would find ways to help local governments
save funds through regionalization.
But James Finley, executive director of the Connecticut Conference of
Municipalities, said though town leaders want this type of relief, they
also would need Lamont to spare municipal aid from any significant cuts
if they won't get state cooperation in controlling municipal wages,
particularly in local schools.
"Teachers, with few exceptions, have refused to come to the bargaining
table and make concessions," Finley said, adding that just under 70
percent of local budgets, on average, is tied to the schools.
If Lamont's goal is to avoid layoffs for public-sector workers, but
also to preserve the existing binding arbitration system, that could
take the option of municipal grant cuts as a means of eliminating the
deficit, off the table.
One option Rell and the current legislature used to balance the current
budget was to borrow nearly $1 billion and pay off that debt over the
next eight years primarily with a surcharge of consumers' monthly
electric bills.
Lamont said employing borrowing instead of permanent fiscal solutions
"is a cheap political game and everybody knows it."
Would the Lamont administration rule out borrowing to balance the next
budget?
"I think so," he said. "I hope so. I will certainly try."
Marsh finds independence liberating
when trying to solve Connecticut's budget crisis
Keith M. Phaneuf, CT MIRROR
July 5, 2010
Waging an independent campaign for governor, Tom Marsh doesn't have
access to the funding, volunteers and other resources routinely
available to major party candidates.
But the Chester first selectman, who abandoned his bid for the GOP
nomination three months ago, said there's one advantage to not having
to woo party insiders: He can tell voters the truth about the largest
budget deficit in state history.
"You have to adhere to the party rhetoric in order to get the attention
of the rabid followers, and that's who makes up the town committees,"
Marsh said in an interview last week. "I don't think the solutions to
the state's problems are going to be found in either party's rhetoric,
yet that's the system we have here."
For Marsh, running as the candidate of the Independent Party of
Connecticut frees him to talk about solutions he's convinced will
infuriate hard-core Democrats or Republicans - and in a few cases both.
It means a higher tax burden, including higher rates for the rich and a
modest new contribution from the poor, as well a repeal of some of the
myriad tax credits and exemptions for special interests.
It also means continued downsizing of state government, and wage
freezes at the state and municipal levels, while still preserving local
control over the most important decisions.
Most importantly, Marsh said, it requires a governor willing to use the
bully pulpit as never before, exposing legislators, unions, special
interest groups or any others trying to shield sacred fiscal cows to
severe public scrutiny.
"I was getting more and more uncomfortable in presenting my positions
to town committees" before mid-April, Marsh said, referring to the time
he was still seeking the GOP nomination. That meant repeating the
mantra Republican contenders like Tom Foley and Michael Fedele continue
to offer: namely that a deficit equal to almost 20 percent of this
fiscal year's $19.01 billion budget can be closed without tax hikes.
Similarly frustrating, Marsh said, is the way Democratic contenders Dan
Malloy and Ned Lamont speak in general terms of seeking labor
concessions, without telling the public sector or the voters what type
of savings they realistically hope to achieve as governor.
"Failure is pre-ordained," he said, for "anybody who is arguing for the
status quo."
What isn't status quo is the $3.37 billion deficit that nonpartisan
legislative analysts say is built into the 2011-12 budget, the first
financial plan that Connecticut's next governor must begin crafting
shortly after taking office in January.
That projected shortfall is the largest in state history, both in terms
of sheer dollars and as a percentage of current expenditures. On paper,
the $4 billion deficit that Gov.M. Jodi Rell and the legislature closed
last September on the way to adopting last fiscal year's $18.64 billion
budget was larger. But just under half of that gap was closed with
budget reserve and emergency federal stimulus grants, two resources
that will be exhausted before July 2011.
Rell and the 2009 legislature also employed $952 million in new tax and
fee revenue to balance this fiscal year's finances.
Unlike most Republicans, Marsh concedes tax hikes would be part of his
solution, and unlike candidates from either party, the Chester first
selectman, will even estimate how much in new revenue he would need.
Though Marsh said his first goal, like all candidates, is to exhaust
efforts to cut spending first before looking at extra taxes, he said a
fair guess on his ratio would be 60 percent spending cuts and 40
percent new revenue.
"I think everybody in Connecticut, at least for the short-term, is
going to be paying more," he said. "You want to call that a tax
increase or revenue restructuring, whatever - there it is."
It's there, Marsh continued "because we've committed ourselves to
obligations that whether we like it or not we have to fund."
But the third-party candidate was quick to add that doesn't mean any
segments of his budget are beyond spending cuts. Just the opposite: the
Marsh administration would take aim at areas that Rell and others have
shied away from because they were deemed too politically risky.
About 50 percent of this fiscal year's budget is tied to two areas:
state employee salaries and benefits, and municipal grants. There's no
way to dramatically reduce spending without affecting state and
municipal employees, Marsh said.
"They are going to share, I'll say, a significant amount of the burden"
of closing a nearly $3.4 billion deficit. "I think it's probably going
to be somewhere shy of $1 billion."
Marsh concedes that can't be done without approaching state employee
unions for concessions.
It also can't be done without calling upon municipal unions, both
general government workers and public school teachers, to make contract
concessions. But Marsh doesn't like the position Republicans like Foley
and Oz Griebel have taken, offering to support a suspension of binding
arbitration, -- not because it wouldn't help towns, but because there's
almost no chance of pushing it through a legislature likely to remain
under Democratic control.
"We're not going to get rid of binding arbitration and anybody who's
coming to the table with that attitude is not going to have any
credibility" in labor talks, he said.
The real solution, Marsh said, lies with the governor three steps:
* Asking the legislature to reduce municipal aid.
* Instructing town leaders to seek the same
concessions from
teachers and general government workers that Marsh would seek from
state employees.
* And making a direct appeal to the public to put
pressure on anyone who won't cooperate.
"The key to success for any of my ideas is a strong bully pulpit,
holding the legislature and anybody who's opposing this publicly
accountable," Marsh said.
But former state House Speaker James A. Amann, D-Milford, who was House
majority leader in 2003 when Connecticut's last across-the-board income
tax hike was enacted, said a strong bully pulpit approach only goes so
far. Former Govs. Lowell P. Weicker Jr., who secured adoption of an
income tax in 1991, and John G. Rowland, who signed the 2003 increase,
both knew how to work with legislative leaders.
"You've got to be able to build a coalition of support and sometimes it
just comes down to leadership," said Amann.
Though the former Milford lawmaker voted against the income tax in
1991, he said "you've got to give Weicker credit for having the guts to
go forward." Only by first establishing a base of support through
negosiations with the Democratic majority was the third-party governor
"able then to pick off the other individuals he needed to get the votes
for the income tax," Amann said.
And in 2003, Democrats wanted an income tax hike aimed primarily at the
wealthy while Republicans opposed any increase. Rowland, a Republican,
"still had the credibility" to convince leaders from both parties to
keep the tax largely flat, and boost the main rate on nearly all income
from 4.5 to 5 percent, Amann said. "People still felt at that time he
could put a deal together, and he did," he added.
Though Marsh wouldn't rule out the possibility of layoffs in his
administration, he also said he believes many public-sector workers
want to make concessions because they know the alternative is dramatic
downsizing. "The rank-and-file is not particularly excited about the
specter of big layoffs," if there are no givebacks. "And we're not
talking about 5 percent. We're talking maybe 15 percent."
"There's public support for the premise that if nobody else is getting
a raise - in fact most people (in the private sector) are getting a cut
or at best a freeze - that this should be the same for our public
employees," he added. "There's going to be a reduction in municipal aid
in the coming years. So whether I'm telling you to freeze your wages at
the local level or not, you're not going to have the money from the
state to continue the status quo."
But one union official who works with both state and municipal
bargaining units, said the Chester first selectman should know town
budgets already have been stretched thin by a decade that saw state
aid, on average, grow at a very modest pace.
"He ought to understand that what municipalities need is more support
from Hartford and from Washington, not less," said Matt O'Connor, a
spokesman for the Connecticut State Employees Association/Service
Employees International Union. The organization represents more than
6,000 city and town hall workers, public works crewmen, engineers, road
maintenance workers and school paraprofessionals across Connecticut.
O'Connor predicted any dramatic drop in state aid would spark outrage
from overburdened town governments. "You make a bad situation far
worse, " he said.
But Marsh isn't looking to tighten costs only on labor.
Though candidates are leery to discuss social service cutbacks, Marsh
said that portion of the state budget is too large to spare entire from
the fiscal knife. Medicaid-programs alone represent nearly $4 billion
in spending this fiscal year, or 21 percent of the total budget.
Those programs where health care or other benefits far exceed those
levels provided in other states have to be subject for review, Marsh
said, adding the Connecticut also might need to privatize more programs
to control costs.
"For me it all comes down to the best value," he said.
Consolidation also is an effective tool to save money, but state
government has to look beyond simply merging agencies - an option that
sometimes creates more bureaucracy than actual savings, Marsh said.
Rather, he added, the next administration should look to merge or share
common functions and services provided by related agencies -
particularly those involving social services, education and health
care. "There's a lot of opportunity for synergy, consolidation and
savings there," Marsh said, regardless of whether two entire agencies
end up under one heading when all is done.
But no matter how many consolidations are achieved and labor
concessions are granted, the next governor will be trying to reverse
two decades of spending that generally has outstripped inflation, Marsh
said, adding the budget can't be balanced without new revenues - and
every candidate knows it.
When it comes to the income tax, the single-largest revenue source in
the state budget at $6.7 billion this year, Marsh is prepared to
infuriate politicians across the political spectrum. He wants more from
the wealthy and the poor, and doesn't rule out asking the middle-class
to chip in extra as well - just not all in the same proportion.
"I do believe with the quality of life Connecticut offers we can be a
little more progressive in our taxation," he said. "I don't buy into
the premise that if we raise it a little bit we are going to lose all
of our affluent tax-paying base." The income tax currently levies a
rate of 5 percent on most income, though earnings above $500,000 for
individuals and $1 million for couples are taxed at 6.5 percent.
Similarly, because of a small personal exemption and a 3 percent rate
charged on the first $10,000 of taxable income, most households earning
less than $35,000 pay little or no state income tax. Marsh--like
Republican candidate Griebel-- said he would impose a marginal tax that
would make a big difference in terms of fairness.
"It has to be a much broader base, which is certainly going to crank up
the whole Democratic side" of the legislature, he said, adding that
asking low-income families to contribute even $5 per week would help
wealthier households contributing far more to feel better. "Everybody
has to have some skin in the game."
Another thing that may help residents and businesses grudgingly accept
tax hikes, Marsh said, would be the repeal of many of the dozens of
credits, exemptions and other tax breaks on the books.
Connecticut has more than $5.3 billion worth of these breaks, including
more than $3 billion on its sales tax alone, according to the 2010 Tax
Expenditure Report, a biennial assessment prepared by the legislature's
nonpartisan Office of Fiscal Analysis.
Some breaks, such as basic sales tax exemptions on groceries and
prescription medications, would be preserved, Marsh said, but many
others would go. "We may see some lower rates, but on more items and
with more people paying." he said.
Though cities and towns would be asked to help balance the next budget,
they also should benefit from any state tax reform, Marsh said. That
means that while there would be an overall increase in state taxes, he
also would favor carving out new revenue-sharing programs, giving towns
a portion of the sales or even income taxes collected in their borders.
That change, coupled with a concerted effort to end many of the
unfunded mandates passed onto towns by state government, would help
communities plan their own routes toward eventual fiscal stability, he
said.
Marsh said he couldn't pledge to leave untouched arguably the most
popular tax break on the state's books, an income tax credit worth up
to $500 for middle-income households to offset local property taxes.
"We're all in this mess, we've all go to get out of it," he said.
"Otherwise you're going to find yourself back in the same cauldron of
discontent that is going to have everybody up and screaming and nobody
working in the same direction."
Candidates'
job claims come up short
CT POST
Ken Dixon, Staff Writer
Published: 10:28 p.m., Thursday, July 1, 2010
Most of the state's six gubernatorial candidates offer personal
experience creating jobs and navigating the marketplace as reasons to
become the next governor, especially the millionaire businessmen Tom
Foley, Ned Lamont and Lt. Gov. Michael Fedele.
But while business success has put them into expensive homes in
Greenwich and Stamford, their modest corporate offices and job-creation
histories don't hint at it.
Their outfits are small and, in the case of Lamont and Fedele, most of
their workers are out of state.
Dannel Malloy, the former seven-term Stamford mayor, doesn't take
direct credit for the more than 5,000 jobs, most in financial services,
which located in Stamford during his tenure.
But he likes to say he created a business-friendly climate to attract
them and local business advocates agree.
Foley's NTC Group, a private investment company, once had upwards of
6,000 employees in a Georgia textile complex, when he made $4 million a
year in management fees. Then the bottom dropped out of the market for
American-made towels and linens.
Foley walked away with tens of millions of dollars as the company went
bankrupt in the mid-1990s. Foley still retains an unrelated aircraft
maintenance and repair operation based in Greenville, S.C., with dozens
of employees in several states.
Foley's Connecticut office, which once occupied a suite on Greenwich's
posh East Putnam Avenue, has actually operated out of his home since he
became ambassador to Ireland in the last years of President George W.
Bush's administration.
Lamont's third-floor office in a glass-and-steel downtown Greenwich
building is shared by a pair of lawyers. A reporter's visit there last
week found several empty offices on Lamont's side and an abandoned
reception desk. There seemed to be only one office occupied on Lamont's
side of the suite.
Fedele's national headquarters for his Pinnacle Group, an
information-technology firm, occupies the second and third floors of a
landmark 1855 Victorian home on Stamford's Richmond Hill, where four
employees work.
Last week, a second-floor ceiling was ripped open, exposing rough
original beams, following a water-heater malfunction on the third floor.
Since Fedele, Foley and Lamont's companies are privately held, there's
not much public information available on them.
Manta, a business-research company, estimates that Foley's 25-year-old
firm has two employees and annual sales of about $230,000.
The seven-year-old Lamont Digital Systems has between 20 and 49
employees and between $20 million and $50 million in annual sales.
Fedele's Pinnacle Group, which began 17 years ago, has an estimated 99
employees and sales of between $10 million and $20 million, according
to Manta.
"I acquired businesses that ultimately ended up employing 6,000 people
under my ownership," Foley recently told the editorial board of the
Connecticut Post. "I didn't create those jobs, because a lot of those
jobs existed when I bought the business."
Foley said his 1985 purchase of the Bibb Corp. in Macon, Ga., was a
good buy at the time, but the domestic fabric industry (NTC was also
known as National Textile Corp.) quickly changed and the company went
bankrupt 11 years later.
"Well, the textile business is a business that I think you have to look
at relative performance," Foley said. "Virtually all that business in
the last 25 years has moved offshore."
He said running Bibb gave him the management experience needed to run a
large organization such as the State of Connecticut, with its 55,000
employees.
Fedele and Lamont said that the vast majority of their employees work
outside Connecticut, selling information-technology equipment in
Pinnacle's case and wiring college campuses for cable television for
Lamont's Digital Systems and related companies.
Lamont said he has about 40 full-time workers, including seven or eight
in Connecticut.
"Over the last 25 years it has changed a bit, depending on how many
systems we're building," Lamont said recently, estimating that his firm
has installed about 200 TV systems, mostly on college campuses, where
he discovered a niche in being able to undercut local cable-TV
providers.
"We found that college systems were extraordinarily unique," Lamont
said. "In the old days, a cable-TV operator looked at a college as if
it was just like a residential town, but we had a different model and
provide cable service like a utility, so everybody got it with a
substantial discount, including foreign languages and distance
learning."
Fedele said his historic building with its slate roof and first floor
rented out to haircutters is not an unlikely location, since he grew up
in the former solidly Italian neighborhood of Stamford's West Side,
after his parents emigrated from Italy when he was a small boy.
Now, the section is occupied primarily by residents of Central American
and South American descent.
"It's a natural place for a high-tech company," Fedele said in a recent
interview. He said that in all, Pinnacle has about 50 employees, most
of whom sell services to consolidate computer systems and provide
computer security.
"We have people who sit, watching systems and fix them while not going
on site," said Fedele, who went to grade school in the neighborhood,
but now lives in North Stamford.
"I would say over the years we've had hundreds of employees," Fedele
said, adding that Pinnacle has 13 active offices across the country,
including Massachusetts, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Colorado.
Malloy, endorsed last month during the statewide Democratic convention,
routinely estimates that 5,000 private sector jobs were created during
his 14 years managing the city's 1,000 employees.
"The reality is, in new jobs we created more than 5,000 jobs but I
always stuck with a conservative number," Malloy said during a recent
interview, acknowledging that when the recession hit, Stamford
employment totals fell like most places in the state. During his
tenure, Malloy cut the city workforce by 107 jobs, more than 8 percent.
"We created an environment attractive for job creation and retention,"
Malloy said. "I'm not sure that there's another city that built three
hotels, consolidated the financial industry and lowered crime during
the term of one mayor."
Malloy and Lamont were involved with a campaign-related controversy
this week when the Greenwich millionaire's gubernatorial campaign asked
that Malloy stop referring in TV commercials to the 5,000 jobs because
of the subsequent job losses in the recession. Malloy, who didn't run
for re-election last fall, refuses to stop the campaign ad.
Joseph J. McGee, vice president for public policy and programs at the
Business Council of Fairfield County, said this week that Malloy's
claims are, if anything, understated.
He said that while UBS' interest in the city began under the previous
mayor, Malloy closed the deal. Malloy's administration was in place
when RBS moved to Stamford.
"He was very involved in making it work," McGee said. "Those two
companies alone are 7,000 jobs. That's indisputable."
McGee said that since the recession, Stamford now has a 25-percent
vacancy rate in office buildings. "I think Dan worked very well with
business," he said. "He reaches out to business."
R. Nelson "Oz" Griebel, a former banker on leave from the MetroHartford
Alliance, which represents dozens of towns and cities in the
north-central region of the state, said he routinely works to bring new
companies to the region.
As CEO of BankBoston Connecticut, Griebel estimates that about 1,200
employees worked under him in this state and western Massachusetts. As
chief operating officer of the Waterbury-based MacDermid Inc., he had
2,500 employees worldwide, including 500 in Waterbury.
"I don't want to come across and say I had responsibility for 500
people," he said. "It's different than creating a company."
At the MetroHartford Alliance, which Griebel has led since 2001, there
are two dozen employees. "What the alliance does is the recruiting of
companies to stay here, so we interface at the Capitol and with
municipalities on a lot of policy-oriented things," Griebel said
recently.
Chester First Selectman Tom Marsh, who's running an independent
petition campaign to get on the November statewide ballot, has
experienced ups and downs with the cleaning company he owns, but says
as town leader he has brought dozens of new jobs to his town on the
west bank of the Connecticut River.
His commercial cleaning company reached a high of 17, mostly part-time
employees, plus a management staff of three with benefits.
As town leader, Marsh says he's proud that the town no longer has a
reputation for being unfriendly to business.
"Downtown's vibrant and has a 100-percent occupancy rate," Marsh said
this week, adding that recent activity in a nearby industrial park
include two new entities, although others lost jobs.
Gubernatorial
contenders spar on jobs,
roads, taxes
Keith M. Phaneuf, CT MIRROR
June 30, 2010
Let it not be said that Connecticut Democrats and Republicans can't
agree on anything. It took about five minutes for the three
Republicans and two Democrats running for governor to agree during
Tuesday's debate that Connecticut is a poor place in which to do
business. And about the only thing harder than trying to grow a
business in the state, they further agreed, was trying to drive in it.
What the five major party candidates who squared off at the Stamford
Plaza Hotel couldn't find consensus on was the role tax increases
should play in resolving the largest budget deficit in state history.
Tom Foley and Michael Fedele insisted they can close the $3.4 billion
gap built into 2011-12 -- a shortfall equal to nearly 20 percent of the
current budget -- without any tax hikes. Dan Malloy disagreed. Oz
Griebel wouldn't rule them out. And then there was Ned Lamont,
who focused more on his pledge to remain independent of party politics
-- despite his Democratic affiliation -- than on declaring his position
on tax issues.
"It's an anti-private sector, anti-business, anti-jobs attitude in this
state," said Griebel, who is on leave from his post as president of the
Greater Hartford Metro Alliance. He said state government spending and
taxes, combined with inadequate investment in transportation, job
training and higher education, has left Connecticut unprepared to
compete with other states for business.
Engaged in a three-way primary battle with Foley and Fedele for the GOP
gubernatorial nomination, Griebel added that Connecticut has to be
prepared to upgrade its transportation system now, and without much
help from a federal government plagued with its own budget problems.
"If Connecticut is serious," he said, "we are going to have to bear
more of the cost."
"Investing in transportation infrastructure is critical toward keeping
the private sector fully engaged and getting people back to work," he
said.
"I talk on the road about Connecticut having spent too much and
invested too little," said Foley, a Greenwich businessman who has never
held elected office. He said state government has "repeatedly raided"
fuel tax revenues to prop-up non-transportation programs. "One of the
reasons this has been permitted is we have not been working toward a
long-term economic plan. Without it, it's hard to make choices," he
said.
One of two home-towners at Tuesday's debate, Malloy, who was mayor of
Stamford for 14 years, said Connecticut has to assess its state and
local tax policies against those in neighboring states, particularly
New York, if it hopes to win back some of the jobs and businesses it
has lost over the past two decades.
"We need to make sure we're not shooting ourselves in our own toes in
terms of job production," said Malloy, who also has said the wealthy
and larger corporations should bear a greater share of any new tax
burdens as opposed to middle-income families and small businesses.
Malloy and Lamont face off in the Aug. 10 Democratic gubernatorial
primary.
Connecticut also must end its practice of borrowing to close general
fund deficits, Malloy said, adding it is using up too much of the
state's credit and leaving too little borrowing capacity for financing
that helps the economy.
"One of the problems is that we go to Wall Street to borrow money for
operating expenses," the former mayor said, adding that research shows
22,000 new construction jobs can be created for every $1 billion spent
on transportation and other capital projects.
Fedele, a former state representative from Stamford who has been
lieutenant governor under retiring Gov. M. Jodi Rell since 2006, placed
the blame for state government's fiscal woes on the Democrat-controlled
legislature. Though all of the candidates insisted tax hikes
should be kept to a minimum, Fedele disagreed with Malloy's assertion
that they have to be part of the solution.
"Let us not stand here and tell you that these challenges are going to
be fixed overnight," he said, adding that unless the next governor
forces the legislature to dramatically cut spending before taxes are
debated, real change will not occur. "The more (revenue) we give them,
the more they spend," he said. "There are the right opportunities to do
things before we look at taxes."
Lamont, a cable television executive from Greenwich, said his
administration's economic development policies would focus on small-
and mid-sized businesses, adding that if each business in Connecticut
added one or two new employees, "It would dramatically change the
economy." And though he didn't offer many thoughts about tax hikes, he
did say that "I don't want to do anything in this budget that hurts job
creation."
The Democratic frontrunner according to a late May poll from Quinnipiac
University, Lamont continued a theme he launched in a television ad
this past weekend, comparing himself to Lowell P. Weicker Jr.,
Connecticut's former third-party governor who led the state through a
recession in the early 1990s.
Lamont said he is "not afraid to shake things up, not afraid to take on
the Democrats and the Republicans." And though he talked about the need
to "fundamentally reform" how state health care programs are purchased
and delivered, he didn't address the single-largest factor that impacts
costs -- the level of health benefits provided to public employees and
to low- and middle-income families.
Foley was quick to point out that Weicker pledged in the 1990
gubernatorial campaign not to seek a state income tax in his first
term, and then proposed one two months after taking office -- and
signed it into law in August 1991.
"I can promise you in a Foley administration, what you hear from me
now, you will get," he said. "We can solve this budget deficit without
any new taxes."
Malloy outlines
education plans--but where's the money?
Robert A. Frahm, CT MIRROR
June 29, 2010
If Dan Malloy is to win support for his ambitious plan to revitalize
Connecticut's education system, he will have to persuade some doubters.
The Democratic candidate for governor outlined ideas such as expanding
preschool classes, promoting innovation and increasing college
graduation rates, but the 15-page education plan released Monday is
likely to face steep challenges.
The biggest challenge is how to pay for it.
Many educators remain fearful that the state budget crisis and the end
of federal stimulus funds will mean more layoffs, larger class sizes
and additional school closings, but Malloy pledged to work to stabilize
school budgets.
"I remain committed to building a different way, a fairer way of
supporting education in the state of Connecticut," Malloy, the former
mayor of Stamford, said at a press conference in Hartford.
Alongside his running mate, state Comptroller Nancy Wyman, Malloy
talked about restoring stability in education funding by finding
savings in other parts of the state budget, limiting administrative
costs in schools and reforming the property tax system.
One of Malloy's key proposals is to begin raising the level of state
funding for schools toward a longstanding goal of 50-50 share of school
costs with local districts, but that will be a daunting task as the
state projects a $3.4 billion deficit by 2012. Last year, the state
covered about 42 percent of school costs while local districts paid
more than 52 percent, with the remainder coming from other sources.
Lawmakers avoided decreasing state aid to local schools this year by
using about $270 million in federal stimulus money to plug a hole in
the state's main education grant, but those funds are expected to dry
up in 2011.
Officials say the state share for the 2009-10 school year has not yet
been calculated but is expected to slip lower.
"I am, quite frankly, embarrassed . . . that we've become a state that
is even more dependent on property taxes to pay for education," Malloy
said. "What we need to do is tackle that issue."
Robert Rader, executive director of the Connecticut Association of
Boards of Education, said, "If he can get [the state share] to 50
percent, school districts would be very pleased about that. It would
take a considerable amount of money off of local property taxpayers."
But, Rader said, "where are we going to go for money? . . . None of
[the candidates] have real answers. I don't see it."
Bringing the state's share of funding to a 50-50 level would require
more than $1 billion in additional school spending, something not
expected to happen anytime soon.
"I'd love to see us at 50-50," said Sharon Palmer, head of the American
Federation of Teachers - Connecticut teachers' union. "We got
close in
1989. It went downhill from there. We've got a long way to go."
"It won't happen overnight," Malloy said later Monday. "It's a sizeable
hole we're in. It's going to be tough, and there is a cost in dollars,
but the alternative is unacceptable."
As a start, Malloy said he would produce a budget that fills the gap
left when federal stimulus money runs out. Stimulus funds accounted for
about 14 percent of this year's Education Cost Sharing grant, the
state's largest grant to local municipalities.
"We're not going to allow that 14 percent cut," he said.
Malloy called for innovation in schools, including a voluntary testing
program that would allow high school juniors to measure their readiness
for college level math and English and to design a senior year
curriculum to make up for any deficiencies.
"We are graduating far too many students from Connecticut schools who .
. . are required to take remedial courses" in college, he said.
Malloy called for stronger connections between high schools and
colleges and recommended allowing some community colleges to begin
offering four-year degrees.
Malloy also proposed:
* Expanding preschool programs to make them
"available to all
children in the state of Connecticut who otherwise could not afford
it." When Malloy was mayor of Stamford, the city became the first in
Connecticut to offer preschool classes to all four-year-olds, he said.
"There is no doubt that this will cost money, but I also believe that .
. . it's perhaps the most cost effective way to lower the
achievement
gap that exists in the state of Connecticut."
* Maintaining the state's commitment to college
scholarships for needy students in public and private colleges.
* Creating more opportunities for involving parents
in schools,
including release time from work for school-related activities.
* Improving teacher evaluation systems through
programs such as one
being tried in New Haven, where the teachers' union and school district
have agreed to develop a system in which schools will use student
progress as a factor in judging teachers.
* Creating more experimental public charter schools
as a means of fostering innovation.
* Reducing administrative costs in higher education.
He said
national studies indicate that administrative costs "have been
increasing faster than the investment in instruction." He cited the
example of Maryland, where educators and state officials gained
national attention for a cost-cutting program that began several years
ago and helped the University System of Maryland and Morgan State
University freeze tuition for four years.
Despite the ambitious education plan, Malloy did not win the
endorsement of the Connecticut Education Association, the state's
largest teachers' union. The 40,000-member CEA endorsed Ned Lamont,
Malloy's opponent in the Democratic primary election Aug. 10.
Nevertheless, Malloy said Monday, "What I believe is, if you showed our
plan to most teachers, most administrators . . . they would be
supportive of it."
Malloy says it's time for a 'grown up'
debate on the state's budget crisis
Keith M. Phaneuf, CT MIRROR
June 28, 2010
Dan Malloy says it's time for the gubernatorial candidates to have a
grown-up conversation about the state's budget crisis.
"I'll say what every other politician is saying, that taxes need to be
a last resort," Malloy said. "But I think somebody's got to be the big
guy in the room, the big boy in the room, and say: 'You know, this is a
pretty desperate situation.'"
That means no more pretending a looming deficit equal to about
one-fifth of all current spending can be solved solely with spending
cuts. The same goes for talking about job growth - an important
long-term solution to the crisis - as an immediate savior.
What it does mean, the former Stamford mayor said during an interview
last week in his Hartford campaign headquarters, is an
unpleasant-but-necessary mix of tax hikes, labor concessions, program
cuts - and maybe even more borrowing.
Malloy estimates he could solve about one-third of the crisis by
reducing spending from the level needed to maintain current services- a
feat which, if achieved, would be the largest reduction in state
history.
But Malloy, who is trailing Greenwich businessman Ned Lamont in the
Democratic gubernatorial primary race according to one poll, also is
wary of drastic cuts in big-ticket items that also are traditional
Democratic priorities: public-sector labor, health care and social
services.
"We live in an anti-tax society which is bipolar in the sense that it
is a pro-service society," he said, quickly adding people would accept
a "grown-up discussion" about program cuts and tax hikes if they are
part of a larger plan "to rapidly make Connecticut's government more
efficient."
Having run one of the state's largest cities for 14 years through 2009,
Malloy said he understands the largest deficit in state history is the
product of years of poor management decisions, and may not be corrected
entirely in one four-year term, let alone a biennial state budget cycle.
Fond of calling the $3.4 billion deficit looming over state finances 12
months from now a "fiscal train wreck," Malloy said the worst part is
"the train wreck didn't need to be nearly as bad as it's going to end
up being, if people had only told the truth, done the right thing,
began the process of realigning our spending commitments with our
willingness to tax commitments."
Malloy said "outlandish" budget proposals from Republican Gov. M. Jodi
Rell, who is not seeking re-election, and from the legislature's
Democratic majority - employing borrowing, using billions of dollars
worth of one-time revenue sources to maintain ongoing spending, and
deferring employee pension payments - all pushed their fiscal problems,
plus hundreds of millions of dollars in interest, into the next term.
Reversing that trend will require a heavy dose of reality, something
other candidates are slow to embrace, the former mayor said. For
example, he called GOP gubernatorial contender Tom Foley's statement
that regaining the 100,000 jobs lost in the last recession would
provide an extra $1.5 billion in added revenues "outrageous," saying
Connecticut would be lucky to regain one-quarter of those jobs before
the next governor must deal with the deficit.
Since taxes are likely to enter the equation, Malloy does offer a few
hints as to where he would look.
"You can't look at income taxes in the state of Connecticut without
recognizing that the middle class pays a substantially higher
percentage of their total earnings to state and local government than
do the wealthy."
A 2008 study by the Institute of Taxation and Economic Policy found the
top 1 percent of Connecticut households, those earning more than $1.36
million, pay about 4.9 percent of their annual earnings to state income
and sales and municipal property taxes after federal income tax
deductions are taken into account. By comparison, households earning
between $75,000 and $302,000 pay between 8.5 and 9.6 percent.
But in terms of total taxes paid, about half of the state's roughly
$6.7 billion in annual income tax receipts comes from households that
earn more than $500,000. And though most income is taxed at 5 percent,
Connecticut did add a new 6.5 percent rate in 2009 for earnings above
$500,000 for individuals and $1 million for couples.
Malloy said he begins with the presumption that the system still favors
the wealthy, but added it's important that any increases be tempered to
ensure Connecticut remains competitive with key three neighboring
states: New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts. The top rate rates in
those states range from 8.97 percent to 12 percent. New York City also
levies an income tax rate as high as 3.6 percent.
But even if Connecticut households' income tax payments grew by 50
percent, that wouldn't solve more than half of the state's budget
crisis, and likely would push the top income tax rates close to or
beyond those in New York and New Jersey.
Malloy said the state's largest businesses also could be asked to
contribute more.
He pointed to a 2008 study by Ernst & Young, one of the four
largest professional auditing firms in the world, that concluded
Connecticut has one of the most favorable business tax climates in the
nation, when state and local taxes levied are weighed as a percentage
of gross state product.
"Does that give us some room" to consider business tax increases?
Malloy said. "My presumption is it does." But he was quick to add that
while tax hikes on larger corporations would be considered, those on
small businesses would be avoided at all costs.
But Connecticut Business and Industry Association Senior Vice President
Joseph F. Brennan challenged Malloy's assessment of the business
climate, saying the Ernst and Young study weighs taxes against
productivity, but doesn't adequately assess the high cost outside of
taxes that Connecticut businesses face.
"We have to be productive here because we're a very high-cost state,"
Brennan said.
Further complicating matters, the corporation tax represents less than
4 percent of the entire state revenue stream--a projected $663 million
in the fiscal year that starts July 1.
Malloy said he also plans to revisit the more than $5.3 billion worth
of exemptions, credits and other tax breaks on the state's books,
including more than $3 billion on its sales tax alone.
Maybe Connecticut still needs to exempt winter boat storage from the
sales tax, Malloy said as an example, but maybe the break for boat
repairs could go. The litmus test for many of the tax breaks not tied
to basic needs, such as the sales tax exemption for groceries, is
whether they protect or create new jobs, he said.
Despite the fiscal crisis, Malloy said he also hopes to reform the
state's tax system, mitigating the need for municipal property taxes to
some extent by allowing cities and towns to share in a portion of state
taxes, possibly sales, hotel or even utility. The latter, Malloy added,
could be particularly helpful because it would reward regions that are
Connecticut's employment centers, since businesses typically use more
energy than residences, and pay more in utility taxes.
Malloy didn't rule out borrowing to balance his first budget, though he
said he hoped to avoid it. He criticized Rell and the legislature for
borrowing nearly $1 billion to balance the 2010-11 budget. "I can't
take anything off the table," he said. "I won't take anything off the
table."
Tax expenditures and regional tax-sharing aside, Malloy's positions on
the income and corporate tax structure are strongly aligned with those
espoused in recent years both by the Democratic majority in the state
legislature and by state employee unions.
A late May poll from Quinnipiac University found Lamont leading Malloy
41 percent to 27 percent, though 30 percent of Connecticut's Democrats
remain undecided.
Republican State Chairman Christopher Healy said Malloy's reliance on
the standard Connecticut Democratic Party playbook might help in a
primary, but would come back to haunt Malloy in the general election.
"He is trying to say, 'Well if we just better manage the bureaucracy,
if we consolidate it and weed out these duplicative functions, and if
the national buoyancy of the economy comes back, we'll be fine,'" Healy
said.
But the GOP chairman said voters and businesses don't want tax hikes to
preserve a government structure they believe to be bloated.
Malloy
insists there definitely will be cuts in his administration, though he
also concedes he wants to protect some of the largest segments of the
state budget.
"It is not my intention to balance the budgets on the backs of those
who are least among us," he said.
And though he promises to shield no group entirely from cuts, Malloy
has pledged to treat the state's nursing homes, and its private,
nonprofit social service network, as two of his top priorities,
Nursing home care is about one-third of a $3.9 billion state Medicaid
budget that also funds health insurance for poor families and for
single adults without children on state welfare. Medicaid-funded
programs and nonprofit social services together represent more than $5
billion, or about one-quarter of the entire, $19.01 billion state
budget for 2010-11.
The former mayor has said he plans to ask state employees to consider
another round of concessions. State workers' salaries and
benefits
represent about 30 percent of the budget. Municipal grants, which
largely support personnel costs for cities and towns represent another
20 percent.
But Malloy said that while he is prepared to consider most proposals,
he largely is comfortable with the binding arbitration system, and
would oppose any suspension of it. And while he said he favors more
accountability in state government, he hasn't developed a position on
the state legislature's practice of effectively approving state
employee raises without voting on them. Current law requires the
legislature to vote only if it wants to reject an arbitration award for
workers, while those awards can be approved simply by taking no action.
The Connecticut Conference of Municipalities called for a suspension of
binding arbitration says it's time forthis year to help control
municipal labor costs, particularly in the school systems.
CCM Executive Director James Finley said the coalition still supports a
suspension, and other long-term changes to arbitration rules, including
prohibiting arbiters from counting a town's emergency reserves as part
of its ability to pay raises.
"We just want to require arbitrators to have a better sense of what
'ability to pay,' from the municipal perspective, means," Finley said,
adding that without more flexibility, public schools likely will be
forced to press for greater concessions than they have received in the
past - or order more layoffs. Local school boards "don't want to lose
the less-experienced-but-more-energetic teachers. But when it comes to
concessions or layoffs, the unions throw them under the bus."
Malloy said his approach will be a departure from the practice of
recent Republican governors in that he will work in cooperation with
labor leaders, employing some of their suggestions for reducing costs,
such as reducing a "top heavy" administration in most state agencies.
"You have departments where there's a commissioner and then a deputy
commissioner and then there's a director and then there's somebody
else," he said.
The Department of Economic and Community Development and
two-quasi-public state development agencies likely could be merged into
one entity, he added.
The concession deal Rell negotiated with labor in 2009 depended in part
on deferring pension fund payments that only exacerbated the state's
budget crisis, Malloy said, adding both the governor and labor have
made mistakes over the past year. The difference under his
administration, he said, would be that labor would respond to a leader
willing to make an honest assessment of the solutions needed to fix
state government.
"I believe," Malloy added, "when presented with real leadership the
people of Connecticut will respond."
Oz Griebel Is Hungry To Be
Governor: Lagging In Polls, But Still Fighting
By CHRISTOPHER KEATING, ckeating@courant.com
July 29, 2010
Oz Griebel is hungry.
And he says Connecticut needs to be hungry, too, in tough economic
times if it is to resurrect its sluggish economy and close a gaping
state budget deficit that is projected at more than $3 billion in
fiscal 2012.
If the state does not have a hungry governor, he says, then there are
49 states that are prepared to eat Connecticut's lunch.
R. Nelson "Oz" Griebel, 61, is running for governor because he wants to
change what he bluntly describes as "an anti-business, anti-private
sector attitude'' that has taken over the state and the legislature.
"I don't see anybody who has thrown their hat into the ring — which is
why I did — who is willing to change the attitude toward the private
sector or to take the steps necessary to get ourselves on fiscal
stability,'' Griebel said. "The two things are linked.''
Griebel has taken a leave of absence as the CEO of the MetroHartford
Alliance, the regional chamber of commerce that pushes for economic
development. Having never held public office, Griebel is running as an
"outsider'' — even though he has held high-profile positions as
chairman of the Connecticut Business & Industry Association, the
Bushnell Center For The Performing Arts, Riverfront Recapture, and the
state's Transportation Strategy Board. In a recent debate, Republican
front-runner Tom Foley of Greenwich called Griebel a member of "the
Hartford establishment,'' but Griebel said he has never viewed himself
that way.
Griebel lacks name recognition among the general public and has fallen
far behind in the Quinnipiac University Poll. He dropped to as low as 2
percent in a poll in June and then 7 percent in the latest poll. He
placed third at the Republican state convention —behind Foley and Lt.
Gov. Michael Fedele of Stamford — just surpassing the minimum 15
percent threshold of delegates to qualify for the Aug. 10 primary.
Griebel, whose campaign has less money than his two rivals', has been
unable to launch an aggressive TV advertising campaign, thus keeping
his name recognition at a low level statewide.
Tolls, Pensions, Vouchers
Following his campaign motto to think big, talk straight and take
decisive action, Griebel does not shy away from controversial topics.
Unlike most candidates, Griebel says the state should consider
reinstalling tolls on Connecticut highways — but only if the money can
be guaranteed to be earmarked for transportation improvements. In
addition, he did not receive any endorsements from the state employee
unions after he said the state should consider ending lucrative
pensions for new state employees and instead install a 401(k)-style
plan that is common in the private sector.
Regarding improvements in education, Griebel says he would "look very
seriously at a voucher system'' that would provide scholarships to
allow children in failing public schools to enroll in private schools.
He also speaks strongly against using public money for political
campaigns, despite the widespread use of the campaign finance system by
both Democrats and Republicans in legislative races.
He says individual package stores and supermarkets should have the
authority to decide whether to sell alcohol on Sundays, rather than
having the legislature continue the state-imposed ban that currently
prohibits the sales.
Care Of The 'Goose'
Griebel blames the Democratic-controlled legislature for helping to
create the state's anti-business attitude with bills such as one that
would make Connecticut the first state in the nation to force employers
to provide paid sick days to their workers. The bill has failed several
times, and it was dropped this year without a vote in either the House
of Representatives or Senate.
"If the private sector and the business sector is the golden goose that
creates the jobs and the tax revenue that allows us to do what we
want,'' Griebel says, "the legislature, generally, is focused more on
how you eat the eggs than how you take care of the health of the
goose.''
When asked how he could change attitudes in the Democratic legislature
when a highly popular, moderate governor — Republican M. Jodi Rell —
could not, Griebel said he's ready to deliver on a new attitude.
"I think, first and foremost, you almost put the legislature off to the
side and say, 'I am the chief executive of this state, and this is the
kind of attitude that we're bringing to the table to the private
sector,' '' Griebel said. "Leadership does start at the top.
Attitudinal changes start at the top. You have to go over the heads of
legislators and go to the electorate. … The governor has to be
campaigning all the time to keep the electorate fully engaged in this
process. We didn't get into this mess in two years. We're not going to
get out of it in two years.''
Said Griebel, "If you're not talking to the Louis Cheneverts and the
three-person machine shop down in Naugatuck to understand what their
needs are, those jobs are ultimately going to go away.'' Chenevert is
chairman of Hartford-based United Technologies Corp.
Pitcher To CEO
Born in New Jersey, Griebel moved often in his early years as his
father received various business promotions and eventually became
president of the corporation that sold Ballantine beer.
A longtime coach and sports fan, Griebel was an accomplished pitcher
who made it as far as the minor leagues with the St. Louis Cardinals.
For the previous four years, he had played on the Dartmouth College
baseball team, including the 1970 squad that made it to the College
World Series.
An aspiring baseball coach at the college level, Griebel became an
English teacher and a coach at Worcester (Mass.) Academy before
attending law school and starting on a financial career at Bank of
Boston. He arrived in Hartford and in his new hometown of Simsbury 18
years ago when he was named CEO and president of BankBoston
Connecticut. Griebel soon became a respected figure in the Hartford
business community, being named "Business Person of the Year'' by The
Courant in 1995. He was among the key players who brought a 1996
presidential debate to The Bushnell.
At different times, he has been chairman of the board of directors at
CBIA, Riverfront Recapture, and Northwest Catholic High School in West
Hartford.
Former U.S. Rep. Nancy Johnson, who served in Congress for more than 20
years, threw her support early to Griebel, immediately lending
credibility among Republican insiders. She delivered one of two
nominating speeches for Griebel at this year's convention.
"He is a natural, forceful leader,'' Johnson said. "I know leadership
when I see it. … Oz has earned his credibility. He is a skilled
negotiator. He has the fire in his belly. Let's put him at the head of
Connecticut's government.''
Senate Republican leader John McKinney, another key supporter, said,
"This is a defining moment for our state. Oz Griebel will stand up to
the Democrats and say, 'You won't raise taxes, and I won't let you do
it.' … Oz Griebel is the Democrats' worst nightmare.''
Four of the five major-party gubernatorial candidates — Foley, Fedele,
Griebel and Democrat Ned Lamont — have all touted their experience as
business leaders in the private sector. But Griebel does not want to be
pigeonholed.
"My view is I'm a leader, not a business guy,'' Griebel said. "I've
demonstrated I'm a leader in multiple capacities. … As a result of all
these jobs, I've had to work in the public arena.''
While being a leader, Griebel knows the state budget deficit can be
reduced only through a collaborative effort.
"No one person is going to solve this problem,'' Griebel said. "I know
what my limitations are. The governor is not a chief executive the same
way he is in business. You can't tell people to do X or you're fired.
That's not the system we have. You have to work with the legislature,
and you've got to work with broad constituency groups.
"I believe the relationships that I've grown over 18 years are going to
be critical to the way this state is governed successfully in the four
years ahead. And that's the way I distinguish myself.''
Griebel's
first budget: Dip into 'big
buckets'
Keith M. Phaneuf, CT MIRROR
June 21, 2010
Though neither Gov. M. Jodi Rell nor the legislature did much to reduce
the record-setting deficit bearing down on Connecticut 12 months from
now, there's no great mystery about how to solve it, according to Oz
Griebel.
Griebel, who is fighting for the GOP gubernatorial nomination in the
Aug 10 primary, says Medicaid-funded health care programs and public
employee wages and benefits are obvious choices for cuts -- not
necessarily because they are the most deserving targets, but rather
because they represent anywhere from half to two-thirds of all state
spending.
The Simsbury resident and former president of the Greater Hartford
Metro Alliance, on leave for his campaign, said his first budget also
would feature some hope for the future with modest investments in key
neglected areas like transportation and economic development. But at
the top of the agenda would be unpleasant choices.
About 30 percent of the $19.01 billion state budget that takes effect
on July 1 is dedicated for state employee salaries and benefits. Add
about $2.8 billion in grants to cities and towns -- much of which is
used to cover municipal labor costs -- and payments into the
statewide teachers' pension fund, and the share of the overall budget
tops 50 percent.
With a projected $3.4 billion budget gap for the 2011-12 fiscal year
that equals nearly 20 percent of that budget, and Griebel said the
budget-balancing math only works if public-sector workers accept a
reduction in their standard of living.
If that seems unfair, Griebel is quick to note that private-sector
workers statewide have faced that, in the form of wage freezes and
cuts, reductions in retirement plan contributions, increased health
insurance costs or loss of jobs for the past three years. And the
general public is getting tired of waiting for Hartford to correct the
imbalance, he said.
"This isn't just an inside baseball game anymore," he said in an
interview last week. "There are more people aware of the shift, the
dramatic shift, in total compensation for public employees -- federal,
state and municipal -- over the public sector."
This public buzz, he added, is not aimed at scape-goating public
employees. "I don't think it's just anger," he said. "They're saying,
'Wait a minute. Can we sustain this?'"
Griebel said he's not convinced state government needs to impose any
layoffs, though he also insists he won't sign away his right as
governor to eliminate jobs, as Rell did as part of a concession deal
with unions.
But it will be necessary to ask unionized state workers for
concessions, and pressing a legislature expected to remain under
Democratic control to suspend or modify binding arbitration rules to
help cities and towns better control their own labor costs.
Though Griebel insists layoffs are not a forgone conclusion, he notes
that streamlining government, consolidating agencies and trimming staff
through attrition is.
Predicting his first budget would offer "a shock to the body politic,"
Griebel said "It's not like we'll close one DMV office or eliminate
three jobs in the Executive Branch. This is going to be dramatic stuff."
That likely will mean privatizing more state services, Griebel said, a
move that would put his administration on a collision course with some
who argue the private sector plus public dollars often equals
corruption.
Matt O'Connor, a spokesman for the State Employees Bargaining Agent
Coalition, said Griebel's philosophy runs opposite of the direction
Rell and the legislature took in 2007 when they enacted the so-called
"Clean Contracting" statute.
The legislation takes several steps to safeguard hundreds of millions
of dollars worth of annual contract awards, including prohibiting
outsourcing of "core government functions," and requiring cost-analysis
studies before other services are turned over to the private sector.
It was developed largely in response to the contracting-related scandal
that drove Rell's predecessor, ex-Gov. John G. Rowland, from office
amid an impeachment inquiry. Rowland served 10 months in federal prison
after admitting he accepted about $100,000 in gifts from state
contractors and from his staff.
"We have a law on the books, a landmark piece of legislation, that
helps protect consumers, businesses and taxpayers from waste, fraud and
abuse that is often the result of privatization," O'Connor said,
predicting both legislators and the public would oppose a return to a
system that Rowland exploited. "You need to look at more than just that
low bid you may get from a private company for that first year of
service.
Griebel said he also hopes to find savings by targeting the nearly $4
billion Medicaid account in the state budget.
Medicaid is a cooperative federal program that provides states with
matching funds to assist with various health care programs for low- and
low-to-moderate-income individuals. In Connecticut it helps support
nursing home care, basic health coverage for families, and health
care offered through the state's welfare program for single adults
without children.
Reducing costs here could involve some difficult choices in tightening
benefits for low-income families, but Griebel said savings also could
be found by investing significantly more state resources on less costly
assisted living home care for seniors who otherwise would turn to
nursing homes.
Though he calls the $3.4 billion deficit he stands to inherit imposing,
Griebel said it appears somewhat less imposing once it's accepted that
the shortfall -- and the problems that created it -- will not be
reversed in one year, or possibly one term.
Still, several Democratic legislators have criticized the Republican
gubernatorial field for refusing to concede that the problem cannot be
solved without significant tax hikes.
Unlike his GOP competitors, Greenwich businessman Tom Foley, the
endorsed candidate, and Lt. Gov. Michael Fedele of Stamford, Griebel
will not rule out proposing tax hikes.
"Trying to find $3.5 billion worth of cuts, that's daunting," he said,
adding that if he pledged to close it entirely with cuts, "I don't know
if I could look at myself in the mirror."
But Griebel declined to identify which taxes he would be more apt to
increase, saying his initial focus would be solely on reducing spending.
"If you raise taxes too high, you are going to drive people out," he
said. "The people who have the very most are the very same people who
could most leave.
But numbers from the state's tax agency showed the wealthy stayed put
and posted record-setting earnings after the last income tax hike.
Department of Revenue Services tax data show adjusted gross incomes for
households reporting annual earnings beyond $1 million shot upward by
more than 230 percent between 2002 and 2007. Even after 2008, the worst
year of the last recession, filers earning more than $1 million were
140 percent ahead of 2002.
The same tax data shows households earning less than $1 million
finished 2008 just 21 percent wealthier than they were in 2002 during
the last recession.
Griebel said he is comfortable with the current state income tax
structure, with one exception.
Most income currently is taxed at 5 percent, though earnings above
$500,000 for singles and above $1 million for couples are taxed at 6.5
percent. But it's not income tax rate at the top end of the scale that
Griebel finds objectionable.
Rather it's two small exemption programs and the 3 percent rate levied
against the first $10,000 to $20,000 earned that combine to ensure
nearly all households earning less than $35,000 pay little or no income
taxes.
Griebel said if he were even to consider asking more of the rich and of
the middle-class, Connecticut's low income families must pay some
income tax as well.
"I think when people don't pay taxes, they don't play in the game," he
said. "They don't have the same stake in the game that everybody else
does. ... I am someone who believes in some progressivity in the income
tax. If we're going downstream as well as upstream, I could be
convinced there's some validity in that."
State Senate Majority Leader Martin M. Looney, D-New Haven, one of the
legislature's most vocal advocates for an earned income credit on the
state income tax to help working poor families, predicted any tax
changes aimed largely or exclusively at the low-income households would
face overwhelming opposition.
"We're the only state in the Northeast that doesn't offer an earned
income credit, which we know is very significant in helping low-income
working families pay for the transportation, clothing, day-care and
other necessities they need. It's one of the best things we can do to
reduce the poverty gap," he said.
Looney called Griebel's position "short-sighted" and said it would
"absolutely exacerbate the problem" of trying to help poor families
stay off government assistance.
Griebel also would not pledge to forgo borrowing, though he placed it
in the same last-resort-category as tax increases when it came to
budget solutions.
Rell and the legislature's decision to balance their last budget with
nearly $1 billion in borrowing has been challenged by critics as
dancing around a fiscal restriction in Article 28 to the amendments the
state Constitution that requires a balanced budget.
State officials argued the revenue bonds they used to support the
current budget don't violate that provision, since they would be paid
off by a special revenue stream -- a new surcharge on utility bills --
and not from tax dollars received by the General Fund.
But former East Hartford Mayor Susan Kniep, president of the
Connecticut Federation of Taxpayer Associations, said if Griebel turns
to similar borrowing, he might escape a court battle since most
grassroots taxpayer organizations lack the funds to wage one, but he
would lose public support.
"Until someone can afford to actually take this to court, and goes
beyond the court of public opinion, it probably won't be resolved," she
said. "But I think most people think what they have done is not only
illegal, it's unethical."
Griebel added there no doubt would be frustration voiced by many groups
to any solution to the largest deficit in state history, but unlike
current leadership at the Capitol, he won't shrink from making tough
choices -- or explaining the reasons behind them to the public.
"This problem we're facing in the state belongs to everybody," he said.
"I think that means there has to be an ongoing campaign of
communication with the public. The bully pulpit has to be used. I think
you have to be candid with the people."
Foley: He'll balance budget without tax hikes
Keith M. Phaneuf
June 14, 2010
Tom Foley insists he can eliminate what effectively amounts to the
largest state budget deficit in Connecticut history without raising
taxes.
To get there, he concedes, will require breaking some new political
ground, a polite way of describing what others would call long-shots:
repealing binding arbitration; getting employee unions to accept
concessions for both current and retired workers; and moving huge
government programs, such as road maintenance and social services, into
the private sector.
And those are the easy parts. Other components of the Greenwich
Republican's budget strategy are even more challenging than winning
uphill battles with state labor unions or a Democrat-controlled General
Assembly.
"I have no illusions about solving this problem with additional
revenues," Foley during an interview, referring to the $3.4 billion
deficit that nonpartisan legislative analysts estimate the next
governor will inherit.
That deficit, built into the 2011-12 fiscal year, equals 18 percent of
the current budget and more than half of the annual receipts from the
income tax, the state's single-largest revenue source.
On paper, the $4 billion deficit that Gov. M. Jodi Rell and the
legislature closed last September on the way to adopting this year's
$18.64 billion budget was larger. But just under half of that gap was
closed with budget reserve and emergency federal stimulus grants, two
resources that will be exhausted before July 2011.
And Rell and the 2009 legislature also employed $952 million in new tax
and fee revenue to balance this fiscal year's finances.
Foley stopped just short of pledging to veto any tax hike, but said "if
the motive for raising taxes is that we need more revenues to solve
this budget deficit, I'm going to say 'no.'"
He left himself a little political wiggle room, saying that increases
included in a larger tax reform package - such as boosting one levy
while lowering another - might be acceptable. "If you say 'absolutely
no new taxes,' that might require that you not sign legislation that
overall made sense," he said.
So how does Foley close a $3.4 billion gap equal to about three times
the cuts to program levels ordered this year by Rell and the
legislature?
One of the biggest sources the GOP gubernatorial frontrunner is
counting on is the economy. Foley estimates that once Connecticut
regains the 100,000 jobs it lost in the last recession, it can expect
another $1.5 billion in new revenue.
But there are two big problems with that.
For one thing, state fiscal analysts already assumed much of that
growth when they issued their last revenue forecast back on April 30.
Specifically, they estimated state income tax revenues will jump almost
$500 million, or 8.6 percent, in the 2011-12 fiscal year. In other
words, state government needs $500 million in income tax growth just
for the $3.4 billion deficit forecast not to get any larger.
Further complicating matters, not everyone agrees Connecticut's economy
will even reach that benchmark, let alone the number Foley is talking
about.
The state has recovered about 6,000 of the 100,000 jobs lost so far,
and University of Connecticut economist Fred V. Carstensen, who heads
the Connecticut Center for Economic Analysis, said there's no question
about whether the remaining jobs will return in time to bail out
Foley's potential first budget. "They won't be," Carstensen said. "I
can guarantee it as much as any forecaster can guarantee anything. We
won't recover all of those jobs before 2015, and that is optimistic."
Carstensen added that given instability in the global market and a
continued sluggish recovery at home, counting on any revenue growth
behind the increases legislative analysts already have assumed as part
of their $3.4 billion deficit forecast is "extremely problematic."
Revenue growth isn't the only component of Foley's deficit-eradication
strategy.
The first candidate to win the Republican State Convention endorsement
for governor without previously holding elective office, Foley has
amassed great wealth by acquiring and overhauling companies.
"I'm not convinced when I hear the other candidates that they actually
believe they can get the job done," said Foley, who said he believes
even with revenue growth he must find a minimum of $2 billion in
spending cuts to current state services. "I'm not somebody who is bound
by the status quo or afraid of... upsetting the applecart a little bit
and goring a few sacred cows."
"You're not hearing that from Michael Fedele or Oz Griebel or Ned
Lamont or Dan Malloy," Foley added, referring to his major party
gubernatorial rivals. Chester First Selectman Tom Marsh, a Republican,
also is running for governor as a petitioning candidate.
Foley said he's prepared to look for savings everywhere, regardless of
whether it involves big dollars, or whether it attracts political heat.
For example, state government is approved to spend just under $1.9
million total in the fiscal year that begins July 1 on six agencies
whose primary responsibility is to advocate for the interests of
seniors, women, children or racial or ethnic minority groups. Their
combined cost represents roughly 1/100th of 1 percent of the entire
$19.01 billion budget, a savings that many legislators have said is too
modest to risk the political heat offending voters across the
demographic spectrum.
But Foley said he "absolutely" would consider reducing or eliminating
funding for any agency not found to perform a vital service. "I
personally don't understand why the government should be paying for,
essentially, advocacy groups for discrete constituencies," he said,
adding he doesn't believe the huge backlash some officials believe this
would generate is likely to occur. "Career politicians are
over-sensitized to the impact of their actions on voters."
Still, there are only so many coins Foley can find in state
government's couch cushions.
A March analysis prepared by a coalition of public sector labor unions
and social service advocacy groups, and overseen by former state budget
director William J. Cibes Jr. - a Democrat who served under Gov. Lowell
P. Weicker Jr. from 1991 through 1994 - projected no more than $1
billion likely could be cut without eliminating basic education, public
safety, health care and road maintenance services.
Out of nearly 70 state agencies and departments in total, abolishing
the 53 with the smallest budgets would save $451 million out of this
fiscal year's total budget.
Not dismayed, Foley said he's prepared to go after the big agencies as
well.
The Department of Transportation is one of the largest and most
expensive, spending more than $490 million this fiscal year. An even
larger one, the Department of Developmental Services, which spends
double that of DOT, also is a target for savings.
The key, Foley said, is to move major tasks performed by state
government's roughly 50,000 unionized workers - such as road
maintenance and social services - even more into the private sector.
"There are probably big opportunities to save money by outsourcing," he
said, acknowledging this would put him on a collision court with both
the unions and a legislature that has long been under Democrat control.
Former state Rep. William Dyson, D-New Haven, who retired in 2008 from
a 32-year-career in the legislature that included 16 as co-chairman of
the budget-writing Appropriations Committee, questioned whether Foley
is prepared for how legislators from both parties would react to
proposed cuts of that magnitude.
"What he's talking about, that's going to be real hard to do," Dyson
said, adding it could take years to gradually reduce government as
Foley has proposed. "It's going to cause an uproar. If they hear about
things they haven't thought about before, the response is going to be:
'No, no, no, I can't do that.'"
Charging Rell with achieving too little in savings in a 2009 concession
deal with labor, Foley also said he wouldn't sign away his right to
impose layoffs without major givebacks. "I'll not only preserve it,
I'll use it if I don't get the cooperation of the unions that we need,"
he said.
Foley said that could mean wage and benefit concessions for existing
employees and benefit givebacks for retired workers - the latter being
new ground in the history of state labor relations.
"The benefit levels for retirees are very generous," he said. "They can
be reduced. They can be brought in line with what people have in very
generous plans in the private sector without people suffering."
But a spokesman for the State Employees Bargaining Agent Coalition,
Matt O'Connor, said Foley's budget formula - no tax hikes, concessions
from workers and retirees, and privatization of state services on a
major scale - adds up to a stalemate. "We have to be part of a
comprehensive solution where we're not the only answer, the only source
of relief," O'Connor said. "There have got to be some revenues and they
have to be fair."
Foley was a little less specific when it came to whether Connecticut's
income tax is fair.
Union leaders and many Democratic legislators argue the system, which
taxes most income at either 5 or 6.5 percent, is overly burdensome on
middle-income families.
Does Foley believe the tax should be more graduated, or remain largely
flat?
"I don't really have an opinion" on that subject, he said, adding he is
more focused on Connecticut keeping its top tax rate well below those
in New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts. "I think we need to look
very carefully at making sure whatever our tax policy is, it is not one
that drives high income people out of our state," he said. "We need to
make sure we remain competitive."
Wyman raises qualifying funds for public
financing
Mark Pazniokas, CT MIRROR
June 18, 2010
Comptroller Nancy S. Wyman, the endorsed Democratic candidate for
lieutenant governor, said today she has raised the $75,000 in
qualifying funds necessary to obtain $375,000 in public financing for
her primary with Mary Glassman.
"I am overwhelmed by the support I have received from people across the
state since I announced my candidacy for lieutenant governor," Wyman
said. 'This has been a grueling and hectic process, and I am thankful
for the enthusiasm that has carried us to this very important goal."
Wyman raised the $75,000 in just five weeks. Her campaign said many of
the donations came from donors who had previously contributed to
$60,000 to her campaign for re-election as comptroller. Those
unexpended funds had to be returned and could not be applied to her new
campaign for lieutenant governor.
If her application is approved by the State Elections Enforcement
Commission, Wyman will join her running mate, gubernatorial candidate
Dan Malloy, as the only candidates for statewide office to qualify for
public financing under the Citizens' Election Program.
The commission must certify that Wyman has raised the threshold amount
in contributions of no more than $100. Malloy had to raise $250,000 to
obtain a basic grant of $1.25 million, plus a supplemental grant of
nearly $1 million to match spending by his primary challenger, Ned
Lamont.
Wyman said she will file her application next week. She could receive
her grant as soon as the following week.
Glassman also hopes to qualify for public financing. Lamont has opted
out of the voluntary program.
Wall Street Firm
Downgrades State
By CHRISTOPHER KEATING, ckeating@courant.com
9:09 PM EDT, June 4, 2010
In another sign of the state's fiscal woes, a Wall Street agency
downgraded the state's bond rating Friday in reaction to fiscal
maneuvers that have temporarily closed huge holes in the state's budget.
The decision by Fitch Ratings follows moves by Republican Gov. M. Jodi
Rell and the Democratic-controlled state legislature to borrow money
for operating expenses and to balance the state budget with "one-shot''
revenues that cannot be used in the future.
Although the state has borrowed money for operating expenses in past
fiscal crises, the legislature made the extremely rare move this year
of borrowing money even before the fiscal year started. Without the
borrowing, the state would have a projected deficit of about $1 billion
in the 2011 fiscal year, which starts July 1.
Although bond ratings can change when the economy improves, a downgrade
can eventually lead to higher borrowing costs for the state.
Fitch is only one of three Wall Street agencies and does not have the
final say on the state's fiscal outlook.
But all five major-party candidates for governor complained loudly
Friday about the downgrade, saying that it was indicative of a
combination of bad decisions and a fear of making tough choices at the
state Capitol. The next governor, who will take office in January, will
be facing one of the largest deficits in state history — currently
projected at more than $3 billion for fiscal 2012.
Plenty of blame was being assigned to both Republicans and Democrats.
Lt. Gov. Michael Fedele, a fiscally conservative Republican who is
running for governor, blamed the Democratic-controlled legislature.
Longtime business executive R. Nelson "Oz" Griebel, who is facing
Fedele and Tom Foley of Greenwich in the Aug. 10 Republican primary for
governor, blamed both the Rell-Fedele administration and the
legislature. Some Democrats blamed the Republican governor.
Republicans have complained for more than a year that Democratic
legislators have not cut state spending enough, while Democrats have
rejected many of Rell's proposed cuts by saying that they would shred
the state's social safety net. Fedele described the downgrade as "a
wake-up call'' for both legislators and the general public as the state
continues to face deficits.
"For too long, the state has failed to take meaningful action to
address its growing fiscal crisis,'' Fedele said. "And that is what it
is, a crisis. In order to avoid making hard decisions, the
Democratically controlled General Assembly has resorted to borrowing
and fiscal gimmicks to supposedly close the budget gap. In reality, all
they have done is to postpone the day of reckoning while the state's
fiscal condition continues to weaken."
Griebel, though, said the move should come as no surprise to those who
have been watching the state's fiscal woes.
"This is much more than a wake-up call,'' Griebel said. "This is the
proverbial truck being driven off the cliff and headed towards
bankruptcy. … What do the Rell-Fedele administration and
Democrat-controlled legislature expect?"
'We Knew It Was Coming'
In addition to the varied political views, there was disagreement over
the exact effect of the downgrade. In a worst-case scenario, a lower
bond rating traditionally means higher interest rates for the state
when it borrows money through the sale of bonds.
State Treasurer Denise L. Nappier, a Democrat, said in a statement,
"While Fitch's decision is disappointing, we do not anticipate that it
will have much impact, if any, on the state's cost of debt given that
the state's general obligation bonds still carry three solid 'AA'
credit ratings — all with stable outlooks.''
The official action was that Fitch downgraded the state's general
obligation bonds from AA+ with a negative outlook to AA with a stable
outlook.
The downgrade, Nappier said, now makes the Fitch rating "comparable to
the state's credit ratings from the other two credit-rating agencies:
Moody's Investors Service rates the state's GO [general obligation]
bonds at Aa2 with a stable outlook, and Standard and Poor's rates the
state's GO at AA with a stable outlook.''
The Fitch report mentioned several times that Connecticut has the
nation's highest per-capita income, and the state's wealth will allow
it to pay back the bonds. Nappier said the rating was last changed only
two months ago, and the latest rating is earmarked for an upcoming bond
sale.
The state treasurer's office had received a heads-up on the rating
change more than a week ago, Rell said Friday.
"We knew it was coming,'' Rell said. "There is good news and bad news
in this. The bad news, of course, is they lowered it by one point. But
the good news is we've gone from a negative rating to a stable rating."
Noting that the economy is getting slightly better, Nappier questioned
the downgrade. Although the economy is still not operating at peak
capacity, it has improved from the depths of the Wall Street collapse
that started with the bankruptcy of the Lehman Brothers investment
banking firm in September 2008 and the subsequent bailouts of major
financial companies.
Despite questioning the rate, Nappier acknowledged that the downgrade
is "a veritable caution sign about the perils of relying too heavily on
debt to balance the budget.''
Besides complaining about the much-criticized use of borrowing for
operating expenses, Fitch also criticized the state's practice of using
"one-shot revenues'' to balance the budget in a particular year with no
chance of using that money in the future. In addition, the Fitch report
mentioned the "structural deficits'' in the future that will be tackled
after Rell leaves office and a new governor takes over in January.
Former Stamford Mayor Dannel Malloy, who is battling in the Democratic
primary against Greenwich cable TV entrepreneur Ned Lamont, blamed both
Republicans and Democrats for the downgrade. He has described the
problems at the state Capitol as a "bipartisan train wreck'' that needs
to be fixed.
"The issues that Fitch pointed to in making their decision are not
cyclical, not primarily the result of the recession, and not
revenue-driven,'' Malloy said. "The downgrade is the result of an
ongoing, systemic failure to make tough choices and take ownership of
our problems. It's the cumulative result of long-term spending
increases, underfunded liabilities and borrowing, plus a state
government that is top-heavy and too top-down. In other words, it's the
result of a lot of bad decisions that were made over a long period of
time by both parties, who chose to build structural deficits into our
budgets rather than make tough choices.''
Lamont, the former chairman of the council that oversees the pension
fund, said: "This downgrade proves that we can't just ride this
recession out and hope for better days. Connecticut's budget crisis is
the result of decades of gimmick-laden budgets and irresponsible
management in Hartford, and all of this has culminated in a downgraded
bond rating that will make government more expensive.''
Senate Republican leader John McKinney of Fairfield said that the state
deserves the poor grade that it received.
"I hope the people of Connecticut, the administration and the
legislature see these lowered bond ratings for what they are: failing
grades for an irresponsible budget solution that borrows too much,
taxes too much and does too little to reduce government spending,"
McKinney said in a statement.
House Speaker Christopher Donovan, a key player in the state budget
talks for the past two years, could not be reached for comment Friday.
The Fitch analysts said the practice of borrowing for operating
expenses comes on top of an already high debt burden that the state is
carrying. For years, Connecticut has ranked at or near the top of all
50 states for the highest bonded indebtedness.
"The downgrade reflects the state's reduced financial flexibility,''
the report said, "illustrated by its reliance on sizable debt issuances
during the current biennium to close operating gaps in the context of
already high liabilities.''
Copyright © 2010, The Hartford
Courant
"About
Town" interviewed the former Congressman earlier this year, when he was
the only person seeking to challenge Senator Dodd
Rob Simmons: 'I am running' - Senate campaign acknowledged at debate
New London DAY
By SUSAN HAIGH AP Political Writer
Article published Jul 28, 2010
Hartford - Rob Simmons acknowledged Tuesday that he is actively
campaigning for the GOP nomination in the Connecticut Senate race,
putting an end to questions about whether he's truly back in the hunt.
Simmons said the words "I am running for the United States Senate"
during opening remarks at a debate held at Trinity College in Hartford.
Asked about the remark afterward, the former Republican congressman
smiled and said, "I said that. I guess I did."
Simmons once led the race to fill the seat now held by U.S. Sen. Chris
Dodd, according to public opinion polls. But after Dodd announced plans
to retire, former wrestling executive Linda McMahon's campaign began to
generate momentum and McMahon, who has pledged to spend as much as $50
million of her own money on the race, managed to wrest the state
Republican endorsement at the May convention from Simmons.
Simmons has since vacillated about whether he's in or out of the race.
After announcing he had "curtailed" his campaign and released his staff
in May, Simmons last weekend began running a TV advertisement to remind
primary voters he's still on the Aug. 10 ballot. Simmons denied he was
restarting his campaign and called the ad a public service announcement.
Besides Simmons and McMahon, Fairfield County money manager Peter
Schiff is also seeking the party's nomination.
Schiff said he believes it was Simmons' strategy all along to leave his
name on the ballot and eventually get back into the race.
"We'll see if it works," he said. "But he had a very well-financed
opponent and it's difficult to combat her. I'm in the same predicament."
Even though Simmons' former staff are now working on other campaigns,
he said he'll spend the remaining weeks traveling the state. His wife
Heidi and daughter Jane are handling his arrangements.
Schiff
calls for another summer TV
rerun
July 23, 2010 at 3:44 pm by Jonathan Lucas, CT POST
Press release issued by Schiff campaign on Friday:
Schiff Puts His Money Where His Mouth Is
Candidate Makes Plea to Event Sponsors: Help Educate Voters, Replay
March Debate!
MILFORD, CT – Expert economist and candidate for the U.S. Senate, Peter
Schiff today released the following statement requesting Fox 61 and the
Hartford Courant replay the only debate the three candidates on the
August 10th ballot participated in:
“If Linda is too afraid to debate Rob and me, then Fox 61 and the
Hartford Courant should reply the debate the three of us participated
in back in March.
“Voters deserve to hear from all the candidates, and if replaying the
debate is the only way that can happen, then those news organizations
should give the voters what they deserve. I pledge $10,000 from my
campaign to help pay for the airtime to replay the debate.”
McMahon:
I'm focusing on the general
election
Senatorial candidate speaks at
Pomfret luncheon
By ALISON SHEA
Norwich Bulletin
Posted Jul 22, 2010 @ 02:11 PM
Pomfret, Conn. —
In her first public appearance in Northeast Connecticut, Republican
U.S. Senate candidate Linda McMahon told reporters that the sudden
re-entry of challenger Rob Simmons, the former eastern Connecticut
Congressman, into the primary race won't affect her campaign much.
Simmons suspended his primary campaign after McMahon defeated him at
the Republican convention in May, but remains on the Aug. 10
primary ballot. His campaign announced Wednesday that he would be
running television ads to remind voters that he is still on the ballot.
McMahon told reporters that she hadn’t heard much chatter from the
party about Simmons’ re-entry into the race — a power outage in her
Greenwich neighborhood caused by Wednesday night’s thunderstorms
literally kept her in the dark, she said.
The re-entry of Simmons will not affect her campaign much, she said.
While she isn't taking the prmary for granted, she said her focus is
down the road.
“I’m focusing on the general election,” McMahon said in response to
questions about not attending a debate with fellow GOP senatorial
candidate Peter Schiff. “I’m ready to debate Richard Blumenthal.”
McMahon was in the area for a Northeastern Chamber of Commerce luncheon
at the Harvest Restaurant in Pomfret, where she made her pitch about
creating jobs, balancing the budget and running the state much like the
business owners gathered there run their businesses and households.
Is
Simmons back on the campaign trail for Senate seat?
He says no, but $350,000 TV ad
suggests otherwise - Rob Simmons' U.S. Senate candidacy
might not be so over after all.
By Ted Mann Day Staff Writer
Article
published Jul 22, 2010
The former congressman announced Wednesday that he
will begin running a television ad this weekend "in the nature of a
public service announcement" that urges primary voters to consider
small business, national security and trust when choosing among
Simmons, Peter Schiff and Linda McMahon in the Aug. 10 Republican
primary.
Since he formally suspended his campaign in May,
Simmons has publicly toyed with the notion of resuming his candidacy,
but the TV ad would be the boldest move yet toward reviving a campaign
and contesting the nomination that now appears to be McMahon's to lose.
"In a way, I think that it's my responsibility to
let my Republican friends and neighbors know that I'm still on the
ballot and they have a choice," Simmons said Wednesday, in a phone
interview from New York.
Simmons said he has kept to his word
since his announcement that he would halt his active campaigning in May.
"I scaled it back," he said. "I stopped campaigning;
I stopped raising money. But as we come close to the primary, I think
it's fair to let people know they have a choice."
Simmons has not hired new staff, a spokesman said,
and doesn't plan to resume "proactive campaigning," but he will attend
events when he is invited.
The candidate is due to appear on WNPR radio's
"Where We Live" on Aug. 3, as part of its "Where We Vote" series, and
will appear Tuesday at a debate sponsored by the Federation of
Connecticut Taxpayer Organizations at Trinity College in Hartford.
Simmons and Schiff will appear, but McMahon will not.
The Simmons ad, which is still being edited, will
run on cable and broadcast TV statewide, beginning later this week. A
spokesman for Cashman and Katz, the public relations agency that
produced the ad and is handling Simmons' media buy, said the campaign
would spend about $350,000 on the spot.
In a statement, a spokesman for McMahon scoffed at
Simmons' wavering on whether or not he would resume his campaign.
"For eight months, Rob Simmons promised Connecticut
Republicans that he would not primary if he lost the convention," said
the spokesman, Ed Patru. "He lost the convention, then immediately
announced he would primary. Hours later, he dismissed his staff and
announced he wouldn't primary. Over the past two months, he's been
engaged in a very strange and erratic effort to reconcile his promise
not to run with his desire to return to Washington. Today, we are as
confused as everyone else."
The McMahon campaign will be prepared if Simmons
launches a full-scale campaign, Patru said, adding, "until that
happens, following Rob Simmons' on-again, off-again campaign is a
little like trying to keep up with an Abbott and Costello routine …
Who's on first?"
McMahon's camp wasn't the only one expressing
confusion about Simmons' move. Even some of his earliest supporters
said they were confounded by the decision.
"My question has always been what happens on Aug.
11," said Rep. Lawrence F. Cafero Jr., the Republican leader in the
state House of Representatives, who served in the legislature with
Simmons and endorsed him before either McMahon or Schiff entered the
Senate race.
"If he were to win (the primary), when he has no
campaign staff, and hasn't raised any more money, then how does he
expect to win in the general election?" Cafero said.
"From my perspective as a Connecticut Republican who
believes the state would be better served with a Republican in the
Senate, if the end result will be that we lose because the person who
is running suspended their campaign and has no money to run against a
formidable candidate, then what's the point?"
Cafero said he had shared his doubts about Simmons'
strategy with the candidate after Simmons called to let him know he'd
be suspending his campaign in May.
"I guess I don't quite get this," Cafero said.
Simmons' move came as a surprise on Wednesday, but
it was foreshadowed in the way he "suspended" his campaign on May 25,
days after losing the party endorsement to McMahon.
At the time, Simmons said that remaining in the race
without the backing of the party and facing off against McMahon's
pledge to bankroll her campaign with $50 million from her personal
fortune would "equate to Pickett's Charge."
But Simmons also pointedly noted that day that his
name would remain on the Republican ballot, allowing his remaining
supporters to express their support for him on Aug. 10.
In the intervening weeks, some town committees,
including in New London and in Simmons' hometown of Stonington, have
voted to renew their endorsements of his candidacy.
And after the surprise announcement on Wednesday,
there were notes of support from some other Republicans, including
Janet Peckinpaugh, one of three primary candidates hoping to retake his
old congressional seat, now held by Democratic Rep. Joe Courtney.
"I believe that Rob Simmons is the Republican
Party's best hope to capture the U.S. Senate seat this fall, as well as
help Connecticut Republicans regain congressional seats," Peckinpaugh
said in a press release. "It is my hope, as it is the hope of thousands
of people across Connecticut, that Rob will win the Republican primary
and help lead our nation, and our state, back to greatness."
t.mann@theday.com
Schiff enlists paid consulting firm to
help collect signatures
Neil Vigdor, Greenwich Time Staff Writer
Published: 09:54 p.m., Tuesday, June 1, 2010
The ACORN doesn't fall far from the tree.
Critical of Linda McMahon's rival Senate campaign for dangling a $5
bounty in front of college students as part of a Republican voter
registration drive that was scrapped, Peter Schiff is paying a GOP
political consulting firm to help him collect signatures required for a
primary.
A spokeswoman for Schiff, who called the short-lived ploy by the
McMahon campaign "ACORN-ish" in reference to voter fraud by ACORN
employees, said the circumstances of the petition drive are much
different.
ACORN stands for the Association of Community Organizations for Reform
Now.
"Peter hired a firm to supplement volunteer signature-gathering efforts
to ensure grassroots Republicans have a choice on Aug. 10," said
Jennifer Millikin of the Schiff campaign.
Millikin identified the consulting firm as Lincoln Strategy Group,
which has offices in Phoenix and Albuquerque, N.M. A menu of services
listed on the firm's website says it can help candidates manage
"get-out-the-vote" efforts and run their campaigns. The Schiff
campaign would not disclose how much it is paying the firm, which it
says is consistent with its practice of not releasing details about
contracts with vendors.
Under Connecticut election law, those circulating nominating petitions
must be "an enrolled member of the party holding the primary, in any
town in this state."
Millikin said the Schiff's campaign is playing by the rules.
"Our volunteers and the firm are following all rules and regulations
applicable for petition-signature gathering set forth by the
Connecticut secretary of the state," Millikin said.
A spokesman for McMahon, who was endorsed by Republicans at the state
GOP convention May 21, took a swipe at Schiff's efforts to secure a
spot on the primary ballot.
"A couple of Schiff petition circulators were here in West Hartford for
a few hours Tuesday," said Ed Patru of the McMahon campaign. "They
dropped by our headquarters to say hello, and they wanted to know more
about Linda so we gave them some literature. Assuming they're
registered voters, we'd love to have their support."
McMahon abandoned a plan in April to pay college Republicans at the
University of Connecticut $10 an hour for a campus voter drive, plus a
$5 bounty for each name added to the GOP rolls, after several state
officials frowned upon the ploy. Schiff, who fell short of the 15
percent total of convention delegates required to appear on the primary
ballot, needs to collect signatures from 8,268 registered Republicans
by June 8 to force a contest with McMahon.
Garnering just 44 votes to McMahon's 737 and 632 for former Rep. Rob
Simmons, who suspended his campaign, Schiff insists that he had more
supporters going into the convention and encouraged them to back
Simmons.
Millikin said the plan is to gather double the number of required
signatures.
"Linda doesn't want us on the ballot and likely will have a bastion of
attorneys going through petitions with a fine-tooth comb to challenge
validity," Millikin said.
Simmons stops campaigning, gains
in poll and press
Mark Pazniokas, CT MIRROR
June 11, 2010
He's picked up 6 points in a new poll. Ann Coulter is openly pining for
him. To get this attention, all Rob Simmons had to do to was quit
campaigning for the U.S. Senate.
"This is marvelous," Simmons said Thursday night. "Maybe if I took a
long trip to China, I might move out front. I think there is a lot to
say about not bothering the voters."
Simmons said he is enjoying the attention that escaped him while he was
an active candidate, but not so much that he is tempted to reactivate
his campaign for the Republican nomination.
"I've had numerous people call, not just today or yesterday, but over
the last week. I am flattered," Simmons said. "But my position remains
the same. Yes, I am on the ballot. No, I am not actively campaigning."
On Thursday, Simmons was treated to a Quinnipiac University poll that
showed him moving from 23 percent to 29 percent in a Republican primary
with Linda McMahon. She was favored by 45 percent, down from 49--a net
gain of 10 percentage points for Simmons.
Coulter, the lawyer and conservative commentator who grew up in New
Canaan, posted a column on the Human Events web site, arguing that only
Simmons can beat the Democratic nominee, Attorney General Richard
Blumenthal.
She urged Sarah Palin, whose endorsed candidates did well in primaries
across the country Tuesday, to back Simmons.
"Otherwise, Republicans can kiss the possibility of a major upset in
Connecticut goodbye," Coulter wrote.
Simmons, 67, a decorated Vietnam veteran and former three-term
congressman, exited the race after losing the Republican State
Convention endorsement to McMahon, the former chief executive officer
of World Wrestling Entertainment.
Without the party's backing, Simmons compared running against McMahon's
money - she's put $16 million into the campaign and promises to reach
$50 million -- to the futility of Pickett's Charge during the Civil War.
Simmons had warned Republicans for months that the WWE's history of
racy story lines and steroid abuse eventually would catch up to
McMahon. Now, Coulter is picking up the same argument.
"Running a professional wrestler in the richest, most highly educated
state in the nation is going to force voters to hold their noses and
vote for the Democrat," Coulter wrote.
Simmons said he was shocked and flattered by the column.
Previously, Rich Lowry of the National Review wrote that WWE was to
popular culture what BP is to the Gulf of Mexico, "a relentless gusher
of pollution." As for McMahon, she is "a schlock merchant of the first
order."
Ed Patru, McMahon's communication director, said his candidate cannot
be so easily caricatured, despite the literary efforts of Lowry and
Coulter.
"When people meet her, they come away convinced that she is a strong
fiscal conservative with precisely the kind of real world business
experience that is needed in Washington. She has growing momentum in
Connecticut because voters here recognize she's authentic and they
believe she can win, and frankly Linda isn't running to represent the
professional commentators in Washington and New York," Patru said.
The national attention comes after the seemingly invincible Blumenthal
was forced to apologize for misstating his Vietnam era military record
last month. Two polls have found that a majority of voters believe he
misspoke, not lied. But his numbers are now in the mid-50s, not north
of 60 percent as they had been.
Simmons thought the Vietnam story had clinched the GOP nomination for
him. His rationale was that a strong Republican could now compete with
a wounded Blumenthal without megabucks, and a Vietnam vet would provide
a compelling contrast.
mcmahon-simmons favorability 6-11-11
"The only thing I couldn't bring to the table was a $30 million
checkbook, and my party decided at their party convention that the
checkbook was the qualification they really wanted," Simmons said. "I
can't compete with that. That's their decision."
The new Quinnipiac poll showed that voters still have a favorable view
of Simmons: 36 percent have a favorable opinion, while 13 percent
view
him unfavorably and 50 percent knew too little to express an opinion.
By comparison, McMahon's was viewed favorably by 38 percent and
unfavorably by 35 percent. A quarter said they didn't know enough to
say.
Only 34 percent of voters said McMahon has the right experience to be a
senator, while 52 percent said she does not. And 51 percent said they
prefer someone with political experience, versus 38 percent who want an
outsider. By a margin of 36 percent to 16 percent, voters said her
association with WWE makes them less likely to vote for her.
Does any of that make Simmons feel vindicated?
"Next question," he said.
Simmons said he is comfortable with his decision to stand down.
"I had a party over the weekend for my staff," he said. "Some have
already secured positions with other campaigns. That was the point."
And he loves the idea of rising in the polls after leaving the field.
"I have to say, when you curtail your campaign and you surge ahead,
that's an interesting phenomenon," Simmons said, laughing. "I have to
give it a lot of thought."
Bill Curry offers
his take...
Republican hopefuls no longer
deferring to convention delegates' decision
Mark Pazniokas, CT MIRROR
June 1, 2010
He was the party-endorsed candidate in 10 previous races for public
office, and Rob Simmons ultimately couldn't bring himself to wage an
11th as a challenger in a Republican primary for U.S. Senate.
When it was noted at last week's farewell press conference that
Connecticut Democrats had long ago lost their inhibitions about
primaries, Simmons just smiled and said, "I'm a Republican."
But other Republicans are overcoming what has seemed to be a hard-wired
aversion to challenging the choices of delegates at nominating
conventions.
Convention-endorsed Republicans began this week with potential
primaries for U.S. Senate, governor, lieutenant governor, attorney
general and four of the state's five congressional seats.
simmons withdraws 2
Rob Simmons drops plans to primary for GOP Senate nomination (Mark
Pazniokas)
Even in the 1st Congressional District of Greater Hartford, where a
Republican has not won since the Eisenhower administration, there is a
primary fight for the privilege of facing six-term U.S. Rep. John B.
Larson, who won with 72 percent of the vote in 2008.
Republican State Chairman Chris Healy said some candidates clearly are
imbued with a heady sense that 2010 may be a watershed year for
Republicans.
By the end of the week, candidates who qualified for a primary by
winning 15 percent of the convention vote have to decide if they will
pursue a challenge. Financial realities may yet discourage some
challengers.
Others, such as U.S. Senate candidate Peter Schiff, and several
candidates in the 4th Congressional District, failed to qualify at
conventions and are trying to force a primary through petitions. They
have until June 8.
Healy is skeptical that the sudden primary mania signals a deeper
change in the personality of a Republican Party that still is badly
outnumbered by Democrats in Connecticut.
"There are less of us," Healy said. "We don't have the luxury yet of
having the huge bandwidth of activism they have on the Democratic side."
It is different with Democrats. In 2006, the convention-endorsed
candidates for governor and U.S. Senate each lost primaries to
opponents with greater grass roots or organized labor support.
Even in the 1980s, when moderate Democrat William A. O'Neill was
governor, he faced challenges from liberals for the Democratic
nomination in 1982 and 1986. He was facing yet another challenge in
1990, when he decided to retire.
O'Neill blocked House Speaker Ernest Abate in 1982 and former
Congressman Toby Moffett in 1986 from qualifying for a primary, which
used to require 20 percent of the delegate vote.
In 2006, U.S. Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman lost a Democratic primary to Ned
Lamont over ideology: Democrats rejected Lieberman's support for the
Bush administration's foreign policy, particularly the war in Iraq.
Lieberman was re-elected as an independent.
"Philosophically, we are pretty much a more homogenous group" than the
Democrats are, Healy said. "We understand how these things can sap
resources and hurt our chances in the fall. There is a realization of
that."
When ideological splits have arisen, the GOP has chosen pragmatism,
quashing a challenge from the right of U.S. Sen. Lowell P. Weicker Jr.
in 1982. Prescott Bush Jr., the brother of the vice president and son
of a former U.S. senator, was dissuaded from a primary against Weicker.
The consensus was that Bush might have won the primary, but was certain
to lose in the fall to the Democratic nominee: Moffett, then a popular
young congressman.
Simmons, 67, a former state legislator and three-term
congressman, said last week the major reason he is not pursuing a
primary against Linda McMahon was her money. She is pledging to spend
$50 million. But another reason was that as a challenger he would
lose too much institutional support.
"That inhibits my ability to raise money, and it removes many members
of my party from the ground game," Simmons said.
Bill Curry, a Democratic challenger who won a primary for governor in
1994 and also was the party's endorsed candidate in 2002, said he
understands Simmons' analysis.
"That answer of his is kind of an honest answer and not a dumb answer,"
Curry said. "What Republicans probably said to Rob Simmons was that he
shouldn't count on any general election money from them."
The GOP hardly was showing a rebellious streak in nominating McMahon
for U.S. Senate and Tom Foley for governor, Curry said.
"The Republicans nominated two strangers for their top two positions,
basically because strategists said it was the smart move," Curry said.
McMahon, the former chief executive of World Wrestling Entertainment,
and Foley, a Greenwich businessman, each had been heavily advertising
on television for months before the Republican State Convention.
"They both had money, and that's what the party decided to do," Curry
said. "Their convention pretty much existed to ratify the money
primary, which Foley and McMahon won pretty much by entering the race."
Losing the convention was a blow for institutional candidates like
Simmons and Lt. Gov. Michael C. Fedele, who finished second to Foley
for governor.
But Oz Griebel, the Hartford-area business leader who finished third,
seemed thrilled to just to qualify for a primary. He had no
expectations of winning, and none of his supporters see a primary as
something to be avoided, said his manager, Ashley Maagero.
"We actually have not met with any resistance in terms of a primary,"
she said. "They welcome the primary."
Breaking
news from the FORUM: Schiff in in the game for August 10
Republican Primany
Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz announced Monday that U.S.
Senate candidate Peter Schiff of Weston has qualified for the
Republican primary on Aug. 10 by collecting the required 8,268 petition
signatures from registered Republicans in Connecticut.
Fate
of Schiff's Senate
candidacy in hands of local registrars
Neil Vigdor, Greenwich TIME Staff Writer
Published: 09:56 p.m., Tuesday, June 8, 2010
Up against a deadline to get signatures from 8,268 registered
Connecticut Republicans to force an August Senate primary against Linda
McMahon, Peter Schiff expressed concerns Tuesday that highway
congestion prevented some of his volunteers from turning in petitions
in time to election officials.
"Unfortunately they told me there was a big traffic jam on (Interstate)
91 that kept a lot of the petitions from being turned in," Schiff told
Hearst Connecticut Newspapers shortly after the 4 p.m. deadline. "It
would be a shame that because there was a lot of traffic today it keeps
me off the ballot."
Schiff wavered on how many signatures his campaign collected, first
throwing out 12,000 as an estimate, but conceding that it could be far
less if the names are disqualified or the petitions weren't turned in
to the registrars of voters.
"It shows you the problems with this system and how it's so stacked
against a grass-roots candidate like me," Schiff said.
The money manager from Weston, and financial commentator was cautiously
optimistic that he did what was necessary to qualify for the primary,
however.
"We do have a cushion, but I want the cushion to be as big as
possible," Schiff said.
Schiff set an initial goal of collecting twice as many signatures --
16,000 -- than the state requires, bracing for the prospect of legal
challenges of the names by the McMahon campaign and its lawyers.
A spokesman for McMahon, who won the GOP endorsement outright over Rob
Simmons and Schiff at last month's party convention, spurned such
speculation.
"We are collecting data that is being sent to us by the registrars,"
said Ed Patru of the McMahon campaign. "But we have no intention of
challenging any of the petitions. We have full confidence in the
ability of the local registrars to do their job, and the same applies
for the state."
Schiff was forced to petition his way onto the primary ballot after
falling short of the required 15 percent total of convention delegates.
Simmons suspended his campaign but garnered enough delegates to appear
on the ballot.
In the towns where Republicans signed Schiff's petitions, the
registrars have until June 15 to certify the names and report the
number to Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz's office, which is
expected to take less than a week to tally the final numbers.
Signers must print their name and list their address to be counted,
according to a spokesman for Bysiewicz, who said they are also strongly
encouraged to give their date of birth for verification purposes.
But individual names are not vetted by the secretary of the state's
office, leaving just two avenues for McMahon's campaign to mount a
challenge.
"They could talk to the registrars, and they could also file a
complaint with the state Elections Enforcement Commission," said Av
Harris, a spokesman for Bysiewicz.
Schiff said he was heartened to hear the McMahon campaign's pledge to
let the process play itself out.
"I'd rather not have to get into a big legal battle with the McMahon
campaign," Schiff said.
At a Tuesday afternoon news conference where he accepted the
endorsement of state Sen. John A. Kissel, R-Enfield, Schiff discounted
a complaint being investigated by the State Elections Enforcement
Commission that his campaign used out-of-state residents to collect
signatures in apparent violation of state law.
A former member of the Hartford Tea Party filed a complaint this week
alleging that petition circulators from as far away as Montana were
working for Schiff's candidacy, violating a rule that they be state
residents.
Schiff's campaign confirmed it hired the GOP consulting firm Lincoln
Strategy Group, which has offices in Phoenix and Albuquerque, N.M., to
help with the process.
"They guaranteed that they would abide by the rules in Connecticut and
are professional," Schiff said in an interview later in the day. "As
far I know, we've done everything by the book, yet the book was
deliberately written to make it difficult."
Peter Schiff tackling McMahon
momentum;
Tea party favorite
making petition run at Republican primary
By Ted Mann Day Staff Writer
Article published May 28, 2010
Stratford - The Gadsden flags - the ones that say "Don't Tread on Me" -
are out and waving at the corner of Barnum Avenue and Main Street when
Peter Schiff arrives for the weekly demonstration of the Stratford Tea
Party Patriots.
Striding to the crowd of a little less than two dozen people gathered
at the busy corner, Schiff's fiancee, Martha O'Brien, stops for a
moment and drags the long-shot Republican Senate nominee back a few
paces to admire the three identical bumper stickers on the back of a
blue SUV.
"Schiff Happens," they say. O'Brien, who came up with the slogan,
requests a photo.
Schiff is trying to gather by the June 8 deadline the 8,268 petition
signatures he needs to force a primary with Linda McMahon, the former
pro-wrestling executive who is the Republican Party's endorsed
candidate to challenge Democrat Richard Blumenthal for the U.S. Senate.
Schiff's also got a taping of WFSB-TV's "Face the State" to attend to,
and he walks like a man on a schedule.
If the inside of the Connecticut Convention Center last Friday was
McMahon's home court - and as delegates shifted her way to roars from a
friendly crowd, it sure felt like it - the strip of grass here by the
fast-food restaurant, the gas station, the shopping complex and the
bank seems to be Schiff's.
Cars speed by, but a surprisingly steady stream of them beep their
horns and emit shouts of solidarity. A tractor-trailer gives a blatting
blast. A woman making the left off of Barnum up onto Main careens
perilously close to the curb, steering with one hand while raising her
own small Gadsden flag up through the sunroof of the black Mercedes SUV.
"Too bad we can't get these cars that are going by to sign our
petitions," Schiff says with a chuckle.
Asked how the signature-gathering is going, he remarks that the
campaign is "bringing in some professionals" from out of state to
finish the job by the deadline.
"It's hard to even hire people," Schiff says. "Figured it'd be easy
with all these unemployed people. They'd just as soon collect
unemployment benefits, I guess."
By the reckoning of seemingly everyone who hasn't slapped on a "Schiff
Happens" bumper sticker, written a pro-Schiff letter to the editor, or
forwarded a YouTube clip of Schiff anticipating - against the derision
of his questioners - the eventual collapse of the housing market on
cable financial shows, Linda McMahon will face Richard Blumenthal in
November to decide who will succeed Sen. Chris Dodd in the Senate.
McMahon's strongest rival, former Rep. Rob Simmons of Stonington, left
the race this week, leaving behind a core of frustrated backers who
believe, like Simmons himself, that Republican delegates and power
brokers chose the free-spending self-funder McMahon over the candidate
with a track record of public service and a resume that compares well
to the popular Blumenthal, especially after Blumenthal's misstatements
of his Vietnam-era service record.
But Schiff and his supporters insist that only he has a chance of
beating Blumenthal in the fall. McMahon's experience as the chief
executive of World Wrestling Entertainment, the source of her fortune
and of what controversies have so far visited her campaign, is more
liability than asset, Schiff said in an interview. He noted the finding
in a new Quinnipiac University poll that more voters looked unfavorably
on McMahon (39 percent) than favorably (32 percent) in the May 27 poll.
"She spent $16 million, and Blumenthal's still beating her by 25
points, even with the lies about Vietnam," Schiff said, referring to
the results of the Quinnipiac poll. "So I don't think she can win."
No previous political experience
Schiff, who runs the investment company Euro-Pacific Capital and like
McMahon has no previous political experience, concedes the finding that
a whopping 78 percent of voters don't know enough about him to make a
judgment. But if he can succeed in reducing that name-recognition
deficit, Schiff contends the small, fervent minority who do like him
could swell into a force large enough to defeat Blumenthal, who for
years has been one of the most popular public officials in the state.
"If I can increase my name recognition, and I get the same kind of
favorables-to-unfavorables with the new people that meet me, then I've
got a chance to beat Dick Blumenthal," he said. "The problem is, she's
already had her chance, she's spent the money, everybody knows who she
is, and they still don't support her."
A McMahon spokesman declined, via e-mail, to address Schiff's remarks.
The Schiff fans in attendance were adamant that their candidate could
win.
"I believe with enough exposure, he could," said Eino Hautala of
Milford, an interior trim-carpentry contractor who said he was
involving himself in a political race for the first time. "Of course,
it's a big challenge, Blumenthal's got the name recognition, big-time
name recognition, so that's going to be a big hurdle for that reason."
Would Schiff really stand a better chance of beating Blumenthal than
McMahon?
"Absolutely," Hautala said. "I don't think McMahon has a chance."
"People ask me how best to describe Peter Schiff," said Palin Smith,
whose business card identified him as the state liaison and
videographer of the Hartford Tea Party Patriots.
(He politely corrected a reporter who suggested that his first name
must be a hit at Tea Party rallies: "To some people," Smith said of the
name he shares with former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, "it's not as
popular as it used to be.")
Of Schiff, Smith said he asked questioners, "Do you know who Abraham
Lincoln was? Do you know who Ronald Reagan was? Do you know who Albert
Einstein was?"
"A lot of people don't remember that one, but some of them do," he
said, referring to Einstein. "And I say 'Well you take all those three,
put 'em in a 47-year-old man's body, you've got Peter Schiff.' Smartest
man I've ever met."
But will he be on the ballot?
Despite his stated need for name recognition, Schiff notably would not
say he plans to turn to television advertising to raise his profile.
"Not right this second," he said. "Right now we've got to get on the
ballot. Let's get on the ballot first, and then I'm going to map out a
strategy for TV, depending on how much money I have."
Until that point, Schiff is relying on the premise that voters who go
to the Republican polls will not resemble the Republican die-hards who
attended and voted in the party convention, many of whom switched votes
from Schiff, and Simmons, to McMahon to secure her the endorsement and
the inside track to the nomination.
"Since I dont think she's going to win anyway, and the money might work
against her, why not go with me?" he said. "At least go down swinging.
At least put up the candidate you believe in, and give the Republicans
somebody to vote for, instead of just somebody to vote against. It's
all going to be 'Let's vote for Linda to block Blumy.' How about 'Let's
vote for Peter, because we want to'?"
Recent
History of U.S. Senate CT Republican Candidates : Brook Johnson,
1992; Jerry Labriola, 1994; Gary Franks in 1998; Philip A.
Giordano, 2000. Jack Orchulli in 2004; Alan R.
Schlessinger, 2006.
Who Wants to Elect a Millionaire?
NYTIMES
By GAIL COLLINS
May 26, 2010
Today, let’s play Political Kingmaker.
Pretend you’re the Republican leadership in a smallish state with an
open United States Senate seat. The opposition is running a popular,
longtime officeholder whose sense of inevitability was shaken by recent
revelations that he had referred to himself as a Vietnam War veteran
when he isn’t one.
Your own options are:
A) A well regarded former congressman who is a decorated Vietnam War
veteran.
B) A political novice who made her fortune building up an entertainment
business that specialized in blood, seminaked women and scripted
subplots featuring rape, adultery and familial violence. In which the
candidate, her husband and children played themselves. Also, the family
yacht is named Sexy Bitch.
Well, obviously, you go for the yacht owner.
Yes, this week the Connecticut Republican Party chose Linda McMahon,
the former C.E.O. of World Wrestling Entertainment, to be their Senate
candidate. Her main opponent, the former Representative Rob Simmons,
packed up his war medals and went home.
“You can’t argue with arithmetic,” he told The New London Day.
The math in question is $50 million, the amount McMahon claimed she was
prepared to spend on her campaign. Connecticut has just under two
million registered voters, so maybe she’ll just invite everybody in the
state to a nice dinner at Red Lobster.
So far this season, the Republicans have offered two new models of
their future. One is the Tea Party vision, in which outsiders full of
spirit and excitement overthrow the old order. In North Carolina, there
was so much spirit and excitement that voters gave the top spot in a
Congressional primary to a former drug addict who, according to court
documents, once referred to the United States government as the
Antichrist and claimed to have personally located the Ark of the
Covenant.
Meanwhile in Kentucky, primary voters nominated Rand Paul, an
ophthalmologist, for the Senate, ignoring the pleas of party leaders to
go for somebody less spirited and exciting. Paul promptly got into
trouble over his lack of enthusiasm for requiring restaurants to serve
black people and his criticism of Barack Obama for being disrespectful
of oil-drilling companies.
The other model is the one on view in Connecticut: richest bidder wins.
For governor, the Republican convention endorsed Tom Foley, a longtime
party fund-raiser who was once George W. Bush’s ambassador to Ireland.
Foley, whose 100-foot yacht makes the McMahons’ 47-footer look like a
dinghy, instantly identified himself as an “outsider.”
Both Foley and McMahon are what political pros like to call
“self-financers.” And while McMahon doesn’t dwell on her willingness to
pay all the campaign freight, her sales pitch is all about financial
success.
“People call Linda McMahon a C.E.O., job creator, business leader. But
I just call her Mom,” says daughter Stephanie in a much, much repeated
TV ad. W.W.E. fans all remember Stephanie from the day she slugged Mom
in a spat over the Wrestlemania fight card, but we are not going there
anymore. In fact, the McMahon organization has been busily scrubbing
the Internet of every embarrassing clip it can claim a copyright on.
The McMahons made a mint off the formerly seedy, small-town
entertainment known as professional wrestling by adding heavy doses of
sex, more spectacular violence and a raw tone that bordered on
pornography. Linda McMahon now likes to brag that she’s “created a
product that is one of America’s greatest exports,” as if there’s no
question that bringing half-naked women wrestling in pudding to 145
countries was one of America’s greater accomplishments.
You can overlook a lot of sleaze for $50 million. Simmons distributed a
video of Vince McMahon, Linda’s husband, standing in the ring and
telling a weeping female wrestler to take off her clothes, get down on
her knees and “dammit, bark like a dog.” Nobody paid attention.
On the plus side, ever since Linda McMahon developed political
ambitions, the W.W.E. has attempted to clean up the more outrageous
elements in its act, sparing millions of impressionable children from
the old hints of necrophilia, the abundance of gore and the side
stories in which Stephanie lost her blouse in the ring, Vince ran off
with a floozy and Linda was sexually assaulted by a competing promoter.
“One good thing has come from her run: Vince McMahon putting out an
edict that there will no longer be any cutting of your foreheads with
razor blades,” said Superstar Billy Graham, a retired wrestler who
contracted hepatitis from a bloody competitor. “He has actually stopped
wrestlers from cutting their heads with razor blades. This is a big
deal!”
We take progress anywhere we can get it.
Race for comptroller: One Democrat
drops out, Lembo and Jarjura remain
Jacqueline Rabe, CT MIRROR
May 25, 2010
Democratic state Rep. Tom Reynolds of Ledyard announced today he would
not force a primary for the nomination for state comptroller.
Reynolds received 24 percent of delegate votes at Saturday's Democrat
convention, well above the 15 percent minimum needed to guarantee a
spot on the Democratic Aug. 10 primary ballot.
"I have concluded that the interests of the state, the party, and my
family are best served by declining such an opportunity," he said in an
e-mailed statement.
Kevin Lembo, who worked in the state's comptroller office before
becoming the state's health care advocate, captured the Democratic
endorsement with 55 percent of delegate votes.
Waterbury Mayor Michael Jarjura also received enough votes for a spot
on the primary ballot, but has said he will decide by the end of the
week if he will force a primary.
On the Republican ticket for comptroller, Darien businessman Jack
Orchulli was unanimously approved to become the Republican nominee
during their Saturday convention.
Lieutenant governor race: GOP will
have a primary
Jacqueline Rabe, CT MIRROR
May 25, 2010
Lisa Wilson-Foley, a Simsbury businesswoman, said today she will pursue
a Republican primary for the nomination for lieutenant governor.
"I am ready for a primary so the voters can decide," she said during a
phone interview. "I think once you get out of the cozy relationships
people have at the convention things can change."
Without any affiliation with a gubernatorial candidate, Wilson-Foley
captured 25 percent of the votes at Saturday's Republican State
Convention, enough to claim a spot on the Aug. 10 Republican primary
ballot.
Danbury Mayor Mark D. Boughton picked up two-thirds of the vote and the
Republican convention endorsement. He is the running mate of Michael C.
Fedele.
Comptroller Nancy Wyman, the running mate of Dan Malloy, captured the
Democratic endorsement for lieutenant governor. Simsbury first
selectwoman Marry Glassman, the running mate of Ned Lamont, has said
she will force a primary.
Simmons effectively
shutting down Senate campaign
Ted Mann, DAY
Article published May 25, 2010
New London - Republican Rob Simmons called an end to his
campaign for the U.S. Senate this morning, saying he could no longer
hope to win his party's nomination after losing the convention
endorsement to newcomer Linda McMahon.
To stay in the race without it, he said this morning, would "equate to
Pickett's Charge."
In an interview in the parking lot outside New London's WXLM-FM radio,
where Simmons first announced his decision to "scale back" his Senate
campaign, the candidate said he was disappointed that convention
delegates awarded the party endorsement to McMahon, the former CEO of
World Wrestling Entertainment Inc. who has pledged to spend as much as
$50 million of her own money on the Senate race.
Simmons, who led the Republican primary race just a few months ago,
said he needed the party endorsement - and the organizational aid and
assistance with fundraising that goes along with it - to remain
competitive with McMahon in the run-up to the Aug. 10 primary.
"You can't argue with arithmetic," Simmons said, as he stood in the
mostly empty parking lot outside the station with his wife Heidi,
daughter Jane, and campaign manager Jim Barnett. "And my party made the
decision not to give me their support at the convention. That was my
party's decision to do that. They knew that I needed that support. They
knew that the only way I could combat tens of milions of dollars was to
have the support of the party, but they were not willing to provide
that, or at least a slim majority were not willing to give me that
chance."
Simmons flatly rejected speculation he might jump into the 2nd District
Congressional race, in an effort to reclaim his old seat.
"Negative," he said, shaking his head.
The Simmons campaign is effectively at an end, the candidate and his
staff said. Staff will be laid off and allowed to seek work on other
races, and Simmons will not continue campaigning. The
candidate will
remain on the August primary ballot, for which he qualified by securing
well more than the threshold of 15 percent of the delegates at the
convention.
Remaining on the ballot enables the Simmons campaign greater leeway in
resolving its finances. It also means Simmons would still be available
should McMahon's candidacy falter over the summer, though an individual
familiar with the Simmons campaign said the candidate was not expecting
such a possibility.
A Republican primary was virtually assured even without Simmons'
decision to stay on the ballot, since there are contested primary
contests for governor and attorney general.
Simmons' remarks to WXLM host Lee Elci, and later in the parking lot,
included more than a tinge of regret that party delegates had - in the
view of Simmons and his supporters - chosen McMahon and her money over
his long record of public service, which includes tours in Vietnam with
the U.S. Army and the Central Intelligence Agency, 10 years in the
state legislature and three terms in Congress representing the 2nd
District in eastern Connecticut.
In his radio appearance, Simmons said some delegates had decided to
"bail" on his candidacy during Friday's Republican convention, and also
criticized what he said was a failure to take the implications of the
endorsement "seriously."
As for McMahon and her personal fortune, Simmons said: "That, I think,
has just twisted people into thinking that the money is going to buy
the race. So what the heck, let's just shut it down."
Moments later, Simmons spoke of his own military service and other
forms of service to the public, and said the party had decided not to
support him, but instead to back McMahon for pragmatic reasons.
"It seems," he said, "that those values were set aside for money."
"We probably could have stuck it out for a few more months, but what
would that have gotten us?" Simmons said. "... I'm not sure it would
change things."
Simmons, who served in Congress from 2000 to 2006, entered last
weekend's convention as the favorite to win the party endorsement.
The candidate announced after the convention that he would fight on to
Aug. 10, but after reflection in church over the weekend and a day of
conversations with campaign contributors and other supporters on
Monday, Simmons had changed his mind.
"I have to think about my family, my supporters, my donors, my people
who have been flat out for 16 months now proceeding without unlimited
funds, without the support of the party," Simmons said. "I equate that
to Pickett's Charge."
FOUND ON COURANT AS A LINK FROM OUR NEW "FAVORITE ONLINE NEWSPAPER IN CT"
CT Governor's residence in Hartford, on Prospect Street. CT
flag half-staff in protest over the trampling of Clean Elections
Law. Governor's Mansion a
bit on
the small side compared to these...
In Democratic primary race, money is a
means and a message
Mark Pazniokas, CT MIRROR
May 24, 2010
Money talks in politics, and it spoke loudly over the weekend at
Connecticut Convention Center in Hartford, where Republicans endorsed
two rich neophytes for governor and U.S. Senate.
But the Republican losers didn't complain as much about the prospect of
being outspent as did a Democratic winner, Dan Malloy, who was endorsed
for governor across town at his convention.
Malloy fired the first salvo in the Democratic primary by denouncing
wealthy challenger, Ned Lamont, for refusing to participate in the
state's voluntary program of public financing and spending limits.
"How dare - how dare - somebody blow up the clean elections program?"
said Malloy, the first statewide candidate to qualify for funding under
the Citizens' Election Program. To qualify, Malloy raised $250,000 in
donations of no more than $100.
The public financing of campaigns long has been a goal among liberal
Democratic activists, many of whom supported Lamont's anti-war
candidacy in 2006 against U.S. Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman.
"It is a delicious irony for Republicans, who don't believe in this
nonsense," said Chris Healy, the Republican state chairman. "You see
Ned Lamont, he was the answer to the liberals' dreams four years ago,
because he had the money to go after Joe Lieberman."
How many of them will be bothered that Lamont is willing to open his
own checkbook again, this time for a gubernatorial campaign, when they
applauded him for spending $17 million of his own money in 2006?
Lamont, a Greenwich businessman, is betting that the answer is not too
many.
"You know how anxious people are. They feel very strongly the state's
at a crossroads right now," Lamont said. "And they want somebody who is
on their side, fighting for jobs, fighting to keep faith with
education, keep faith with our kids, maintain a decent standard with
health care."
House Speaker Christopher G. Donovan, D-Meriden, and Senate President
Pro Tem Donald E. Williams Jr., D-Brooklyn, two of the legislature's
most important backers of public financing, are supporting Lamont.
But U.S. Rep. John B. Larson, D-1st District, the sponsor of a federal
public-financing bill, said Malloy's reliance on public financing was
one of the reasons he endorsed the former Stamford mayor a week before
the nominating convention.
"It's nice to point to somebody who's led by example," Larson said.
Larson grew up in public housing in East Hartford, one of eight
children. Malloy also is one of eight children
"God bless people that have a lot of money and can use it for whatever
they like," Larson said. "I have nothing but respect for Ned Lamont.
But being one of eight kids, if it comes down to the fact you can only
be a self-funder to run for the United States Senate or governor... you
have to take a step back and think long and hard about that."
Lamont endorsed passage of the public financing law and says he would
fight to preserve the program, which is endangered by a court challenge
and unease by some politicians about using public funds in the midst of
a fiscal crisis.
But Lamont said relying on public financing would be tantamount to
unilateral disarmament for Democrats, since the endorsed Republican is
millionaire businessman Tom Foley of Greenwich, who already is airing
television commercials.
For U.S. Senate, the Republicans endorsed Linda McMahon of Greenwich,
the former WWE chief executive who plans to spend $50 million of her
own money, over former U.S. Rep. Rob Simmons of Stonington and Peter
Schiff of Weston.
Federal candidates are not eligible for the state's public financing
program. Qualifying candidates for governor are eligible for $1.25
million in a primary and $3 million in a general election. The grants
will be increased to match spending by a non-participating opponent, up
to double the original grants.
If everyone participated in the program, which sets voluntary spending
limits in exchange for accepting the public grants, then he would have,
too, Lamont said. No candidate, participating or non-participating, can
accept contributions from lobbyists, state contractors or their
families.
"Are you going to fight this battle with one arm tied behind your back,
or are you going to get in it to win?" Lamont said. "If everybody plays
by the same set of rules, and we urged everyone to do that, that's
great. But they're not all playing by the same set of rules."
Malloy has made Lamont a counter-offer: Limit his spending in the
primary to $2.5 million, and then spend whatever is necessary to
compete in November - if he is the nominee.
"He can make his argument about not fighting this battle with his arm
tied behind. I gave him a way out," Malloy said. "I said simply, 'Live
with it through the primary.' What's he afraid of? What was he afraid
of that he had to do what he's done, that he had to blow up a system
that he has said he supported?"
Lamont and his supporters say that argument is disingenuous.
Name-recognition and support established now through television
advertising is a benefit that will help a candidate beyond the primary,
they said.
Foley already has begun his general-election campaign, even though he
faces a primary challenge from Lt. Gov. Michael C. Fedele of Stamford
and business leader Oz Griebel of Simsbury. Fedele is seeking public
financing. Foley and Griebel are not.
"They're already on TV, already framing the debate, already taking the
Democrats on," Lamont said. "You just can't afford to wait an extra
four months and give them four months of free air time to compete. It
just is a losing proposition. And the stakes are too big."
Fedele, who was a classmate of Malloy's at Westhill High School in
Stamford, is more subdued when discussing facing a wealthier opponent
in Foley. Anyone has the right to use their own money in a campaign, he
said.
"I think this election is going to be about the people and about grass
roots and about taking the message to folks. And I think the CEP again,
if you have a self-funder, gives us some competitiveness," he said.
Gov. M. Jodi Rell, who counts the Citizens' Election Program as an
important element of her legacy as governor, has endorsed no one to
succeed her, but she expressed admiration for those living within its
limits.
"Those people who are living and working by the public financing law,
more power to them," Rell said.
The governor then offered what could be seen as a dig at Lamont, Foley
and McMahon.
"I remember one candidate once said to me, 'If you have to use your own
money, you shouldn't be running,' ' Rell said. "I thought that was good
advice, since I didn't have any, anyway."
Unconventional Times: McMahon Pushes
Simmons Aside
Kevin Rennie, COURANT columnist "Now You Know"
May 23, 2010
The bombshells that exploded on Democrats last week even dazed
Republicans as they met Friday night to nominate a U.S. Senate
candidate to oppose the beleaguered fantasist, Attorney General Richard
Blumenthal. The long season of uncertainty has made them wary of
events. We keep learning things we might rather not know.
Six months ago, the Republican faithful thought they'd be facing
unpopular incumbent Sen. Christopher Dodd as he sought a sixth term. He
scampered from the race as the year began, leaving Blumenthal to begin
a stately stroll to victory in November.
Professional wrestling mogul Linda McMahon, who won the Republican
nomination for the Senate on Friday night, used her fortune to tell
party members things about her opponent, former Republican Congressman
Rob Simmons, that party members might have preferred not to know. That
fortune made it impossible for them to avert their gaze from her
highlighting of Simmons' record in Congress for six years at the start
of the decade.
Simmons had voted for legislation in those years that Republicans could
no longer ignore in exchange for him holding a traditionally Democratic
seat. A choice not an echo, echoed from the slogans of history into
Republican ears. McMahon, new and rich, could make herself into her own
political creation.
The Republican race became more intense with each Blumenthal stumble.
He seemed tentative from the start. The only Democratic debate of the
campaign found him on the back foot, trying to cope with his
Lilliputian challenger, Merrick Alpert. Maybe the Republican nomination
would be worth something.
Simmons, unhappy at what Republicans were learning about him in a
steady barrage of mailings from McMahon, began to unravel. He was
criticism turned to vitriol. Republicans began to recoil at his angry
tactics. He'd started the race for the nomination as a heavy favorite,
but McMahon began to seem like a legitimate alternative. The Simmons
campaign obsession with her conferred legitimacy.
When the Republicans gave her a narrow convention upset Friday night,
they were taking a step into the unknown. She has a pleasant demeanor,
knows how to make a 30-second television spot, and knows how to deploy
her vast campaign exchequer with maximum effect. She hasn't been around
long enough for them to know well.
Maybe that's not possible. Everyone thought they knew the ubiquitous
Blumenthal, but they discovered last week that they did not. That, too,
happened with a push from McMahon. Her research team found evidence of
Blumenthal's serial embellishments of his military record and kindly
tipped off The New York Times that he had claimed at times to have
served in Vietnam. He did not. He was in the Marine Corps Reserves,
stationed in Washington, D.C., and New Haven.
A firestorm engulfed Blumenthal when the fuse lit by McMahon became an
explosion created by the Times' research. Blumenthal denounced the
Times' investigation at an angry event that was a combination campaign
rally and press conference. He admitted only to misspeaking and using
the wrong words. It was the sort of defense that Blumenthal would have
used to bludgeon an opponent who offered such a preposterous
explanation of clear declarative sentences.
The pattern of fabrications grew when Connecticut newspapers began
reviewing their archives and finding more Blumenthal fabrications. The
most devastating came from a November 2008 Stamford Advocate article in
which Blumenthal was quoted as saying that he "wore the uniform in
Vietnam." There was no ambiguity in the declaration. Nor was there ever
a request for a correction from Blumenthal.
Blumenthal worked for decades to make integrity his brand. He won five
terms as the state's chief civil law enforcement official, and yet we
did not know the essential man. His ordeal last week reminded us of how
detached the political class is from normal human reactions. They are
distorted by malignant tribalism.
None of the state's five congressmen and two senators offered even a
mild rebuke to Blumenthal. Alpert, his Democratic opponent, called
Blumenthal "a liar and a coward" early in the week. He endorsed him
with enthusiasm at the end. The people, however, will apply their
instincts, which could also force Blumenthal from the race, raising
Republican fears of an unknown replacement.
GOP has the edge in unsettled convention
races
Keith M. Phaneuf and Mark Pazniokas, CT MIRROR
May 20, 2010
Unlike their Democratic counterparts, Republicans will open their
annual state convention this afternoon with a number of pressing
questions unresolved.
Will the selection of Danbury Mayor Mark Boughton as a running mate be
enough to secure a GOP convention win for lieutenant
governor/gubernatorial contender Michael Fedele?
Will Tom Foley, the frontrunner for the gubernatorial nomination in a
March 18 Quinnipiac Poll, have as much pull with convention delegates
as he does with the general public, and will his decision not to name a
running mate help or hurt him this weekend?
Two other Republicans, business leader Oz Griebel of Simsbury and
former Congressman Larry DeNardis of Hamden, still hope to secure
enough delegates to squeeze into a gubernatorial primary. Branford
financial analyst Christopher Duffy Acevedo also is seeking the
nomination.
A potential four-way race for the GOP nomination for attorney general
is brewing after Thursday's announcement by veteran state Rep. Arthur
J. O'Neill of Southbury that he is pursuing the office.
And hovering above it all is a heated race for the U.S. Senate
nomination between former Congressman Rob Simmons of Stonington, World
Wrestling Entertainment co-founder Linda McMahon of Greenwich and
economist Peter Schiff. Vincent Forras, a Ridgefield businessman, also
is running for the nomination.
"This convention is a different type of animal," Republican State
Chairman Christopher Healy said, adding that with a Senate seat long
held by Democrats up for grabs and the next governor facing
record-setting budget deficits, there's too much at stake to expect a
mild party gathering. "The delegates are not looking for candidates
simply willing to give it the old college try."
Fedele, a former state representative from Stamford who was Gov. M.
Jodi Rell's running mate in their successful 2006 campaign, predicted
he would win the convention's gubernatorial endorsement on the first
ballot. Balloting continues round after round until one candidate
secures more than half of the 1,444 delegates.
"The momentum for this campaign has been remarkable in the past three
to four weeks," Fedele said, adding that recent endorsements from
former 4th District Congressman Christopher Shays and by state House
Minority Leader Lawrence F. Cafero Jr., R-Norwalk "have energized our
campaign."
And Boughton's decision to abandon his own gubernatorial bid and become
Fedele's running mate has provided not only additional delegate
support, but enough financial backing that the campaign now expects to
clear the $250,000 fund-raising threshold it must pass to qualify for
public financing, Fedele campaign spokesman Christopher Cooper said.
Foley, a Greenwich businessman and former U.S. ambassador to Ireland,
had the rosiest numbers in a March 18 Quinnipiac University poll. While
half of the Republicans polled were still undecided, Foley - who hit
the airwaves with television and radio ads long before his competitors
- captured 30 percent of the party vote while no one else cleared 4
percent.
But in the contest for delegates, who usually involve long-time party
activists from town committees across the state, Foley wouldn't concede
anything to Fedele, but said the only big expectations rest on a
political insider.
"Michael Fedele should be the winner since he is the sitting lieutenant
governor," he said. "It he doesn't, I think that is a pretty big
problem for him. If our conversations with the delegates are accurate,
we expect to do very well. I have no stake in the status quo in
Hartford. I'm not part of the problem. People want someone who is going
to come in and shake things up."
Foley also is taking a gamble this weekend, opting not to name a
running mate, instead pledging to run alongside whomever the party
nominates. But Boughton doesn't have the race for lieutenant governor
to himself. Simsbury businesswoman Lisa Wilson-Foley, who is not
affiliated with any gubernatorial contender, also is seeking the
nomination for lieutenant governor.
Foley added he is confident he will secure well over the 15 percent of
the delegate vote to qualify for an August primary.
But he isn't the only one hoping to score points this weekend with a
message of challenge to the political establishment at the state
Capitol.
Griebel, former chairman of the Greater Hartford Metro Alliance, also
hopes his political backbone will propel him into a gubernatorial
primary.
"I think people looking to see who's got the toughness to get the job
done," said Griebel, who is being touted by former Congresswoman Nancy
Johnson as a fiscally conservative, pragmatic problem-solver who can
stimulate business and streamline government. "I have absolutely no
illusions about what we are facing, none whatsoever. There's a
different environment out there."
By comparison, the race for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination is
straightforward, a two-man race between Dan Malloy and Ned Lamont that
will be settled by one ballot.
Malloy is acknowledged by both camps as the certain winner of the
endorsement, but Lamont has stepped up efforts in recent days to secure
delegate commitments, aided by urban mayors and legislative leaders.
Hartford Mayor Eddie A. Perez and his former chief of staff, Matt
Hennessy, recently began to wrangle Hartford delegates for Lamont, even
though Perez had endorsed Malloy four years ago.
Bridgeport Mayor Bill Finch is loaning Lamont his chief of staff, Adam
Wood, to manage the convention. Leslie O'Brien of the Senate Democrats'
staff also joined the team this week.
Her boss, Senate President Pro Tem Donald E. Williams Jr., D-Brooklyn,
was an early backer of Lamont. House Speaker Christopher G. Donovan, D-
Meriden, and the rest of the Meriden delegation endorsed him this week.
Malloy will be helped at the convention by his popular running mate,
Comptroller Nancy S. Wyman. His recent endorsements include U.S. Rep.
John B. Larson, D-1st District.
Lamont and Malloy are the survivors of what was a five-candidate field:
Juan Figueroa and Ridgefield First Selectman Rudy Marconi dropped out
and Simsbury First Selectwoman Mary Glassman is Lamont's running mate.
Though the Democratic field has been thinning in recent weeks,
Republicans have gained a few more candidates over the past week.
O'Neill became the third Republican this week to announce for attorney
general, joining lawyers Ross Garber of Glastonnbury and Kie Westby of
Thomaston. Avon attorney Martha Dean announced her interest several
months ago.
The O'Neill-Garber match-up is a different re-pairing of two combatants
who squared off in a difference political arena six years ago.
O'Neill co-chaired the bipartisan House Committee appointed in 2004 to
consider impeachment charges against then-Gov. John G. Rowland, while
Garber served at the time as chief counsel to the governor's office.
Rowland announced in late June 2004 that he would resign - just days
before the panel was expected to vote to recommend impeachment.
O'Neill, who has practiced law in the private sector for the past 32
years, was re-nominated last week to run in the 69th Assembly District,
which he has represented for the past 22 years.
The attorney general's office has drawn increasing interest since the
overwhelming front-runner in the polls, Middletown Democrat Susan
Bysiewicz, was bounced from the race Tuesday. Bysiewicz, a lawyer who
has served as secretary of the state since 1999, had her hopes to
become attorney general dashed when the state Supreme Court ruled she
lacks the required years of experience in active legal practice to
serve.
The incumbent attorney general, Greenwich Democrat Richard Blumenthal,
announced in January he would not seek a sixth term but instead would
run for U.S. Senate. George Jepsen, the former Senate majority leader,
is the only remaining Democratic candidate for attorney general.
Wyman's recent decision to run for lieutenant governor instantly made
the comptroller's race more attractive. Darien Republican Jack Orchulli
announced he is seeking the GOP nomination, joining Bolton Republican
Stephanie Labanowski. Kevin Lembo, state Rep. Thomas Reynolds of
Ledyard, Waterbury Mayor Michael Jarjura and Fairfield First Selectman
Kenneth Flatto are contending for the Democratic nomination.
Just
another day of
politics in the Land of Steady Habits
Mark Pazniokas, CT MIRROR
May 19, 2010
It will be remembered as the day when the national political spotlight
swung away from states with pivotal primaries to the circus that took
over staid Connecticut politics.
Where to begin? With Richard Blumenthal, accused of lying about his
military record, holding a nationally televised press conference aimed
at righting his can't-miss candidacy for the U.S. Senate?
Or Susan Bysiewicz, whose sure-thing campaign to succeed Blumenthal as
attorney general was undone hours later by the state Supreme Court,
which ruled she lacked the experience to be A.G.?
No? How about this plot twist: Bysiewicz's brother-in-law, Republican
Ross Garber, now is free to pursue his own dream of running for
attorney general without fear of eating Thanksgiving dinner in the
garage. It was a day when grown politicians giggled, from
delight,
discomfort or amazement. BlackBerries endlessly chirped with the latest
tidbit. The Land of Steady Habits is unhinged.
"I was afraid to leave my BlackBerry alone for a minute. Seriously.
This was lighting up like a Christmas tree," said Roy Occhiogrosso, a
Democratic political consultant.
"It all happens at once," said a laughing Lawrence F. Cafero Jr. of
Norwalk, the leader of the Republican minority in the House. "I can't
believe this."
To be sure, it was a funnier day for Republicans. Blumenthal is the
Democrats' best-known and most popular candidate. Bysiewicz ranks
second in name recognition behind him.
"It's like V-E Day," said Chris Healy, the jubilant Republican state
chairman.
"It certainly was a whirlwind of a day," said a more subdued Nancy
DiNardo, the Democratic state chairwoman. "I think even the press
didn't seem to know what questions to ask me."
With the Democratic and Republican nominating conventions each
beginning Friday evening, the Blumenthal-Bysiewicz double-feature meant
no audience for other races. In the contest for the Republican
gubernatorial nomination, Oz Griebel tried to get noticed for grabbing
two delegates from Ellington that had been committed to Mark Boughton,
who dropped out Monday to become Michael C. Fedele's running
mate. For
the record, their names are Michael and Kathleen Stupinski.
Republican Tom Foley's gubernatorial campaign thought it was a good day
to share the news that he was endorsed by George Pataki.
Democrat Ned Lamont had this: He was endorsed by the International
Union of Painters and Allied Trades District Council 11.
His
spokeswoman, Justine Sessions, actually fielded a bunch of press calls.
Most were from national reporters asking if Lamont would drop out of
the race for governor, elbow Blumenthal aside and declare his candidacy
for the U.S. Senate.
"Ned is extremely supportive" of Blumenthal, she said.
Knocking down a story about Lamont looking at another race was not how
she expected to spend the day. For that matter, she wasn't prepared for
endless text messages from colleagues in Washington, where she worked
for Sen. Chris Dodd, asking what the hell is going on in Connecticut.
Dan Malloy, Lamont's rival for the Democratic nomination, didn't try to
get press attention. In Malloy's camp, Occhiogrosso tried to
fight off
flashbacks to 2006, when Lamont actually was a candidate for U.S.
Senate. Lamont fought Joseph I. Lieberman in a contest so compelling
that most reporters forgot there was a race for governor.
Occhigrosso
had high hopes for the run-up to the convention. Malloy recently
qualified for public financing, then scored a coup by signing
Comptroller Nancy S. Wyman to be his running mate. Lamont had picked
Mary Glassman.
"He made his pick. We made our pick. It certainly seemed like it was
going to grab a lot of attention this week," Occhiogrosso said. "There
is a piece of me that remembers, not too fondly, that we couldn't get
attention for the primary in 2006."
One of the few Democratic winners Tuesday was George Jepsen, the last
Democrat standing in the race for attorney general. Rep. Cameron C.
Staples, D-New Haven, dropped out last week.
"If I was Cam, I'd be on a ledge right now," DiNardo said.
Not so. Staples said Tuesday night he quit the race for a variety of
reasons, political and personal. He said he sees no reason to jump back
in.
"George is well-qualified and will do a great job as attorney general,"
Staples said.
Garber, a Republican who considered declaring for attorney general
before Bysiewicz switched from the race for governor to A.G.,
acknowledged Tuesday night he once again is thinking about becoming a
candidate. He cannot think too long.
On the Democratic side, DiNardo was unsure if anyone else could jump
into the contest.
"I would never say never at this point," she said. After a pause, she
added, "Anything is a possibility."
OK,
so who's still in the running for top office now (May 31)?
Governor's Challenge: How I
Would Fix It
Hartford Courant
May 16, 2010
With the state
Democratic and Republican parties convening next weekend to choose
their favored candidates for governor, we asked each party's contenders
this question: The next governor will spend the first six months in
office trying to stave off a looming $3 billion-plus budget shortfall.
Where specifically will you find the money or savings to lead the state
out of the red?
REPUBLICAN: Mark Boughton (Note: now
Lt. Gov. candidate on Mike Fedele's team, according to Monday's Courant)
The next governor of Connecticut will be faced with some of the most
difficult challenges to ever face any governor in the history of our
state.
By acquiescence of the General Assembly and the governor, the state has
failed to make the systemic changes necessary to set us on stable
financial ground.
Upon taking office, I will immediately move our state from a cash
accounting system to a Generally Accepted Accounting Principles system
similar to the one that we use at the municipal level. This will
provide our taxpayers with a true accounting of the financial challenge
before us.
I will freeze all spending, and with the exception of public safety, or
when overtime is affected, freeze all hiring.
I will implement a freeze on all bonding for the next five years with
the exception of education and transportation projects.
I will then ask to reopen negotiations with our state employee unions
to address the current level of benefits. While I recognize that there
is a "lockout" on benefits until 2017, it is imperative to reorganize
the salaries and benefits of our state employees.
Finally, I will implement a financial accountability system called
Connstat that will analyze all spending data in all of our departments,
and will require biweekly reporting to my administrative team.
Through sound financial management and solid financial reporting, we
can restore faith and trust in our financial practices so that we may
begin the much more important conversation about the size and scope of
government in Connecticut.
•Mark Boughton is mayor of Danbury.
REPUBLICAN: Larry DeNardis (didn't get enough delegates to Primary)
The only way to address the problem is to cut every department, agency,
board, commission, committee and organization in state government.
As governor I will immediately declare a state of fiscal emergency,
freeze all spending, halt new borrowing, direct department heads to
find 10 percent savings and devise a plan to cut the number of
departments to no more than 14. I will offer to create a strategic
partnership with state employee unions. If we cannot find common
ground, I will act to avoid fiscal catastrophe.
State government is still operating with a 1970s top-down, heavy layers
of bureaucracy mind-set, with too many programs that we cannot afford.
We must focus government on its core functions, reduce the size of
government, restructure departments and reduce the size of the state
employee workforce.
I will present a plan to replace the state pension plan — which is
underfunded by more than $30 billion — with a defined contribution
plan. In addition, I will propose health savings accounts to replace
the current health insurance plans offered to employees. Both of these
measures will save taxpayers tens of millions of dollars in the first
year and billions over the long term.
Most of all, I will create a new mind-set in Connecticut that limits
taxes and spending, simplifies regulations and invites private
investment in new job creation. I will take the lead in making
Connecticut the Innovation State once again — open to inventors,
entrepreneurs, young professionals and others willing to expand our
economy.
•Larry DeNardis is a former congressman and college president from
Hamden.
REPUBLICAN: Christopher Duffy Acevedo (ditto - see above)
The days of balancing Connecticut's budget using such tactics as
accounting tricks, borrowing and delaying payments must end. It is time
for a philosophical and systemic change in how our government is
structured and functions. And this change must begin on Day One.
I am proposing a number of changes that will provide immediate relief
to our current budget situation as well as ensure our state's fiscal
health for the years to come. Among my plans are:
1. An immediate freeze on the hiring of new state workers. We will also
offer retirement incentive plans to current employees, saving the
taxpayers money in the short and long term.
2. Creation of an entirely new benefit system for state workers, which
will move those not near retirement into a 401K system and out of the
more expensive defined benefits pension plan.
3. A "right-sizing" of state government. There are 220 departments and
agencies in our state government. We need to review each agency's
function to make government more efficient and cost-effective, and to
eliminate the duplication of services.
4. Privatizing certain functions currently delivered by government to
private and nonprofit entities.
5. An end to legislators' pet projects on both sides of the aisle.
6. Transferring certain state functions to cities and towns (with
corresponding funding), thus eliminating certain elements of state
bureaucracy.
Due to limited space these are just a few of my proposals. I promise
Connecticut smart, effective government.
•Christopher Duffy Acevedo is a financial analyst from Branford.
REPUBLICAN: Michael Fedele (Primary candidate)
Over the past two decades, personal income in Connecticut has almost
doubled — but state government spending has nearly tripled.
Connecticut's government has outgrown the taxpayers' ability to pay for
it. My solution is to cut spending and to shrink the size of state
government, and includes these proposals:
t A four-year state employee hiring freeze — exemptions only for public
health and safety.
t Bring UConn/Connecticut State University hiring practices under
executive control — most new state hires since July 1 have been in
higher education.
t Two-year moratorium on borrowing — Connecticut has the third highest
bonded debt in the nation.
t Eliminate bonding for local pet projects.
t Restructure state employee salaries and benefits — require 401k
instead of current pensions; bring work schedules, health benefits in
line with private sector.
t Merge state agencies — government is too big and duplicative.
t Reform Medicaid — require cost-sharing for certain Medicaid services
as allowed under federal law.
t Privatize certain state services — private providers deliver services
at half the cost of state-run services, state group homes and other
state facilities.
t Eliminate leased space — the state spends $60 million a year on
leased space.
I will convene the leaders of the General Assembly to go through the
budget line by line and to put these proposals in place with a
consensus plan. I will seek an agreement on a budget plan before the
legislative session begins and I will involve leaders of both parties
because continuing the gridlock is not an option and is costing us lost
jobs, business closures and a stagnant economy.
• Michael Fedele of Stamford is lieutenant governor.
REPUBLICAN: Tom Foley (Party endorsed)
I will work hard to restore the 100,000 jobs we have lost in the last
two years. These new jobs will generate more than $1 billion of revenue
to help close the budget deficit.
I will reduce waste and duplication in government by implementing the
recommendations of the Thomas and Hull-Harper commissions and other
opportunities to streamline. I will shift state services to outside
contractors where it can be shown that equivalent service levels can be
provided at less cost.
I will begin shifting our elderly Medicaid population out of nursing
homes and into less-expensive and more humane community-based care,
with potential savings of hundreds of millions of dollars. I will lower
the cost of providing health care services to state employees and
Medicaid recipients by promoting wellness programs, implementing
electronic record-keeping, improving the system for compensating
victims of medical malpractice, and introducing health savings accounts.
I will lower incarceration rates for offenders who pose no threat to
society. I will get more money from Washington, which sends only 62
cents to Connecticut for every dollar collected here. I will reduce the
size and cost of the state workforce and bring state workers' benefits
in line with the private sector. If we have the cooperation of the
state employee's representatives, we can reduce the size of the state
workforce through attrition and not cutbacks.
Together, these actions can solve the budget crisis, but the next
governor and the General Assembly will need to move cooperatively and
quickly.
•Tom Foley is a businessman from Greenwich.
REPUBLICAN: Oz Griebel (Primary candidate)
Connecticut faces financial challenges we haven't seen in two decades.
Come January, our next governor will face a $3.5 billion shortfall,
exacerbating our structural deficits estimated at more than $50 billion.
As our state's next governor, I am committed to ending business as
usual and making the tough decisions required to stop mortgaging
Connecticut's future. I will take an immediate accounting of all state
agencies and consolidate, eliminate and privatize government services
as appropriate.
For example, the private sector lives under defined health care
systems, and public employees must do the same. We must negotiate
permanent savings that transition from defined benefit to defined
contribution plans to make Connecticut's future secure.
More important, we must bring back 100,000 lost jobs to rejuvenate the
state's revenue base. Instead of raising or increasing taxes, we must
restore confidence in the private sector to spawn job growth. When I'm
governor, we will create a business-friendly environment that supports
employment retention and expansion, and the infusion of venture capital
into Connecticut. We will consolidate and streamline business
regulatory functions under a single state agency that works to lower
the overall cost of doing business.
The challenges we face are real, but with proven leadership and a fresh
perspective, we can return fiscal sanity to Hartford and economic
prosperity across Connecticut.
•Oz Griebel of Simsbury is on leave from his job as CEO of the
MetroHartford Alliance.
DEMOCRAT: Ned Lamont (Primary candidate; Mary
Glassman, Lt. Gov.)
I come from the business world, where you're measured by results, not
rhetoric. Given the budget crisis, our next governor must have the
experience and independence to challenge special interests and make
tough decisions to deliver results for Connecticut families.
I'm running because I want to be held accountable for getting our state
back on track. I'll use what I've learned over a lifetime in the IT
business to make government more efficient. We can save millions by
switching state telephones to cheaper Internet connections and
implementing group purchasing of everything from state vehicles to
pharmaceuticals. I'll find real savings by encouraging community-based
alternatives to nursing homes, ridding departments of duplicative
middle management, working with front-line employees to increase
efficiency, and fine-tuning state regulations to maximize federal
funding.
I will also review Connecticut's more than $5 billion in tax credits to
make sure each benefits our economy and creates jobs. We give away
millions of tax dollars in the name of economic development, but we
haven't produced one net new job — we've been dead last in job creation
for 20 years. I will offer incentives that spur long-term job growth,
and save us hundreds of millions by cutting credits that only rent jobs
temporarily.
In the long run, however, we cannot cut or tax our way out of this
crisis. We must grow the economy. I'm running for governor to make the
changes it will take to create jobs, grow our tax base and move
Connecticut forward.
• Ned Lamont is a businessman from Greenwich.
DEMOCRAT: Dan Malloy (Party endorsed; Nancy Wyman,
Lt. Gov.)
Connecticut needs to fundamentally change its approach to government.
For too long, our state government has been too big, and too top-down.
For instance, the state has 220 agencies; I'd like to see us reduce
that number by a third over time. The state has three economic
development agencies, yet we're dead last in job growth — how much
worse could we do with just one agency? I'd also suggest freezing
compensation for all political appointees, and stopping the practice of
providing cars for most state employees, outside of law enforcement.
I'd also like to hear more details from state employee union leaders on
their ideas for saving money; to date, they haven't been given that
opportunity. If the ideas will save money, we should implement them.
We also need to get more competitive on energy — the rates paid by
Connecticut industries are more than double the national average,
crippling our ability to be competitive. We should expand opportunities
to finance and invest in energy efficiency and renewable energy by
leveraging federal dollars, using the state's bonding authority,
providing incentives for private investment and giving municipalities
new options to finance investments.
This notion of better government isn't some unreachable ideal. As the
mayor of Stamford, I proposed balanced budgets every year and created
nearly 5,000 new jobs — and when I left office, there were fewer
municipal employees than the day I took over. Services were better, and
taxes were held to the rate of inflation. That's what more efficient
management can do.
•Dan Malloy is the former mayor of Stamford.
Copyright © 2010, The Hartford Courant
Sarah
Palin 2010
GUBERNATORIAN CONTE$T NEW$ -
Lamont, Foley and...Susan B. for AG!
Leading the pack or is it PAC? Surprise!!! Having practice
of law credentials (technicality) questioned hasn't hurt AG to-be!
Ned
Lamont, Tom Foley Maintain Leads In New Quinnipiac Poll; Bysiewicz
Leads With 54 Percent In AG Primary Race
Hartford Colurant
By Christopher Keating
March 18, 2010 8:22 AM
Two Greenwich millionaires -
Democrat Ned Lamont and Republican Tom Foley - maintain their
frontrunner status in the potential gubernatorial primaries in the
latest Quinnipiac University poll that was released this morning.
Lamont, a cable television
entrepreneur, leads former Stamford Mayor Dannel Malloy by 28 percent
to 18 percent. Simsbury first selectman Mary Glassman is in third place
at 4 percent, but 44 percent of Democrats remain undecided - making the
race a wide open contest.
On the Republican side, Foley leads
with 30 percent over Lt. Gov. Michael Fedele of Stamford and Danbury
Mayor Mark Boughton, who are both tied at 4 percent. Some insiders
believe that Boughton could have enough support from his days as a
state legislator and mayor to capture 15 percent of the delegates at
the convention and qualify for the GOP primary. In that race, 50
percent of Republicans are undecided - giving a chance for plenty of
movement in the multi-candidate field.
In potentially the biggest surprise
of the day, Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz maintains a huge
lead in the race for attorney general, despite a barrage of negative
publicity for the past two months over whether she has the necessary 10
years of "active practice'' of the law in Connecticut, which is the
requirement under the law to be attorney general. Bysiewicz has the
support of 54 percent of those polled, far ahead of former state Senate
majority leader George Jepsen of Ridgefield at 10 percent. Overall, 31
percent of Democrats are still undecided in that race.
The candidates are battling for the
support of delegates at the party conventions in May in Hartford, and
then they will clash in statewide primaries on August 10.
In the Democratic race for governor,
Lamont is expected to spend millions of dollars in the way that he
spent nearly $17 million of his own money in the primary and general
election races against U.S. Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman in 2006.
Justine Sessions, a new spokeswoman
for Lamont who previously worked for five years for U.S. Sen.
Christopher J. Dodd, said, "This is the third poll in a row where Ned
is up by double digits over his closest challenger. Ned's business
background and his focus on creating jobs are resonating with voters,
and this comes before campaign season has even kicked into high gear.''
Unlike Foley, Lamont has not yet
started his television blitz that is expected to arrive in the coming
weeks. Lamont told Capitol Watch in an interview that he has no
intention of allowing Foley to be the only candidate on the airwaves
for an extended period of time.
Lamont had been ahead of Malloy by
16 points in the previous Quinnipiac poll, and he is now up by 10
points among those polled.
In a potential Republican primary
for attorney general, state Sen. Andrew Roraback of Goshen leads with
13 percent to 9 percent for Martha Dean, an Avon attorney who lost in a
previous race for attorney general against longtime Democrat Richard
Blumenthal. Republican fundraiser John Pavia of Easton is close behind
at 8 percent with 66 percent of Republicans undecided.
In the Republican race for governor,
a group of candidates is fighting for name recognition and the
attention of delegates. Longtime business executive Oz Griebel of
Simsbury, Newington Mayor Jeff Wright, and former U.S. Rep. Larry
DeNardis of Hamden are all tied at 2 percent. They are all behind the
three leading candidates.
Foley has clearly pulled ahead in
the GOP primary because of a heavy barrage of statewide television
commercials that show him driving around the state and then standing
outside of the Capitol to say that he is going to fix Hartford. Before
his television blitz, Foley had little name recognition because he has
never held elective office.
A friend of former President George
W. Bush, Foley is the former U.S. Ambassador to Ireland - having served
there until Bush left office on January 20, 2009. Before that, Foley
served in an appointed position in Iraq for seven months, overseeing
the privatization of previously state-owned businesses.
Since he never served in the state
legislature or other elected post, Foley has been making numerous trips
around the state to raise his profile. That included an appearance at
the state Capitol on St. Patrick's Day for the traditional Irish Coffee
Break that is held every year by the Motor Transport Association and
always fills up a large, chandeliered function room on the third floor.
Foley has also advertised on the
Internet and recently sent a brochure to Republican households in an
attempt to reach primary voters. The expensive, stapled, eight-page
brochure contains 14 color photographs and includes Foley's slogan that
"Connecticut is broken and broke. Working together, we can fix it.''
Likes dogs and cats
(orange cat of Rudy Marconi, former candidate for Governor on the
Democrat
side)...Senate candidates Blumenthal, Simmons (now "innactive"),
McMahon and Westonite
Schiff - Coin
of the
realm in CT Democrat poltiics, with Weston connections!
Blumenthal 'Active Duty' Bio Entry Is
Latest Issue
Hartford Clourant
Jon Lender, Government Watch
June 13, 2010
Attorney General Richard Blumenthal provided information for a 1991
biographical listing in a national lawyers' directory that summarized
his military service this way: "With USMC., active duty and reserve,
1970-1976."
This was the Democratic U.S. Senate nominee's last entry in the annual
Martindale-Hubble Law Directory of attorneys at private law firms —
since then he's held his government post — and it has not attracted any
notice up to now. But everything that Blumenthal has said about his
Vietnam-era military service has become noteworthy since his
misstatements about it have become a major campaign issue.
It started with The New York Times' disclosure last month that in a
videotaped 2008 speech, Blumenthal referred to "the days that I served
in Vietnam." Then other misleading statements surfaced, such as when he
was quoted in 2009 as saying: "When we returned from Vietnam, I
remember the taunts, the verbal and even physical abuse we encountered."
The facts are that Blumenthal served from 1970 to 1976 in the U.S.
Marine Corps Reserve, was never activated for duty overseas, and
remained in this country. Blumenthal said after the Times story that
"on a few occasions, I have misspoken," and later apologized. He and
supporters say that he's never intended to misrepresent his military
record, and that his official biography and campaign literature have
always had it right.
But now there's increased scrutiny each time a new statement surfaces
that he's made about his military service — and veterans interviewed by
The Courant were divided in their opinions about his capsule biography
in the 1991 edition of the nationally prominent Martindale-Hubble Law
Directory.
Again, the listing was: "With USMC., active duty and reserve,
1970-1976."
"I think [active duty] was probably put in there to be misleading,
based on all these other things," said Randall H. Collins of Waterford,
who served in Vietnam in the late 1960s in the U.S. Army military
intelligence division. An unaffiliated voter, Collins, 65, who is
Waterford's superintendent of schools, is in the Connecticut Veterans
Hall of Fame, established in 2005 to honor those who served honorably
and "continue to serve and inspire their fellow man."
"I was repulsed by his comments" in the 2008 videotaped speech, said
Collins. "I consider it a lie, not a misstatement."
As to the Martindale-Hubbell entry, he said: "I think it's both
accurate and misleading: It's true that boot camp [training] is
considered active duty," Collins said, "but when people think of active
duty, they think of something longer than six months…. They think of a
longer period of time" of "full-time" military service – not part-time
reserve status in this country for six years with weekend duty once a
month, and two-week drills in the summer.
"It's hard to say it's not technically accurate," Collins said. "I
really think it would be insignificant if it weren't for the comments
he made publicly about his duty. But when you contextualize it in a
pattern, it becomes a little more suspicious. Rightly or wrongly, you
read into his motivation of why he put it there."
Blumenthal, 64, voluntarily signed up for the Marine Corps Reserve in
April 1970, and served six months' "active duty in training" at Parris
Island, S.C., at the beginning of his six-year reserve stint, said
campaign spokeswoman Marla Romash. She released a military document
listing six months of "total active service" for Blumenthal as of
October 1970.
The Courant had asked to interview Blumenthal, but Romash returned the
call and responded to questions, saying, "He's addressed all these
issues."
Before joining the reserve, Blumenthal had received student and
occupational deferments during college and his work as a young staff
assistant in the Nixon White House. He had drawn a relatively low
number, 152, in the Dec. 1, 1969, draft lottery.
Concerning the language in the lawyers' directory, Romash said that
"everything is highly condensed [but] certainly the intent was not to
be anything but straightforward." She said she agrees the listing could
be "confusing," but it "was not meant to communicate" that Blumenthal
had seen "active combat duty." Most other lawyers who said they served
in the reserves did not mention "active duty" in their listings. When
asked why Blumenthal's listing did, Romash said it might have involved
"something intrinsic to the form you fill out."
Collins, the former military intelligence officer from Waterford, was
one of several members of the Veterans Hall of Fame who were asked by
The Courant what they thought of Blumenthal's Martindale-Hubbell
listing — and he was the most critical. Others were more charitable —
saying that the item made no claims about Vietnam, and that it's true
to say his reserve stint involved months of active duty, even though it
was in the U.S.
"I don't see anything wrong with him saying that at all," said Jack
Dougherty of Branford, another Veterans Hall of Fame member. Dougherty,
65, enlisted in the Marine Corps in 1966 and served in Vietnam as an
infantryman and squad leader. He was awarded the Purple Heart after
being wounded at Phou Noui.
"At that time, the reservists and the guys who were going to be there
forever and ever were side by side in the same, exact boot camp," said
Dougherty, who works as a mechanical engineer and is an unaffiliated
voter. Dougherty said that the reservists "served their active duty for
six months. The balance would be … reserve status," with periodic
activities such as drills.
Asked what he thought of the recent disclosures about Blumenthal's
misstatements, Doughterty said, "I'm not bent around the axle about it
like some people are." He said, "I don't know if he misspoke in the
past," but "my personal opinion is that he's a nice guy and does a
great job in the category we find him in," as attorney general.
The 1991 volume of the who's-who-style directory of lawyers in private
practice was the last of seven or so annual editions covering
Blumenthal's time from 1984 to 1990 as a partner in the Stamford law
firm of Silver Golub & Teitell; that was his last job before
winning the 1990 election for attorney general and assuming office in
January 1991. Earlier editions of the directory worded Blumenthal's
military history one word differently — with the word "in" instead of
"and," as follows: "With USMC., active duty in reserve, 1970-1976."
Romash had no explanation for that difference.
Part of the problem for Blumenthal, said one Democratic political
consultant, is that he has established an atmosphere that invites
questions about credibility. "The problem facing the Blumenthal
campaign is that these kinds of situations become fair game," the
consultant said, referring to matters such as the Martindale-Hubbell
entry, or last week's news reports that a Blumenthal subordinate said
the attorney general had told him in the past that he'd served in
Vietnam. Such things "might not have come forward as a news story if it
hadn't been for the misstatements about Vietnam."
But one of Blumenthal's assets is the reservoir of goodwill he has
built up with veterans over decades of attending their events and
responding to their requests for assistance.
Another member of the Veterans Hall of Fame, Marine Corps Vietnam
veteran Bob Janicki of Guilford, said that he has "struggled for years
with imposters," and noted that recently he'd said after Blumenthal's
apology, "I don't forgive him."
But now, Janicki, 63, a Republican voter who works for the federal
Veterans Administration, said he is writing a letter to newspaper
editors about a conversation he had since then with Blumenthal. Part of
it says: "Mr. Blumenthal shared with me his personal feelings on what
he may have said over the years, and I truly feel that he was honestly
sincere, and I believe him. Personally I am not about to go back in
time and review every quote presented by the media. I will never trust
them, to determine if they were in context or taken out of context."
Courant Senior Information Specialist
Cristina Bachetti contributed to this report.
Jon Lender is a reporter on The
Courant's investigative desk, with a focus on government and politics.
Contact him at jlender@courant.com, 860-241-6524, or c/o The Hartford
Courant, 285 Broad St., Hartford, CT 06115.
Copyright © 2010, The Hartford
Courant
Schiff relishes role of would-be
spoiler to McMahon
Neil Vigdor, Staff Writer
Published: 09:54 p.m., Tuesday, May 25, 2010
The last obstacle standing in the away of Linda McMahon and a November
duel with Richard Blumenthal, Republican Senate candidate Peter Schiff
said Tuesday that he is prepared to invest more of his Wall Street
winnings on the race.
"If I thought an extra million or two million could make a difference
and play a key part, then I'd spend it," said Schiff, who is president
of Euro Pacific Capital, a Westport-based brokerage firm.
Schiff relished the role of would-be party crasher on a day when former
Congressman Rob Simmons, McMahon's main competition to represent the
GOP, withdrew from the race.
"I'm the last man standing, other than Linda," Schiff said. "It's
either me or her."
For a candidate who garnered just 44 votes to McMahon's 737 and
Simmons' 632 at Friday's party convention in Hartford, Schiff was
brimming with confidence, saying the contrasts between himself and the
World Wrestling Entertainment promoter couldn't be more stark. A
frequent guest on CNBC and Fox Business Network, Schiff said he
predicted the financial meltdown and has the answers to get the economy
back on track, starting with cuts to government jobs and programs such
as Social Security and Medicare.
Endorsed by various tea party factions, Schiff said he is the
anti-establishment candidate, not McMahon, who has already spent $16
million of her vast WWE fortune on the race.
"Her grass-roots campaign is as real as wrestling is. It's all
fiction," Schiff said. "You can't buy your way inside and claim you're
an outsider."
A spokesman for McMahon said that the momentum built up by her campaign
was a result of her hard work on the message of job creation and fiscal
responsibility.
"Look, Linda has said many times that the people of Connecticut can't
be bought, and I think any suggestion to contrary is insulting to
them," said Ed Patru of the McMahon campaign. "The support Linda has is
testament to the nearly 500 meetings she's had around this state since
she announced (her candidacy). People are hungry for something
different."
The message coming out of the McMahon campaign Tuesday was one of party
unity heading into the November general election. There was no
mention of a potential GOP primary in August, which would require
Schiff to petition his way onto the ballot first.
"Our focus today and in the coming weeks will be on bringing the party
together so we can win in November, so we can restore common sense in
Washington and start putting people back to work," Patru said.
Schiff, who fell way short of the 15 percent total of convention
delegates required to appear on the primary ballot, needs to collect
signatures from 8,268 registered Republicans by June 8 to force a
contest with McMahon.
"It seems like the powers that be and the establishment don't want me
on the ballot," Schiff said. "What good does it do to keep my name off
the ballot?"
Schiff said a number of Simmons' supporters and even some of his
one-time rival's political operatives had reached out to his
campaign. State Rep. Alfred Camillo, R-151st District, a Simmons
backer from Greenwich, said he was contacted Monday by McMahon's
campaign manager David Cappiello about shifting his allegiances.
"I'm leaning toward supporting her," said Camillo, who represents
eastern Greenwich, Riverside, North Mianus, Cos Cob and part of the
downtown.
Although he has never spoken to Schiff, Camillo said he would entertain
feelers from his campaign.
"Ideologically, I certainly am aligned with him," Camillo said. "But
from what Linda McMahon has said, she's certainly not far off the
spectrum from Peter Schiff."
Camillo said he was thanked Tuesday afternoon for his support by
Simmons, who did not push him in the direction of either McMahon or
Schiff. State Rep. Lile Gibbons, R-150th District, who is also
from Greenwich, immediately ruled out Schiff as an alternative, however.
"He's not a viable candidate," Gibbons said. "I'm not going to do it
today, but I'm going to support the party nominee. (McMahon) made a
very strong showing at the convention."
Gibbons, who represents shoreline areas and part of the downtown,
suggested that there wouldn't be much to gain from a primary.
"My guess is both parties will try to avoid a primary because it will
save time, money and effort," Gibbons said.
Bob MacGuffie, co-founder of the Fairfield-based political action
committee Right Principles, a group affiliated with the tea party
movement, said "God no" when asked if he could bring himself to support
McMahon.
"He's a better candidate than Linda McMahon," MacGuffie said of Schiff.
"He's a smarter person. He doesn't carry the baggage that she does. He
can take it to Blumenthal and clean his clock. All Linda McMahon has is
money."
If Rand Paul can win the Republican Senate primary in Kentucky and Ken
Buck can take Colorado's GOP convention for Senate -- both favorites
among the tea party -- MacGuffie said Schiff can do the same in
Connecticut.
"The tea party represents the swing vote in America," MacGuffie said.
"I think his campaign has to stand up and come alive. It appears that
he hung back waiting to get to the primary phase. We're here and he
needs to have an aggressive campaign and take it to McMahon."
Schiff acknowledged that he will miss having Simmons in the race as a
foil to McMahon.
"I think having Linda and Rob beating each other up for a little while
longer would have been good for me," Schiff said. "I liked that dynamic
about the race."
But those looking for Schiff to pick up where Simmons left off
attacking McMahon's promotion of professional wrestling, which her foes
say is rife with sex, violence and drug use, may have to look elsewhere
for kicks.
"We haven't done any kind of opposition research," Schiff said. "(But)
if it comes down to her attacking me, then I'm going to obviously fight
back."
Staff writer Neil Vigdor can be
reached at neil.vigdor@scni.com or at 203-625-4436.
From high flyin' to free fallin'
CT POST
Ken Dixon
Published: 03:11 p.m., Friday, May 21, 2010
Politicians are a needy lot in general and the higher the profile, the
greater the stakes, the more likely they'll eventually fly too close to
the sun and melt the wax from their wings.
Such is the free fall of Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, whose
20-year run as the state's top civil lawyer is being tainted by his
clinical ubiquity and pathological desire to be loved.
If we're not there melting the wax, reporters are around to cover the
plummet and describe Icarus's wreckage on the ground. Blumenthal is now
in the second phase, as gravity works its magic.
Vietnam, it seems, 35 years after the last American helicopter
levitated off a Saigon rooftop, is the war that keeps on destroying
people.
Blumenthal's two-decade, non-stop self-promotional circuits of the
state and his slips of the tongue in the heat of pandering to
military-themed occasions are making what would have been the
once-simple operation of mopping up Republican competition for U.S.
Sen. Chris Dodd's seat oh-so-challenging.
Republican Linda McMahon's sexist, steroid-fueled "wrestling" empire is
at least partly responsible for the decline of civilization. Yet this
millionaire "businesswoman" from Greenwich is now a few "misspoken"
moments in Dick Blumenthal's overexposed public career away from
becoming a U.S. senator in her first election.
Yep, McMahon hasn't run for anything before.
Even Ned Lamont, the Greenwich millionaire (Do you see a theme here?
Let's mention Tom Foley, the Greenwich millionaire/GOP gubernatorial
hopeful/political neophyte) has a local board of selectman and tax
board service on his elected resume.
I'm kind of rooting for the autumnal cage match of Blumenthal versus
Rob Simmons, who was voted out of Congress after three terms
representing the state's Second District, which to us in southwestern
Connecticut is the unknown area to the east of the Connecticut River.
There's no doubt that Simmons was in Vietnam.
So you could have Blumenthal, who occasionally forgets that his Marine
Corps Reserve service from 1970 to 1976 kept him in the United States,
and Simmons, a certified vet whose tours of duty there are murky, but,
he says, included 20 months in the Army followed by 20 months with the
CIA.
I've covered literally hundreds of occasions over the last 15 years
where Blumenthal has held news conferences or spoken during various
programs. I've never heard him speak about being in Vietnam during his
service. Others have and there's a growing litany of his picking
occasions to claim he was.
But there he was the other day, inappropriately enough, in a Veterans
of Foreign Wars' dining room in West Hartford, backed by about 20
members of the Marine Corps League in a carefully staged and
choreographed attempt to save his career.
He was trying to respond to an explosive New York Times story, but with
a sense of entitlement that has marred his Senate campaign from the day
he upstaged U.S. Chris Dodd's retirement announcement by trumpeting his
candidacy; that was plainly on display when he was snookered in a
televised debate with Merrick Alpert (Merrick who? exactly) of Groton.
I kept thinking of that old Bruce Springsteen song, with the chorus
that goes, "No retreat, baby, no surrender," as Blumenthal feigned
camaraderie with these ex-Marines behind him.
"Dick, you said you take full responsibility, but do you think you owe
people an apology for having misspoken?" I shouted from among the
dozens of reporters. "No, No, No, No," came the voices from behind him.
"I regret that I misspoke and I take full responsibility," he said.
"Is that the same thing as apologizing?" I shouted back. "I... I... "
Blumenthal didn't finish, turned his head and sought out another
reporter, who didn't follow up on what I hope veterans ask him from now
until Election Day.
I was lucky enough to be a year too young for the Vietnam draft. Too
callow to be an anti-war type until I was nearly through my freshman
year in college, I would have been ripe for the draft and the war.
But we in the Stamford High class of 1972 were safe, mostly because of
a nationwide social battle, as well as because of the guys who went
into the jungle, 58,000 of whom were killed.
The reason why I've refused to ever hold a gun is because I figured
Greg and Charlie and Al and Ed and Steve and others did it for me. They
put their lives on the line and were forever changed by Vietnam. I'm
privileged that they are my friends.
The early stages of the campaign have shown that Blumenthal hasn't been
schooled in 21st century politics, the kind that makes Linda McMahon a
soft and squishy grandma type.
It's an easy thing to apologize for saying something stupid. But it's
not easy at all for Dick Blumenthal, who wants the state of Connecticut
to trust him and vote him into the United States Senate.
I'm sorry he has to be that way, but that's the gravity of the occasion.
Blumenthal
makes appearance at Weston military ceremony
Stamford ADVOCATE
By Meg Barone
Published: 11:28 p.m., Sunday, May 23, 2010
WESTON — The town’s celebration of its Community Covenant with the
Military Sunday served as Attorney General Richard Blumenthal’s first
appearance at an event honoring military personnel since admitting last
week he mis-spoke about his own military service.
In a news conference May 18, Blumenthal offered regrets about
inadvertently claiming over the years to have served in Vietnam when he
didn’t. Blumenthal joined the U.S. Marine Corps. Reserves during the
Vietnam era. He was one of several federal, state and local politicians
who addressed the audience of about 150 people at Weston High School.
They gathered to offer their commitment to servicemen and women in the
U.S. military, including veterans, active duty personnel and reservists.
Blumenthal received polite applause as he was introduced and at the
conclusion of his remarks, during which he made no mention of the
controversy. Several people in the audience said they did not want to
comment about Blumenthal and the issue of his military service saying
Sunday’s event was a patriotic, not a political forum. Event Master of
Ceremonies Gil Sanborn, the civilian aide to the secretary of the army
for Connecticut, would say only that he has attended many events at
which Blumenthal has spoken in support of the troops.
“Thank you to the town of Weston for showing what is really important
about America, what is important about being an American. What you’ve
done with this covenant is truly a model for our entire state and our
nation,” Blumenthal said, adding that the celebration had personal
meaning for him as well. “I have a son who was commissioned just a few
months ago in the United States Marine Corps. Reserve and he is
finishing his training, as we speak, at Quantico,” he said.
“Nothing is more important than supporting our troops and keeping faith
with our veterans, and I have been a very staunch and steadfast
advocate of making sure that we honor and respect the troops who are
serving now and all the veterans who have served before,” Blumenthal
said.
Sunday’s celebration featured a keynote speech by Col. JB Burton, who
serves as executive assistant to the deputy secretary of defense in
Washington, a 30-minute documentary “The Surge” and the signing of the
covenant. The national anthem was sung by Jennifer Barron, of Weston,
and Army Sgt. Major Caterina Veronesi, a Bridgeport native, sang “God
Bless America.”
Burton, who was a combat leader in Baghdad, discussed the key role of
the Dagger Brigade during the surge in Iraq and strategies that led to
a turn-around in the U.S. war effort. He also talked about the impact
Weston citizens had on Brigade members during their deployment in late
2006 and early 2007.
“Our troopers appreciate the support that you extend, whether it’s six
tons of brownies baked by Jane (Young-Anglim), whether its soccer balls
from Meg (Sanborn) and her great friends, whether it’s the adopting of
the medical platoons by the EMTs. That touch of America to troopers in
combat means something. I’m ever thankful that we had the opportunity
to cross paths with the great town of Weston,” Burton said.
“When the military receives support from the home front it is like
oxygen; it is the wind beneath our wings,” said Veronesi, who is a
chief operating officer of a civil liaison team based at Fort Meade in
Maryland, who served in Iraq for 18 months.
Sgt. Samuel Dolan, an Army recruiter in Danbury, said he was deployed
to Iraq in 2006 but never experienced the outpouring of support that
Weston provided for the Dagger Brigade. “It’s interesting to see a
community come together and support a unit that they don’t even know,”
Dolan said.
Preston Joffe, 10, chose to miss his fifth-grade soccer game to attend
the patriotic event. “It’s not every day that you get to hear Army
soldiers speak,” Preston said.
“Regardless of what you feel about any particular military action or
war, the reality is that there are many men and women who are stationed
around this world who left the comfort and security of their homes so
we can have the comfort and security of ours, and they unequivocally,
absolutely deserve our support,” said First Selectman Gayle Weinstein.
“We not only have an obligation to support our military directly. We
also have an obligation to support them by being informed and active
citizens,” Sanborn said.
U.S. Rep. Jim Himes also attended the event and addressed the audience.
The event was sponsored by the Weston Board of Selectmen and Weston
Kiwanis Club.
Mr. Blumenthal’s
Misdirection
NYTIMES editorial
May 18, 2010
There are few sins less forgivable in American politics than claiming
unearned military valor. Richard Blumenthal, the attorney general of
Connecticut, may consider his false claim to have served in Vietnam to
be “a few misplaced words,” as he put it on Tuesday, but, in fact, this
deception seems to have been part of a larger pattern of misleading
voters.
As Raymond Hernandez reported in The Times on Tuesday, Mr. Blumenthal,
a Democratic candidate for the United States Senate, said on at least
one occasion in 2008 that he had served in Vietnam, and he failed to
correct journalistic profiles over the years that included the claim.
He was actually a member of the Marine Corps Reserve who never served
overseas.
In an unsatisfying news conference on Tuesday, Mr. Blumenthal said he
had meant to say that he served “during” the Vietnam War, not “in”
Vietnam. He was surrounded by veterans who said he had repeatedly used
that construction over the years. But even that phrase seems intended
to suggest to inattentive voters that he had a greater link to the war
than he actually did.
There is nothing wrong with having received multiple military
deferments during the Vietnam period, as Mr. Blumenthal did, and
neither those deferments nor the details of his service in the reserve
have any bearing on his fitness to become a senator.
But his embellishments do. Mr. Blumenthal, who has an exemplary record
as attorney general, has only a few months to demonstrate that they are
an aberration and not a disqualifying character trait.
A debt of honor
NYPOST
Last Updated: 1:46 AM, May 19, 2010
Posted: 11:45 PM, May 18, 2010
Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal yesterday booked
himself a lectern at a Veterans of Foreign Wars hall in West Hartford,
Conn. -- hoping to explain away having lied about being a veteran of a
foreign war.
He wasn't terribly convincing.
The New York Times reported yesterday that Blumenthal repeatedly over
the years claimed service in Vietnam with the US Marine Corps, when he
actually received five academic and professional draft deferments
between 1965 and 1970 -- finally enlisting in the Marine Corps Reserve
and fulfilling his six-year service obligation stateside.
Faced with the facts, he finally 'fessed up -- sort of: "On a few
occasions, I have misspoken about my service," he said. "I regret that
and take full responsibility."
Not likely. For one thing, taking "full responsibility" would have
involved not trying to camouflage the facts by booking that VFW hall.
All of this matters because Blumenthal is seeking to replace another
unprincipled pol, Chris Dodd, in the US Senate.
Thus, Connecticut voters will ultimately decide whether high office
goes to a low-life like Blumenthal. And they've done worse -- Dodd's
30-year incumbancy being Exhibit A.
Blumenthal's principal debt of honor, however, is not payable to the
people of Connecticut. Not at all.
Rather, it is due to the nearly 15,000 United States Marines whose
names are chiseled into that granite wall hard by the National Mall
down in Washington.
It is their sacrifice that Blumenthal sought to appropriate, and taking
"full responsibility" would begin with an apology to them -- delivered
alone, in the dead of night, no cameras allowed.
But it would take an honorable man to make such an act of contrition --
and an honorable man wouldn't have told such a base lie to begin with.
New York Times
report says
Blumenthal misrepresented Vietnam service record
CT MIRROR
Mark Pazniokas
May 17, 2010
The New York Times late Monday reported that Attorney General Richard
Blumenthal falsely described himself on at least two occasions as a
Vietnam veteran, instantly roiling his campaign for the U.S. Senate
four days before he is set to accept the Democratic nomination at a
state convention.
Blumenthal frequently and accurately refers to his stateside service as
a Marine reservist during the Vietnam War, but The Times found him
twice referring to having served in Vietnam and also described him as
the beneficiary of hard-to-get draft deferments.
"We have learned something important since the days that I served in
Vietnam," Blumenthal told veterans and others in Norwalk in March 2008,
according to The Times, which posted a video of the speech. "And you
exemplify it. Whatever we think about the war, whatever we call it -
Afghanistan or Iraq - we owe our military men and women unconditional
support."
The campaign of Republican Linda McMahon acknowledged finding and
providing the video.
"We got our hands on it," said Ed Patru, McMahon's director of
communications. Patru declined to say from where the tape was
obtained
or when the campaign gave it to The Times.
In 2003, according to the Times, Blumenthal addressed a rally in
Bridgeport, "where about 100 military families gathered to express
support for American troops overseas. 'When we returned, we saw nothing
like this,' Mr. Blumenthal said. 'Let us do better by this generation
of men and women.' "
Blumenthal's campaign manager, Mindy Myers, called the story "an
outrageous distortion of Dick Blumenthal's record of service. Unlike
many of his peers, Dick Blumenthal voluntarily joined the Marine Corps
Reserves in 1970 and served for six months in Parris Island, S.C., and
six years in the reserves. He received no special treatment from anyone.
"Dick has a long record of standing up for veterans. Tomorrow, veterans
will be standing up with Dick."
Blumenthal's campaign will launch its defense with a news conference
with Connecticut veterans, details to be announced.
Myers' statement did not address the two occasions when The Times says
Blumenthal described himself as serving in Vietnam.
Marla Romash, a media adviser to the campaign, said later that
Blumenthal simply misspoke on those occasions.
"Dick Blumenthal said today he misspoke. He has attended thousand of
these events and is very careful out of respect for the veterans who
served in Vietnam to talk about his service in the Marine Corps
Reserve," said Romash, who was a campaign spokesman for Joseph I.
Lieberman in 1988 and later worked for Vice President Al Gore.
The Times also described Blumenthal as obtaining five draft deferments,
then enlisting in the Reserves only when he faced the draft: "In 1970,
with his last deferment in jeopardy, he enlisted in the Marine Reserve,
landing a coveted spot in a unit in Washington, which virtually
guaranteed that he would not be sent to Vietnam. The unit conducted
part-time drills and other exercises and focused on local projects,
like fixing a campground and organizing a Toys for Tots drive."
The story was quickly circulated without comment by the campaign of
McMahon, one of Republicans seeking the GOP nomination for the seat now
held by U.S. Sen. Christopher J. Dodd. In an interview, Patru
acknowledged that the campaign helped generate the story with its
research on Blumenthal's record.
"It has been increasingly clear to us as the weeks went on and we
sifted the records that there was a troubling disconnect between the
truth and his carefully cultivated image," Patru said.
Rob Simmons, a Republican candidate who served with the U.S. Army in
Vietnam, urged Blumenthal to quickly address the story:
"As someone who served, I respect Richard Blumenthal for wearing the
uniform, but I am deeply troubled by allegations that he has
misrepresented his service. Too many have sacrificed too much to have
their valor stolen in this way. I hope Mr. Blumenthal steps forward and
forthrightly addresses the questions that have arisen about this
matter."
Simmons, the winner of two Bronze Stars during his 19 months of service
in Vietnam, could be the short-term beneficiary of the story. He is
struggling to win the convention endorsement in the face of McMahon's
heavy media buys, part of her $50 million, self-funded campaign.
Blumenthal also faces token opposition for the Democratic nomination
from Merrick Alpert, who is a former Air National Guard member who
served in Bosnia.
Democratic State Chairwoman Nancy DiNardo, who was unaware of the story
until reached by The Mirror, had no immediate comment.
Her Republican counterpart, Chris Healy, said that Blumenthal and the
Democrats have difficult questions to answer.
"I think that's for Dick Blumenthal and the Democratic Party to
determine: Do they want to nominate a liar?" Healy said. "It's beyond
lying. It's psychopathic. I mean that seriously."
Healy said it will be difficult for Blumenthal, an accomplished lawyer
who typically chooses his words with great care, to pass off the quotes
as misstatements.
One defense, however, is likely to be his long record of accurately
referring to his military record. This is not, even as described by the
Times, the case of a lifelong fabulist suddenly unmasked. Rather, he is
accused of inaccurately describing his record at least twice and
leaving a misimpression several other times.
The only reference to his military record on his campaign web site is
the second-to-last sentence of his bio: "He served in the U.S. Marine
Corps Reserves, honorably discharged as sergeant."
"The best he's got is he only lied some of the time," Healy said.
SPITZER
Long article about Richard Blumenthal
from 2004, in full, here.
"...Blumenthal
is hardly alone in his
activist approach. Attorneys general around the nation have ramped up
the
scope and profile of their offices in the last decade, earning the
national
Association of Attorneys General the derisive nickname of "Association
of Aspiring Governors."
"New
York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer,
for example, has gone after nothing less than Wall Street itself,
winning
enormous settlements from powerful investment firms and exposing
favoritism
in the $7 trillion mutual fund industry since taking office in 1999 -
all
while regulators complained bitterly that he had far exceeded his legal
authority..."
As if to confirm
the wealth story just below...
Poll: McMahon leads Simmons in GOP
Senate race
DAY
Associated Press
Article published Mar 17, 2010
HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) - Former wrestling executive Linda McMahon has
taken the lead among Connecticut Republicans running for the U.S.
Senate, but is trailing Democrat Richard Blumenthal in the general
election race, according to a poll released Wednesday.The Quinnipiac
University Poll shows McMahon with the support of 44 percent of
Republicans. Former U.S. Rep. Rob Simmons garners 34 percent while
Fairfield County money manager Peter Schiff has 9 percent. Twelve
percent of registered Republicans say they're undecided.
It's a blow to Simmons, who led Sen. Chris Dodd in the polls until the
veteran Democrat announced his retirement in January. And while Simmons
trailed Blumenthal in a Quinnipiac Poll conducted in January, he also
had been ahead of McMahon.
"What explains Linda McMahon's rise in the polls? Money," said Poll
Director Douglas Schwartz. "She is the only Senate candidate on TV
right now. She quickly has become as well-known and well-liked among
Republicans as the former front-runner."
But in a potential general election matchup, McMahon trails Blumenthal,
61 percent to 28 percent.
Blumenthal, the state attorney general, is leading Simmons, 62 to 26
percent, and Schiff, 64 to 21 percent, in other potential general
election races. Blumenthal is far ahead of his rival for the
Democratic nomination, Mystic businessman Merrick Alpert, 81 to 6
percent.
From March 9 to 15, Quinnipiac interviewed 1,451 registered voters by
telephone. Of those, 549 were Democrats and 387 were Republicans.
The poll has a sampling error margin of plus or minus 2.6 percentage
points. For the questions asked of Republicans, the margin of sampling
error is plus or minus 5 percentage points. For the Democrats, it's
plus or minus 4.2 percentage points.
McMahon, the former CEO of World Wrestling Entertainment, has said
she's willing to spend up to $50 million of her own money on the race.
She is currently running ads on television detailing her background and
has peppered Republicans with mailers, many of which take aim at
Simmons.
The poll showed that 46 percent of voters prefer a candidate who funds
their campaign mostly with private contributions while 36 percent said
they prefer a candidate who self-funds their race.
Twenty-three percent of those surveyed said they consider themselves to
be supporters of the tea party movement.
The
running of the rich: Is wealth changing Connecticut politics?
By Ken Dixon, CT POST STAFF WRITER
Published: 07:16 p.m., Sunday, March 14, 2010
Just look at the boats.
To appreciate the influx of wealth in the top political races in
Connecticut, you have to go nautical. At first, you might be impressed
with Democratic gubernatorial hopeful Dannel Malloy's 28-foot powerboat
or with Republican Senate candidate Rob Simmons's J-22 sailboat.
But they're humble dinghies next to the 47-foot "Sexy Bitch," the
sports yacht that Republican Linda McMahon's husband docks in Boca
Raton, Fla. They'd be swamped in the wake from "Odalisque," Republican
Tom Foley's 100-foot ship flagged under the Republic of Marshall
Islands and hailing from the port of Bikini. (Odalisque, if you must
know, comes from the Turkish for a slave in a harem.)
The gap between rich candidate and not-so-rich candidate is enormous in
Connecticut this year. To illustrate the great divide, you could easily
choose real estate, watches or cars (say Lt. Gov. Michael Fedele's
wife's 2007 Maseratti Quattroporte versus Danbury Republican Mark
Boughton's 1993 Chevy pickup truck).
But what does it really mean? Do you now have to be rich to be
successful in big-time Connecticut politics? And can these wealthy
candidates identify with the problems of just-average voters, most of
whom don't have any boats at all?
Hearst Connecticut Newspapers gave 11 of the gubernatorial and U.S.
Senate candidates a questionnaire designed less to ascertain their
wealth than to get some insights into how they use it. We wanted to
know the cars they drive, how much they give to charity, where they
vacation, what they spend on a haircut or business attire, where they
like to go out and eat.
Most candidates gave us answers. For those who did not, we tried to
provide information from publicly available records to offer some
insight into the candidates' lifestyles.
The power of personal wealth
For the less well-endowed contenders, Campaign 2010 already has been an
eye opener. They face the very likely prospect that their well-heeled
opponents will use their personal wealth to finance a barrage of TV
ads, hire the best consultants, conduct exhaustive opposition research
and polls and fly in popular surrogates to impress voters.
McMahon already has made it clear she will tap millions of dollars from
her family's wealth -- disclosure reports show her family's assets
could be as high as $335 million -- in her bid to replace retiring
Democratic Sen. Chris Dodd. The leading candidate on the Democratic
side, Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, has a family fortune of his
own to write checks on. Ditto for Democratic gubernatorial candidate
Ned Lamont, the man who dumped an estimated $17 million of his own
money into a just-missed U.S. Senate race four years ago, and for Tom
Foley, the businessman and GOP fundraiser extraordinaire who also wants
to be the governor.
Democratic Senate hopeful Rudy Marconi, who has the least income of all
the candidates who responded to the Hearst survey, noted glumly that
the wealthy candidates get taken more seriously just by being wealthy.
Those in the rest of the field, he said, "get 15 minutes, a handshake
and a cup of coffee."
MONEY vs. experience
But hold on a minute. The last two governors, Republicans M. Jodi Rell
and John Rowland, were not politicians of great wealth. Nor is the
retiring Dodd, whose net worth of up to $1.85 million in his last
disclosure filing puts him in the back of the pack of Senate
millionaires.
Dodd, Rell and Rowland worked their way up through the political
system, winning lower-level electoral seats in the state Legislature or
Congress before convincing voters to give them the big prize.
These days, McMahon, Foley and Lamont undoubtedly can be emboldened by
the success wealthy political neophytes have had in winning elections,
including New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Jon Corzine, the former
New Jersey governor.
Scott McLean, professor of political science at Quinnipiac University
in Hamden, said that for a variety of reasons, rich, untested
candidates could have an edge this year. Voters, angry at the
state's stagnant economy, may be willing to accept inexperienced,
well-funded outsiders, he said.
"People don't like career politicians anymore," McLean said.
"Experience seems almost a disqualification."
The less-affluent candidates always can take to heart the lesson of
John Connolly. The former governor of Texas who bolted parties to run
for president as a Republican in 1980 was seen as a formidable and
well-financed candidate by pundits from coast to coast. Well-financed
Connolly undoubtedly was, but his $11 million in spending earned him a
grand total of one GOP delegate to the party's national convention.
Connecting with voters
Neither party has a monopoly on wealthy candidates in Connecticut this
year. Affluence doesn't seem to have a particular ideological bent,
either. Certainly the views of Democratic millionaires Blumenthal and
Lamont and GOP millionaires Foley and McMahon are oceans apart on the
economy, health care and financial regulation.
The more important issue for voters might be whether Connecticut's crop
of millionaire contenders have the leadership skills and the ideas that
can make a difference in the their lives. And candidates, while making
their issue pitches, also are portraying themselves as people who
understand those common problems.
For instance, McMahon's TV commercials stress how she and her husband
came back from financial calamity and understand what hard times are
like.
Woe to the candidate who fails to see how even a momentary portrayal of
being out of touch can ricochet through a campaign. George H.W. Bush's
alleged unfamiliarity with checkout scanners -- a claim that was flatly
erroneous -- branded him as above the struggles of his constituents.
And Mario Cuomo's jibe at Republican Lew Lehrman's expensive choice of
timepieces ("Nice watch,'' he observed during a 1980 New York
gubernatorial debate) seemed to say volumes about Lehrman, who lost the
race.
A cheap shot, some said later. Maybe. Or perhaps voters simply
concluded Cuomo was a better candidate. After all, politicians with the
common touch -- whether their names were Roosevelt or Kennedy or Bush
-- never have let their wealth undermine their appeal.
Perhaps multimillionaire Democrat Blumenthal is familiar with fellow
Greenwich resident Lehrman's brush with Cuomo.
Blumenthal's choice of timepiece? Timex.
Staff writer Neil Vigdor contributed
to this report.
The profiles in this package were
reported by staff writers Ken Dixon, Brian Lockhart, Robert Miller,
Dirk Perrefort and Neil Vigdor.
GOP Candidates for U.S. Senate: Peter Schiff, Rob
Simmons, (dog "Bailey" - what kind of name is that for a CT GOP
dog?) and Linda McMahon; DEM Dick Blumenthal running for U.S.
Senate
Schiff serves Tea Party bullion and
politics
Mark Pazniokas
March 7, 2010
NORTH HAVEN - The two worlds of Peter Schiff merged over the weekend at
a Holiday Inn hard by I-91, where he pitched investment advice and his
U.S. Senate candidacy to Tea Party activists. Schiff covered
subjects never broached in last week's tepid debate with
two rivals for the Republican nomination, things like the merits of
burying gold vs. stashing it off shore.
He was invited to give two talks, one on his candidacy and the other on
how to use gold as a hedge against an economic collapse that he has
been predicting since 2007. Over three hours, Schiff seamlessly
mixed business and politics,
telling his audience some things it wanted to hear and a few it didn't.
"Nobody in Washington thinks I can get elected," said a smiling Schiff,
who preaches cutting Social Security, Medicare and unemployment
benefits. "I have stepped on every political third rail that exists."
And then some.
Schiff is the president of the Westport brokerage firm, Euro Pacific
Capital, and a frequent commentator on CNBC, CNN, Fox and Bloomberg
known as "Dr. Doom" for his apocalyptic views of the U.S.
economy. He claims credit for calling the 2008 recession on the
air and in
print. In early 2007, he published, "Crash Proof: How to Profit from
the Coming Economic Collapse."
But here's the thing: The 2008 recession is not the collapse he is
talking about. If one considers Schiff a financial evangelist, then
think in biblical terms of what he sees in store for the U.S.
economy. Schiff sees the U.S. economy unraveling. The debt is
unsustainable,
made tolerable for the moment only by interest rates kept artificially
low by a meddling central bank, the Federal Reserve. He likens
the government's fiscal and monetary policies to a Ponzi
scheme, destined to collapse when when China and other foreign lenders
finally cut off credit.
"At some point, they are going to look at the U.S. and decide we can't
pay it back," he said.
The dollar will crash. Interest rates will rise, fueling inflation that
could leave currency worthless. And that's where the gold comes in.
"You have to have real money, gold and silver," Schiff said.
It was unclear if Schiff found the right demographic at the Holiday Inn
for his pitch about gold or his candidacy. Organizers had to pass the
hat to offset the $650 cost of the conference room, and not even Tea
Party leaders like predicting where the movement's activists will show
up on election day. Tanya Bachand, one of the organizers, said
she likes Schiff's economic
message, but a significant portion of the movement are opposed to
abortion.
"He's pro-choice, and that's difficult," she said.
Monique Thomas of Greenwich said abortion opponents are unlikely to
find an ally who is a serious challenger in the mix. At some point,
being against the status quo is not enough.
“You have to choose someone else,” she said.
Palin Smith of Woodbury was one of the audience members who has found
it easier to oppose incumbents. He introduced himself as the originator
of a dump Chris Dodd web site. With Dodd out and Richard Blumenthal in
the race, Smith has shifted gears, printing buttons that say, "No
Blumen Way."
He has no pro-Schiff buttons, but he may get there, Smith said.
"I like him," he said.
But Schiff is off message with elements of the Tea Party, seeing no
need, for example, for tightening the borders against illegal
immigrants. That bothered Philip Balestriere, a Republican town
committee member from Stamford.
"We should lock our friggin' borders," he said. But he added,
"Otherwise, he's a great guy."
Like most of his audience, Schiff bemoans the U.S. decision to go off
the gold standard in 1971, leaving U.S. currency as paper backed only
by a government drowning in debt. Schiff recommended the Perth
Mint of Western Australia as a safe place to buy and store gold bullion.
"It's a good thing to store precious metals off shore, especially if we
get into confiscation," he said. Having assets off shore also is good
"if things really, really get bad and if you have to leave."
He also suggested keeping some gold on hand, buried in the backyard if
necessary, Schiff said he is days or weeks from launching a new
subsidiary, Euro Pacific Precious Metals.
"We're going to be selling primarily for physical delivery," he said.
"We will be very competitive on price."
Schiff warned about storing gold in a bank safe-deposit box, in case
the government bans the private ownership of gold.
"If you have it buried in your back yard, I don't think they will
dispatch agents to your backyard with metal detectors," Schiff said.
He said that precious metals are the only safe hedge against
hyper-inflation on the scale suffered by Weimar Germany after World War
I. Schiff told the story of a wealthy woman whose assets were rendered
worthless by inflation in a year.
"We are right there," Schiff said, holding a microphone in one hand and
chopping the air with his other like a metronome. "We are right at that
point right now."
(He said later that the Weimar Republic is not part of his stump
speech. "This is an audience of people that want to know about why you
should own gold," he said. "Normally, I am not bringing up the Weimar
Republic.")
Schiff argues that the federal government has grown beyond the role
envisioned by the founding fathers or authorized by the U.S.
Constitution. It is a message that resonates with Tea Party adherents,
who see much of the federal government as unconstitutional, including
the federal income tax.
Nationally, the movement has veered off into areas that Schiff sees as
foolhardy, including conspiracy theories on 9-11 and the economy.
During a Q&A period, the second question posed was about the need
for a commission to resolve "unanswered questions" about 9-11.
"I'm not aware of any unanswered questions," he said. "I do know there
are people out there who believe that 9-11 was somehow planed by the
U.S. government. I think our government is incompetent. I don't think
they are evil."
Schiff warned that talk of conspiracies will cost the movement
credibility.
"We can't be led down those roads and think that everything is a result
of conspiracy," Schiff said. "There are people who think I'm a double
agent in this conspiracy because I'm Jewish. They think, hah, I must be
in league with the bankers."
The moment seemed awkward.
"I don't believe in any of these conspiracies," Schiff said. "I don't
think Elvis is alive. I don't think the government is hiding aliens in
some silo in New Mexico."
His audience laughed.
The next question came from Joe Markley of Southington, a former
Republican state senator who is running for state Senate again. Was
there anything in Schiff's past that could haunt his candidacy?
"There are no scandals in my background," Schiff said.
His opponents can "take things out of context" and paint him as
unpatriotic for advising clients to invest overseas, he said. And they
can talk about his disinterest in voting for much of his adult life.
"And, of course, there's my father," he said.
His father is Irwin Schiff, an imprisoned tax protester who has
insisted that the U.S. has no authority to collect a federal income
tax. After talking for nearly three hours, Peter Schiff later sat
with a
reporter, sipping water from a paper cup. He said he agrees with his
father about the income tax, but that's not his fight. His father
tilted at that windmill for more than 30 years. For his
troubles, he was convicted three times in federal court, most recently
four years ago at the age of 78. He is serving 13 years in a federal
prison in Terre Haute, Indiana.
"It was his life," Schiff said. "He was committed to this cause. He was
obsessed. He was like Captain Ahab, fighting the great white whale. And
that wasn't what I wanted to do. But I have a lot of respect for what
my dad did, and his willingness to put it all on the line the way he
did."
A woman interrupted to compliment his performance in last week's
debate. He smiled and nodded. Peter Schiff was 5 and living in
Connecticut when his parents divorced.
He was raised by his mother in New York, south Florida and California.
"Always with my mom," he said. "My dad was always off doing his tax
thing."
Schiff wondered if his father will become an issue.
"I did work with my dad for a couple of years when I was 19 and 20.
They could try to hold that against me," Schiff said. "My name is on
one of his books, 'The Great Income Tax Hoax.' "
For now, his Republican opponents, Linda McMahon and Rob Simmons, are
ignoring Schiff. Simmons, a former three-term congressman, is
attacking McMahon for the
off-color content of her family's business, World Wrestling
Entertainment. McMahon is attacking Simmons for being a former
three-term congressman. That leaves Schiff free to preach the
gospel of economic doom, a message that was ridiculed prior to 2008.
He was asked if he ever thinks his message sounds a bit paranoid,
especially when he talks about possibility keeping assets off shore, in
case living in the U.S. becomes untenable.
"I'm not saying this is definitely going to happen," Schiff said. "I'm
just saying what will happen if we continue on our present path. I know
that everything we are doing is undermining the economy further. We are
laying the foundation for a greater collapse."
Senate Debate: GOP Candidates Avoid
Personal Attacks, Focus On Public Policy
By DANIELA ALTIMARI, The Hartford Courant
March 3, 2010
For months, Republican U.S. Senate candidates Rob Simmons and Linda
McMahon have been locked in a nasty, deeply personal clash marked by
blatant attacks, stark differences of opinion and accusations of lies.
On Tuesday, the candidates met in their first debate and some
surprising similarities emerged.
In fact, the hourlong forum, which also included money manager and
author Peter Schiff, was largely a genteel affair that featured few
fireworks and focused instead on the finer points of public policy.
The three GOP contenders found consensus on numerous issues, showing
caution by hewing to their party's core philosophy. Each expressed
opposition to a government-run health care plan, and government
regulation in general. Each voiced support for lower taxes and efforts
that help small businesses grow. And each acknowledged that they had
not read the mammoth health care bill passed by the Senate last year.
It was only in the waning moments of the hourlong debate at the
University of Hartford that McMahon's ties to World Wrestling
Entertainment -- her family business and the subject of much criticism
from the Simmons camp -- were raised. And it was McMahon herself who
brought it up. She suggested one way to end gridlock in Washington
would be to set up a ring in the Senate chamber for a "smack down." The
line drew laughs.
Simmons, who has been churning out press releases denouncing both the
WWE's treatment of its wrestlers and the spicy nature of some of its
content, avoided the topic. He made a reference to character in his
closing statement: "The character of our Republican Party will be
conveyed by the nominee that we select. I hope that my character as a
public servant will reflect their choice." He insisted to reporters
afterward that it wasn't a veiled jab at McMahon.
Instead, Simmons took a swipe at Democrat Richard Blumenthal, who said
in last night's Democratic debate that the many lawsuits he has filed
through the years have actually helped to spur job growth.
"I would not recommend lawsuits as a way to create jobs,'' Simmons
said. "What I would recommend is that we go to the fundamental value
that all Americans, have which is free enterprise¡Kand in
particular that we focus on small business."
Schiff noted after the debate that many people watching at home might
have been surprised to see three candidates in the debate. His
candidacy, fueled by passionate and energetic supporters from across
the nation, has to some degree been overshadowed by the heat generated
by Simmons and McMahon.
But Schiff's fans were among the loudest in the room, yelling "Peter!"
as he took his place on the stage. They have come to know the Weston
pundit through his frequent television appearances schooling viewers on
monetary policy -- and that's largely what they got Tuesday night.
Schiff sounded like a college professor trying to convey a complex
topic to a class full of undergrads, but he also showed a combative
side. When asked about „©partisan„© gridlock, the other
candidates voiced confidence that, if elected, they could work with
their Democratic colleagues. Schiff, gesturing with hands to underscore
his points, wondered why bipartisanship was viewed as such a virtue.
"A lot of people say we need bipartisanship so we can overcome
gridlock,'' Schiff said. "Well, I don't want to overcome gridlock if
that's the only thing standing between us and more government. I want
to change what's happening in Washington. I don't want to go to
Washington to compromise my positions or my principles. I want to try
and persuade and educate the other members of Congress to adopt my
principles. ... We've been compromising for years, and look at the mess
that we're in."
And Schiff ended with a pledge: "If you send me to Washington, I
promise you one thing ¡V that town will never be the same again."
Each of the candidates emphasized their life stories: Schiff spoke of
how he predicted the economic meltdown. McMahon talked of her rise from
bankruptcy to the head of a multimillion-dollar corporation. Simmons
spoke of his many years of public service and his distinguished
military career.
The stakes Tuesday night were perhaps highest for McMahon, a newcomer
to politics who has indicated she could spend up to $50 million in her
quest to win the seat, which is currently held by U.S. Sen. Christopher
Dodd. She has never debated before, not even in high school or college,
and her handlers were clearly pleased with her performance.
In her closing statement, McMahon explained to voters why she is
running. "I don't need a hobby,'' she said. "I'm running because I
could no longer tolerate the lack of common sense and the lack of
fiscal discipline I see in Washington. I wanted to shake things up. I
want to offer a fresh perspective. I'm not a career politician."
The debate was sponsored by The Courant and Fox 61.
Copyright © 2010, The Hartford
Courant
Democratic Senate candidates square
off in debate
By Brian Lockhart, CT POST Staff Writer
Published: 11:58 p.m., Monday, March 1, 2010
HARTFORD -- During Monday's Democratic U.S. Senate debate, one of the
best exchanges highlighting the differences between the two candidates,
state Attorney General Richard Blumenthal and Mystic businessman
Merrick Alpert, came over, of all issues, Cuba.
Alpert, the admitted underdog for his party's nomination to succeed the
retiring U.S. Sen. Chris Dodd, portrayed himself as a bold, decisive
political outsider who would wage war on "incrementalism" in Washington.
Asked by moderator Tom Condon, of the Hartford Courant, whether the
United States should normalize relations with Cuba, Alpert responded:
"Tom, I would vote to do it tonight. Why wait?"
Blumenthal's answer was far more measured and involved. He talked about
the need for the Castro regime, which has run the country for decades,
to depart and for Cuba to adopt "more Democratic forms of government."
He also said he would listen to the opinions of Cuban constituents in
Connecticut.
"It will be a demanding and painstaking process," Blumenthal said,
adding minutes later, "As a U.S. senator, I would hope I would be part
of that process, working step by step, but maybe very quickly and maybe
within the next couple of years."
The hourlong debate at the University of Hartford's Lincoln Theater
provided opportunities for both candidates.
Republican candidates Linda McMahon, Rob Simmons and Peter Schiff will
debate at the same location on Tuesday.
ISSUES 2010 - CT - State Aid
Formula (ECS); O.P.E.B.
status; Campaign Finance reform; jobs recovery picture. Other. Tea Party
power?
"MILLIONAIRE'S TAX" 2011 A GOOD
BET? DEATH
PENALTY?
The problem - State aid drying up; third-party candidate
Tom
Marsh local sales tax plus Foley and Malloy thoughts; Regional ideas have not been
picked up yet by others. Hartford
Courant has their facts wrong today Oct. 13. 2010 - Michael Ross
was executed May 13, 2005 (read article here).
It looks as if the results of the Gubernatorial Election should make
Cherhire case moot (?) with leader in the race Malloy against death
penalty, and the Democrat Legislature having passed a bill
against the
death penalty which did not become law because Gov. Rell vetoed it...
65% Back Death Penalty In
Connecticut, New Poll Shows
Courant Staff Report
7:48 AM EDT, October 13, 2010
Nearly two-thirds of Connecticut voters favor the death penalty in
general, while even more favor it for the man found guilty of killing a
Cheshire woman and her two daughters, a Quinnipiac University Poll
released this morning shows.
The poll shows that 65 percent of those surveyed support the death
penalty in general -- slightly higher than in recent years, when
support has "hovered" about 60 percent, Quinnipiac says.
When asked specifically about Steven Hayes, 76 percent said they
support the death penalty, the poll shows. Hayes has been convicted in
the July 2007 killings in Cheshire and awaits the penalty phase of his
trial, scheduled to begin Monday. He faces the death penalty on six
capital-felony convictions.
Poll Director Douglas Schwartz said in a statement accompany the poll
that "support for the death penalty in a specific case can be higher
than support in general. This is because some voters who oppose the
death penalty in general support it for a particularly heinous crime."
The death penalty divides the two major-party candidates for governor,
though only 6 percent of those polled said they would cast their vote
for governor based on that issue alone. Dannel Malloy, the Democrat
candidate, opposes the death penalty, while his opponent, Republican
Tom Foley, favors it.
Both the state House of Representatives and the state Senate voted last
year in favor of abolishing the death penalty. Republican Gov. M. Jodi
Rell vetoed the bill.
The Quinnipiac poll of 1,721 registered voters was taken Oct. 7 to 11
and has a margin of error of plus or minus 2.4 percentage points.
In a statement accompanying the results, Quinnipiac said the new poll
shows the death penalty has more support among men, 69 percent, than
among women, 62 percent. "In the specific Cheshire murder case," the
statement said, "women back the death penalty 74 – 17 percent while men
back it 78 – 19 percent."
Nine prisoners are currently on death row in Connecticut. The longest
serving, at 21 years, is Robert Breton, who was sentenced to death in
October 1989 for the beating and stabbing deaths of his ex-wife and
son.
ERROR BY
COURANT IN TODAY'S REPORT!
The last person executed in the state, in 1995,
was Michael Ross, who strangled six young women in the 1980s.
Candidates Differ
In a recent interview with The Courant, Malloy explained his stance on
the death penalty: "… we know that there is precious little connection,
if any, documented between the existence of the death penalty in a
state and the homicide rate.
"We know that it has been unfairly, or at least disproportionately,
applied to men and women of color. And then when you consider the
difference in the race of the victim of the homicide, that becomes an
even larger discrepancy," Malloy said. "So, based on a number of
factors, I would rather we lock people up for the rest of their lives
and throw away the key.''
Said Foley, "I'm for leaving the laws as they are in Connecticut, and I
think this heinous crime against three women reminds us that some
crimes do warrant capital punishment."
Connecticut's Cash Crunch: Will Towns And Cities Take The Hit?
By DON STACOM, dstacom@courant.com
September 7, 2010
HARTFORD —When Jim Finley reviews Connecticut's fiscal projections for
the next two years, his conclusion is brief but not reassuring: "This
is a public-policy time bomb."
Finley, executive director of the Connecticut Conference of
Municipalities, worries that huge state deficits projected for the next
two years could create further reductions in revenue sharing with local
governments, meaning bad times for local governments and taxpayers
alike.
"What we don't want is for the state to balance its budget on the backs
of municipalities, because that's a false savings," Finley said. "It
will just shift the cost onto the property taxpayers." CCM is the main
lobbying group for cities and towns.
The group this month began lobbying Dan Malloy and Tom Foley, the two
major-party gubernatorial contenders. When the winner takes office in
January, he will inherit what looks to be a financial quagmire. The
state budget is projected to be more than $3 billion in the red in each
of the next fiscal years. The $1.3 billion in "rainy day" reserves are
spent, and the Obama stimulus aid that propped up state and local
governments across the country is scheduled to end.
Many political leaders privately acknowledge that severe spending
reductions coupled with unpopular tax increases are inevitable. But
East Hartford Mayor Melody Currey, president of CCM, says cuts must not
hit aid to towns and cities. Local governments already are struggling,
and most — like East Hartford — exist almost entirely on a mix of state
aid and property-tax receipts.
"We know the state is going to take a big hit next year. But on the
local level, we've already been making cuts. We're to the point where
we'd have to cut services," Currey said. "Our unions have given
concessions; town workers made less in 2009 than they did the year
before. I've cut jobs at the fire department, the police department.
The schools lost 60 teachers."
Wealthy suburbs generally receive the least state aid, but small rural
towns and big, poor cities are especially reliant on it. Communities
ranging from New Haven and Meriden to Thompson and Canterbury get a
third to half of all their revenue from the state. The biggest
percentage by far goes to school systems, mostly through Education Cost
Sharing grants. Connecticut is spending more than $2.4 billion on local
education this year, including roughly $270 million of Obama
Administration stimulus grants.
"The stimulus runs out this year. So next year, the state would need to
put in $270 million more just to provide level funding," Finley says.
"And another $270 million the year after that."
CCM last week distributed a proposal for the next governor and the
General Assembly to help towns and cities by letting them raise revenue
on their own.
State law prohibits local taxes except property and conveyance taxes.
CCM says more property-tax increases would hurt businesses and local
residents. Instead, it wants municipalities to have the power to
levy local entertainment or even local sales taxes. Alternatively, the
state could raise the 6 percent sales tax to 7 percent and split the
projected $600 million in new proceeds with local governments, Finley
said. In either case, municipalities need freedom to diversify from
reliance on the property tax, he said.
"There are going to have to be serious discussions at the state level
about raising revenue," Finley said.
Rell administration officials say that personal income and sales-tax
receipts are edging up in the past few months, and that Connecticut has
been able to cut back sharply on borrowing to pay its day-to-day bills.
But even in best-case projections, it's likely to take four or five
years — at best — before revenue returns to the level before the
national financial collapse in mid-2008, they said.
House Speaker Chris Donovan said the General Assembly made good on its
previous promises to protect municipal aid, and can do the same thing
again. "Everybody said they were worried about '09, then about '10,
then about '11. We took care of that. We were going to borrow $900
million this year, that's down to $646 million," he says.
Could Taxes Be Ripe For An Increase? Huge Looming Deficit For
Next Year Spurs Candidates To Discuss A Hike
By CHRISTOPHER KEATING, ckeating@courant.com
September 5, 2010
With a huge budget deficit looming, the candidates for governor are
debating whether the state needs to raise taxes to close the projected
deficit of more than $3 billion in the next fiscal year.
Republican candidate Tom Foley is ruling out an increase in any taxes,
saying the budget gap can be closed through spending cuts alone.
Democrat Dannel Malloy, his spokesman said, would consider tax
increases only as a last resort — after first creating jobs, cutting
state spending and streamlining state government.
"The notion that you can get out of this without considering revenue —
nobody believes that,'' said Roy Occhiogrosso, Malloy's chief
strategist. "Dan believes in progressive taxation. It's a basic
difference between the two.''
Malloy has not made any specific proposals about raising taxes, other
than to say that various options would need to be considered.
The Democrat-controlled legislature's finance committee, however, is
expected to consider whether the sales tax and other taxes need to be
raised next year to close the gap. House Speaker Christopher Donovan
said Friday that the finance committee analyzes the tax structure every
year in an effort to strike the right balance regarding taxation. He
said it is too early to predict potential tax increases in the 2012
fiscal year, which begins next July 1.
"When we have state Democrats and federal Democrats working together,
we balance our budget. We'll do it again,'' Donovan said. "We did it
for fiscal years ['09], '10 and '11.''
Following recent practice, any tax increases would likely come as part
of a legislative package that also includes spending cuts and,
potentially, borrowing for operating expenses. No final decisions will
be made until next year, after the new governor and the new legislature
are sworn in.
The Sales Tax
The legislature has raised the cigarette tax several times, as well as
the state income tax, to close past budget gaps. The maximum rate on
the state income tax was raised to 5 percent during a fiscal downturn
in 2003, and then increased again for couples earning more than $1
million in an even larger downturn in 2009.
"When facing a huge deficit, no taxes were raised — just on those
making $1 million,'' Donovan said.
Connecticut enjoys an advantage over the surrounding states, with a
sales tax of 6 percent. Both New Jersey and Rhode Island charge sales
taxes of 7 percent, while Massachusetts is at 6.25 percent. New York
has a hybrid system of state and local rates that can total higher than
8.5 percent, depending on where an item is purchased. Connecticut
also has more than 100 sales-tax exemptions. There is none, for
instance, on food, prescription drugs, X-rays, dental visits, oxygen,
telephone equipment for the deaf and blind, diapers and cremation
services.
The sales tax used to be 8 percent, but in 1991 it was dropped to 6
percent as part of an overall compromise to create the state income
tax. Foley rejects the idea that Connecticut's sales tax could be
raised without much backlash simply because it would still be even with
or below the rates in surrounding states.
"That's no wiggle room at all," Foley said. "If you add to the sales
tax, you just make it worse."
Foley said he has not received a clear answer from Malloy on his tax
plans.
"Ask Malloy. What's the plan?'' Foley said. "Whose taxes are you going
to raise? So far, he's being vague. I've been very clear. I've said no
new taxes.''
The budget deficit, however, is a moving target that can change
quickly. Foley has said that an economic recovery could boost state
collections by as much as $1 billion per year, thus slicing the
deficit. In the same way, Donovan said, that the state never expected
to generate a surplus of nearly $450 million in the 2010 fiscal year,
which ended June 30. So, Donovan said, the problems in the 2012 fiscal
year that will face the new governor might "not be as big a problem as
people have projected.''
Both Foley and Republican State Chairman Christopher Healy say Malloy
will have major difficulties cutting the state budget because he is
supported by the major state-employee unions.
"Who in Connecticut believes that someone who is in the pocket of the
unions will make the tough decisions for the state?'' Foley asked.
Occhiogrosso responded that the unions are backing Malloy because of
his 14-year record as mayor of Stamford and his knowledge of how
government works.
"The reason the unions are supporting Dan is they know the next
governor is going to have to make some tough decisions about
government,'' he said. "If this race is decided on Dan Malloy's record
as mayor and Tom Foley's record as a businessman, we'll take that
matchup.''
Foley's World
As a wealthy Greenwich millionaire, Foley does not understand that
progressive income taxes on the affluent need to be considered as part
of the mix in a difficult budget year, Occhiogrosso said.
"He lives in a fairy tale land,'' Occhiogrosso said. "Tom Foley lives
in a rarefied world. Most people don't live in that world.''
He added that the no-new-taxes pledge failed when it was used in 1988
by then-candidate George Herbert Walker Bush, who became president and
later signed legislation to raise taxes.
"It is a desperate pandering attempt to get votes,'' Occhiogrosso said.
" Republicans make these pledges because that's what they do. It's the
same old playbook. This is a purely desperate attempt for Tom Foley to
grab onto an issue.''
But Healy, the Republican chairman, said the Democrat-controlled
legislature has mishandled the state's fiscal problems, prompting the
state to face a triple whammy that will lead to a fiscal tsunami.
"It's the Hurricane Earl of fiscal problems — too much debt, too much
spending and a lack of economic growth,'' Healy said. "It's more than
past high noon on this issue. It would be a disaster to raise taxes on
sales, income or capital gains. It would be a fiscal Hurricane Earl. At
some point, you reach a breaking point.''
The Revolt of the Bourgeois
Tea partiers are mad as heck, and
they’re letting the world know — politely.
Rich Lowry, NATIONAL REVIEW
September 3, 2010 12:00 A.M.
The much-analyzed speeches at the Glenn Beck Lincoln Memorial rally
weren’t as notable as what the estimated 300,000 attendees did: follow
instructions, listen quietly to hours of speeches, and throw out their
trash.
Just as stunning as the tableaux of the massive throngs lining the
reflecting pool were the images of the spotless grounds afterward. If
someone had told attendees they were expected to mow the grass before
they left, surely some of them would have hitched flatbed trailers to
their vehicles for the trip to Washington and gladly brought mowers
along with them.
This was the revolt of the bourgeois, of the responsible, of the
orderly, of people profoundly at peace with the traditional mores of
American society. The spark that lit the tea-party movement was the
rant by CNBC commentator Rick Santelli, who inveighed in early 2009
against an Obama-administration program to subsidize “the losers’
mortgages.” He was speaking for people who hadn’t borrowed beyond their
means or tried to get rich quick by flipping houses, for the people
who, in their thrift and enterprise, “carry the water instead of drink
the water.”
The tea party’s detractors want to paint it as radical, when at bottom
it represents the self-reliant, industrious heart of American life. New
York Times columnist David Brooks compares the tea partiers to the New
Left. But there weren’t any orgiastic displays at the Beck rally, nor
any attempts to levitate the Lincoln Memorial — just speeches on God
and country. It was as radical as a Lee Greenwood song.
A New York Times survey earlier this year occasioned shock when it
found that “Tea Party supporters are wealthier and more well-educated
than the general public, and are no more or less afraid of falling into
a lower socioeconomic class.” We’re so accustomed to the notion of a
revolt of the dispossessed that a revolt of the possessed (in the
non-demonic sense, of course) strikes us as a strange offense against
the nature of things. But it’s threatening to wash away the Democratic
congressional majorities in a historic wipeout.
In extremis, Democrats and liberal commentators have dragged the debate
over the tea party into the well-worn rut of elite condescension to the
bourgeois, a term coined in its modern sense by Rousseau and not meant
as a compliment. For more than a hundred years, the bourgeois have been
accused of being insipid, greedy, and unenlightened. To the long
catalogue of their offenses can now be added another: unenthralled by
Barack Obama, the Romantic hero seeking to transform the nation.
The tea party represents a revolt against his revolution, and thus a
restoration. If a tea-party-infused Republican party were to take
Congress and manage to cut federal expenditures by a sharp one-fifth,
that figure would only be back to its typical level of recent decades
of roughly 20 percent of GDP. If the party were to succeed in making
the federal government more mindful of its constitutional limits, it
would only be a step toward the dispensation that obtained during most
of the country’s history.
To be sure, the tea partiers are fiercely anti-establishment, and that
produces political candidates who are exotic and unexpected. Then
there’s Beck himself. As he’d probably be the first to admit, he’s an
unlikely leader for the disaffected bourgeois. He’s emotionally
extravagant and conspiracy-minded, an intellectual enthusiast and
rollicking showman.
The last time Republicans benefited from a wave election, they had
their own Beckian figure at the top in the person of House Speaker Newt
Gingrich. They wallowed in their revolution and let Gingrich’s
ideological grandeur define them — to their regret in the end. If the
wave comes this time, Republicans should endeavor to be a sober and
responsible party for sober and responsible people, resolutely cleaning
up after the failed Obama revolution.
They could do much worse than to take their cue from the tea partiers
at the Lincoln Memorial, who knew how to make an impression without
scaring anyone or trashing the place.
Funding is key education challenge for next governor
Robert A. Frahm, CT MIRROR
September 21, 2010
The nation's largest academic achievement gap among poor children is
high on the list of challenges confronting Connecticut's next governor,
but another education gap poses a more immediate dilemma.
It is the $270 million shortfall that will be left in the state's
education budget when federal stimulus money runs out next year.
Both major party candidates, Republican Tom Foley and Democrat Dan
Malloy, say they intend to plug that gap - amounting to about 14
percent of state school aid - and to preserve the current level of
state support for public schools.
"I have committed to not reduce education funding," Foley said. "We
need to reduce the level of spending in our state but not at the
expense of our children and our educational system."
"No way around it," Malloy said. "If we were to impose a 14½
percent cut, communities like Hartford, Bridgeport, New Haven,
Waterbury, New Britain, New London would be absolutely devastated."
A third candidate, Chester First Selectman Tom Marsh, running as an
independent, said he would make education "a very high priority" but
that it would be impractical to fund education at its current level,
given the enormity of a projected state budget deficit.
The Education Cost Sharing grant is the single largest source of state
aid to local school districts, and the pledges by Malloy and Foley not
to reduce it "are welcome news to towns and cities that are very
nervous about that funding," said James Finley, executive director and
CEO of the Connecticut Conference of Municipalities.
But finding the money for schools will be a daunting challenge,
especially as the next governor confronts an overall budget deficit
projected to reach nearly $3.4 billion next year. The $270 million in
education funds currently covered by the stimulus would be more than
enough to pay annual state costs for a dozen state regulatory agencies,
including the departments of public safety, labor and consumer
protection, for example.
Across the state, school districts have already been hit hard by the
economic slump, laying off teachers, cutting popular programs and even
closing some schools. Educators fear next year could be worse.
"While both candidates said they will do their best to find ways . . .
to keep [state school aid] as it is, we remain concerned about it,"
said Robert Rader, executive director of the Connecticut Association of
Boards of Education. "It's a big gap."
Malloy has said he will use a combination of cuts in state services,
labor concessions and tax hikes to attack the deficit. The task could
be even more difficult for Foley, who has pledged not to raise taxes,
saying the deficit can be closed through spending cuts, labor
concessions and revenue from job growth.
The question of how to pay for public schools will shape the approach
to other issues on the education agenda. How will the state pay for the
high school reforms approved by the legislature last spring? Can it
afford Malloy's plans for preschool? How will it pay for Foley's plans
to expand charter schools and other choices for parents?
The State Board of Education is reviewing a complex set of formulas
governing school aid, and the next governor will play a key role in the
debate over financing public education.
Foley, a Greenwich businessman, says the current Education Cost Sharing
grant "looks like about 15 inches of computer code." He has endorsed a
controversial approach that would link school funding directly to each
student, sending state aid and local tax support to whatever school the
student attends - a magnet, a charter, a technical school or the local
neighborhood school, for example.
The money-follows-the-student plan has been championed by charter
school supporters, including the New Haven-based school reform group
ConnCAN. However, the idea has drawn criticism from teacher unions,
school boards and others, mainly because it would bolster aid for some
schools while taking away money from others.
Critics fear it would drain money, including local tax funds, from
regular public schools at a time when schools are facing worsening
budget strains.
Foley, however, described the system as "a marketplace where parents
are choosing, selecting schools that they think are doing the best job
for their children." He said part of the problem with the existing
system "is that the money gets directed to the very schools that are
failing."
Foley's education plan is centered on a philosophy of making public
education more accountable to market forces. It would reallocate state
funds to successful schools and give parents more choices such as
charter schools, magnet schools or even schools in other districts.
"We don't want to be funding failure. We want to be funding success."
Malloy, the former mayor of Stamford, has called for long-term reform
of school funding. As mayor, he was part of a coalition of municipal
and education officials that sued the state in 2005 over what it says
is a broken and unfair system of paying for public education.
That lawsuit by the Connecticut Coalition for Justice in Education
Funding is pending in court.
"We need to build more robust funding for education and need to end our
over-reliance on property taxes," said Malloy. His plan also calls for
curbing school district administrative expenses and shifting funding
toward preschool and elementary grades, "where the greatest educational
gains can be made."
In the current economic climate, however, one of the key pieces of
Malloy's education platform - the expansion of preschool education -
will take some time to achieve, Malloy said.
"I wish I could do that on Day One, and I can't," he said, "but it's a
goal we will work at."
Connecticut spends about $74 million annually to subsidize preschool
programs in the state's neediest school districts, but the State
Department of Education estimates there is a need for about 13,000
additional slots for 3- and 4-year-olds in those districts - an
expansion that would cost more than $100 million.
Marsh, the third-party candidate, said he would try to make up part of
the loss of stimulus funds by working work with statewide union leaders
to negotiate wage freezes for school employees "rather than having 169
towns going through their own negotiations."
He also said any debate over building support for state school aid
should include discussions with labor leaders "on increasing
accountability and cost control."
For the next governor, the cost of education is just one piece of a
much bigger puzzle. The biggest immediate challenge will be to jump
start the economy, the candidates say.
"As soon as I resolve the structural imbalance in our budget and begin
work on an economic development plan that can reasonably predict
producing jobs, then [education] will once again be my highest
priority," Malloy said.
Foley said, "Too many people in our state are out of work or under
financial stress. . . . That's a more acute problem. That's a problem
people feel every day. Failing schools is more of a chronic problem. .
. .
"But long-term for the state," he said, "the economic future and
economic vitality of Connecticut depend on the performance in our
education system."
Towns fear a sharp decline in state
education assistance
Keith M. Phaneuf, CT MIROR
August 31, 2010
Though state government's impending fiscal woes are well-documented, a
new report shows local schools also face a financial hit 10 months from
now that could reverse efforts to increase education assistance.
In a briefing to candidates for state office, the Connecticut
Conference of Municipalities also noted that non-education programs
have dwindled to to what CCM regards as dangerously low levels.
But despite town leaders' pleas to be spared, gubernatorial candidates
and key lawmakers declined to offer that assurance Monday, pledging
only to consider options to mitigate the fiscal pain.
"The state is going to have to supplant an unprecedented amount of
money" in the next two-year budget cycle, CCM Executive Director James
Finley said Monday. "The biggest fear for the cities and towns is that
the state is not going to honor its funding commitment."
State government's "commitment" in this fiscal year's $19.01 billion
budget involves more than $2.8 billion in municipal grants, including
nearly $1.9 billion for the Education Cost Sharing program. But
the ECS grants have been supported this year and last by $271 million
in annual emergency federal stimulus aid set to expire in
2011-12. That annual figure is nearly 150 percent the size of the
$182.2 million ECS increase approved for 2007-08 - the largest in
Connecticut history - by Gov. M. Jodi Rell and the legislature.
ECS rose another $80.1 million in 2008-09 but has remained flat since
then. So if the expiring stimulus is not replaced, the 2007 education
initiative - which both Rell and legislators have hailed as one of the
top accomplishments of recent years - will have been entirely reversed.
"We're well aware there's a huge hole in ECS out there," Rep. John
Geragosian, D-New Britain, co-chairman of the Appropriations Committee,
said Monday. "But we're facing a crisis. I don't think we can guarantee
anything at this point."
"It's wise for municipalities to be concerned about what will happen in
the next budget. The state's revenue picture isn't really improving and
we face a nearly $3.5 billion deficit," said Rep. Craig Miner of
Litchfield, ranking House Republican on the Appropriations Committee,
referring to the $3.37 billion shortfall nonpartisan legislative
analysts are forecasting for the next fiscal year.
"I think it would be a big mistake for anyone to make promises to any
group," Senate Minority Leader John McKinney, R-Fairfield, said, adding
cities and towns can take steps right now to safeguard against a
potential cut in 2011-12.
Specifically, Connecticut schools benefited earlier this month when
Congress enacted a stimulus extension measure that provided an
additional $110 million to help avert teacher layoffs. But the
federal legislation gives school districts the option of spending the
funds any time between now and September 2011 - a deadline that comes
two months after Connecticut's 2011-12 fiscal year has begun. In
other words, school districts could hold those funds to mitigate any
cut in state ECS funds they might receive 10 months from now.
East Hartford Mayor Melody Currey, a former state legislator and
current president of CCM, said her community opted to sit on the extra
federal aid for exactly that reason. But Currey also said
encouraging communities to save today's windfall to guard against
tomorrow's fiscal rainy day won't solve the problem. That's
because cities and towns already have been facing cutbacks in state
aid, though not as large as the potential hit in school funds centered
in 2011-12.
State government's share of video slot revenues from Indian casinos has
slipped from $430.5 million in 2007 to a projected $367.8 million this
year, and the portion shared with towns has fallen from $91 million to
$61.8 million over the same period, according to state budget
records. In similar fashion, grants to mitigate property tax
revenues municipalities cannot collect on state land, colleges,
hospitals and manufacturing equipment, have fallen from $252.2 million
in 2007 to $235.8 million this year.
And while the $22 million allocated for municipal road maintenance is
the same level allocated in 2007, state government had provided as much
as $35 million per year for this purpose during the first half of the
past decade.
"We've taken hits everywhere on the town (non-education) side of the
budget," Currey said, adding that East Hartford's fire, police and town
hall staff all took pay cuts last fiscal year.
Democratic gubernatorial candidate Dan Malloy, who was Stamford's mayor
for 14 years through 2009, said that while he's well aware of the
fiscal challenges municipal leaders are facing, "I consider putting the
state's fiscal house in order to be top priority."
And though he declined to guarantee protection for any specific grant
program, Malloy said not averting at least a portion of the looming ECS
cut "would be devastating. It would endanger the future of
Connecticut's ability to compete with other states."
Republican gubernatorial candidate Tom Foley, who has pledged to
eliminate the largest state budget deficit in Connecticut history
without tax hikes, also declined through campaign spokeswoman Liz
Osborn to promise to spare any municipal grant from the budget axe.
"Tom is going to look at the budget as a whole," Osborn added. "But he
believes reductions should not be made at the expense of our children's
future."
Both
Foley and Malloy have said they are open to relieving certain mandates
on cities and towns. And while Foley is willing to consider CCM's
request to suspend binding arbitration to mitigate cuts in town grants,
Malloy prefers to open new revenue-raising options besides the property
tax to local governments.
Chester
First Selectman Tom Marsh, a third-party candidate for governor,
largely echoed their comments, saying that while he believes there is
little hope of sparing municipal aid from any cuts and also closing a
2011-12 state budget deficit that approaches 20 percent of current
spending, education aid should be touched last.
But
Marsh said he also believes it's time to allow communities to retain a
portion of the state taxes raised within their boundaries, particularly
the sales tax.
Officials challenge study showing
state's pension fund going broke
Keith M. Phaneuf, CT MIRROR
July 9, 2010
The Northwestern University study concluding that the pension funds of
Connecticut and 19 other states will be broke by 2025 is fundamentally
flawed, failing to account for future contributions to cover unfunded
liabilities, according to the National Association of State Retirement
Administrators.
And state Treasurer Denise L. Nappier said Thursday that while
Connecticut's state employee pension fund has been "chronically
underfunded" the state still is required through its benefits contract
with worker unions to both meet annual costs and save for future
liabilities.
The study, prepared by Professor Joshua D. Rauh of university's Kellogg
School of Management, estimated Connecticut would be one of the first
seven states to run out of funding, reaching that point by 2019.
"Rauh's financial analysis does not account for changes that have been
made and undoubtedly will continue to be made, that reduce public
pension liabilities and increase contributions from both employees and
employers," the association wrote in its analysis of the study.
"Although we share Professor Rauh's concern over the difficult
financial situation that state and local governments face in the
current economy, we do not believe his analysis or recommendations are
helpful for addressing the situation."
The association includes retirement fund administrators from all 50
states, four territories and from the District of Columbia.
Rauh could not be reached for comment Thursday.
At the heart of the disagreement is how states manage what is commonly
referred to as a pension program's "unfunded liability."
For example, Connecticut's pension fund had $19.2 billion worth of
obligations, or liabilities that eventually must be paid, not only to
just under 40,000 current retirees, but another 53,000 workers who also
will eventually draw benefits, according to its last actuarial
valuation. That report also found that fund had just under $10 billion,
or an amount equal to 52 percent of its liability. Actuaries typically
cite a funded liability of about 80 percent as a healthy ratio.
Annual contributions to the system are supposed to cover current
retirement benefit costs and to build up a savings to gradually erase
that unfunded liability over a 30-year period.
For more than two decades, governors and legislatures have routinely
approved annual contributions during tough fiscal times far below the
level recommended by plan analysts both to cover current retiree
expenses and to offset future costs. Between May 2009 when Gov. M. Jodi
Rell, state employee labor unions and the legislature approved a
concession package, and the end of this fiscal year next June, $314.5
million in pension fund contributions will have been deferred.
But even with those deferrals, Connecticut's annual contributions to
its fund still covered more than just that year's pension payments to
current retirees.
Actuaries recommended a $944 million contribution for this fiscal year,
with about $340 million going to cover current benefits. Even though
the contribution was reduced per the concession deal to $844 million in
the $19.01 billion overall state budget adopted in May, more than half
of that appropriation would go toward future benefit costs.
"The state employees' retirement fund has indeed been chronically
underfunded, but based upon a collectively bargained agreement between
the state and its unions, we are on a plan to pay up, over a period of
time, for the past practice of not adequately funding the retirement
system," Nappier wrote in a statement released Thursday. According to a
report prepared last month for a commission appointed by Rell to study
the fiscal challenges facing the state's retirement benefit system, the
pension system would be fully funded by 2040.
The Northwestern University study also challenged the approximately 8
percent return on investments this state and most others typically
count on in their projections. This reflects about three-quarters of
the historical average growth of the stock market since 1927, Rauh
argued in his study.
Connecticut assumed 8.25 percent in its 2008 actuarial analysis.
If Connecticut and other states assumed a more conservative, guaranteed
rate, closer to the 3 percent a U.S. Treasury security would yield,
Rauh wrote, their pension savings would be even more inadequate.
But Keith Brainard, research director for the association and one of
the authors of its rebuttal to the Rauh study, said public pension
funds with assets beyond $1 billion have a track record of their own
that supports their assumptions. These funds have enjoyed a median
return on their investments of 9.25 percent over the past 25 years, he
said.
In February Rell formed the Post-Employment Benefit Commission, a panel
of state budget and pension experts from management and labor charged
with charting a long-term strategy to improve the system's fiscal
health.
Office of Policy and Management Deputy Secretary Michael J. Cicchetti,
who chairs the commission, said after the Northwestern University study
was released that it underscores the need to investigate a broad range
of possible changes to a package of retirement benefits that critics of
state government have called too generous. The changes Cicchetti asked
the panel to analyze include shifting to a defined contribution system,
requiring pension recipients to pay more for health care, and
restricting access to health care for workers who leave state service
before they reach retirement age.
Under current law, workers with 10 years of state service remain
eligible for both a pension and health care even if they leave for
other jobs before reaching retirement age.
Nappier cautioned in her statement against overreacting to the fiscal
concerns facing the pension system.
The "Great Recession" and "uncertain recovery" will put added pressure
on state and local governments to meet pension obligations, she wrote.
"But the answer does not lie in reactionary policies that merely shift
the financial burden from the government to individuals who have earned
a benefit for a lifetime of public service."
The State Employees Bargaining Agent Coalition, which negotiates health
care and retirement benefits for all state employee unions in
Connecticut, said the association analysis invalidated Rauh's study,
adding that suggestions like replacing state pensions with a defined
contribution plan - similar to the 401 (k) commonly found in the
private sector - does not make economic sense.
"We know that when taxpayers pay into a pension fund, they get a
four-to-one return back into the economy as retirement income," said
veteran state union leader Salvatore Luciano, who serves both on the
bargaining agent coalition and on Rell's study commission. "Pensions
are good for workers and they are good for the economy. Pensions are
not the problem."
Study
says state employee pension fund will be broke by 2019
Keith M. Phaneuf, CT MIRROR
June 30, 2010
Connecticut is one of seven states that will run out of money to pay
state employee pensions over the next decade, coming up short in 2019
due to poor savings habits and generous guaranteed benefit levels,
according to a recent study by Northwestern University.
And Connecticut's pension fund could become insolvent sooner than that,
according to Joshua D. Rauh, an associate professor of finance at the
university's Kellogg School of Management, if the 8 percent return on
investments this state and most others typically count on are not
realized in the near future.
The collapse also could be accelerated by retirement incentive programs
and deferred annual contributions -- two fiscal shortcuts Gov. M. Jodi
Rell and the General Assembly have employed over the past two years to
mitigate tax hikes and programmatic spending cuts.
"States face the risk that higher inflation and low asset returns could
make their systems even more vulnerable," Rauh wrote. "State
governments face a choice between taking more risk today and funding
the liabilities to a greater extent."
Pension woes are nothing new for Connecticut. For more than two
decades, governors and legislatures have routinely approved annual
contributions to pension accounts far below the level recommended by
fiscal analysts to cover current retiree expenses and begin saving to
offset future costs.
Connecticut, like most states, provides a defined benefit pension plan,
meaning it promises its workers a specific annual payment once they
retire. By comparison, the most common plans in the private sector
involve defined contributions. Under these, employees save for their
own retirement, making investments often matched in part or full by
their employer.
According to its last, full actuarial valuation, the pension fund had
$19.2 billion worth of obligations and held just under $10 billion in
assets, or about 52 percent of its liability.
In February Rell formed the Post-Employment Benefit Commission, a panel
of state budget and pension experts from management and labor charged
with charting a long-term strategy to improve the system's fiscal
health.
"This study just underscores the reason why the governor put together
the commission," Office of Policy and Management Deputy Secretary
Michael J. Cicchetti, who chairs the commission, said this week. "It
also underscores the fact that we cannot sit back and do nothing. We
have to get our arms around this and make some real changes."
Cicchetti has urged the panel to investigate a broad range of possible
changes to a package of retirement benefits that critics of state
government have called too generous. The changes include shifting to a
defined contribution system, requiring pension recipients to pay more
for health care, and restricting access to health care for workers who
leave state service before they reach retirement age.
Under current law, workers with 10 years of state service remain
eligible for both a pension and health care even if they leave for
other jobs before reaching retirement age.
A new report submitted last week to the commission by a Kennesaw,
Ga.-based actuary and health care consultant showed Connecticut's
problem has worsened due in part to a 2009 retirement incentive program
that saved $110 million that year. Further complicating matters, the
governor and legislature have ordered $314.5 million in union-approved
reductions to pension fund contributions to squeeze through tight
fiscal straits over the past two years and in fiscal year that starts
July 1.
Connecticut, like most states, also is vulnerable because it assumes a
healthy return on what money it does invest in its pension program.
Most states rely on 8 percent or more -- Connecticut assumed 8.25
percent in its 2008 actuarial analysis. This is based largely on the
historical average growth of the stock market since 1927.
If Connecticut and other states assumed a more conservative, guaranteed
rate, closer to the 3 percent a U.S. Treasury security would yield,
Rauh wrote, their pension savings would be even more inadequate.
According to Rauh, under the current scenario Illinois would the first
state to face pension-fund insolvency, going belly up in 2018.
Connecticut, Indiana and New Jersey would follow one year later,
followed by Hawaii, Louisiana and Oklahoma in 2020.
By 2025, 20 state funds will have run out of money, according to Rauh.
By 2030, 31 state funds will be broke. And because the problem is so
widespread, he added, taxpayers will find it increasingly challenging
to avoid the burden simply by moving to other states.
"There seems to be a high likelihood that future generations will have
to bear the substantial burden of making up pension benefits for
previous generations of state employees," Rauh wrote. "While citizens
of states that are particularly hard-hit by the pension crisis may be
able to escape to other states, an acceleration of this demographic
phenomenon would leave a dwindling taxpayer base behind in the states
facing the largest liabilities."
State's
job
recovery picture
grim; New report predicts
continuing losses at least through 2011, while recovery could be five
years off
By Lee Howard Day Staff Writer
Article published Feb
10, 2010
Connecticut, which has been losing jobs for the past two years, won't
start recovering them any time soon, according to a new economic report
released today. The quarterly report from the Connecticut Center
for Economic Analysis predicts that the state will continue losing jobs
at least through the end of 2011, probably even longer. Fred
Carstensen, who directs the economic analysis center at the University
of Connecticut, said Tuesday that eastern Connecticut may not see job
growth for another five years or more.
"We don't have a particularly coherent economic-development strategy
(in Connecticut)," Carstensen said in a phone interview. "Forty-nine
states have done better (on jobs) over the last 20 years."
What's more, "no jobs recovery is in sight," according to the report by
senior research fellow Peter E. Gunther, with the only good news being
a predicted slowdown in the pace of decline. But an accelerating
employment slump forecast at the end of 2011, which is as far out as
the report goes, suggests that "job losses will continue into 2012 and
perhaps beyond."
Such a sustained period of job losses would put Connecticut on a pace
to exceed the 39-month recovery time required before employment figures
started trending up after the 2002-03 recession.
Another recession in the early 1990s required a nearly two-year
recovery period. Before the 1990s, Connecticut's recovery from
recessions took 10 months or less, according to the report.
Gunther's report said the lag in jobs recovery indicates a systemic
problem related to structural changes in the state's economy and
increased outsourcing of work to other states and countries.
Carstensen said Connecticut appears to be more affected by outsourcing
than other states. It's a phenomenon, he said, that creates the
illusion of economic growth - through greater profits for companies -
even as it fails to deliver more jobs. The report said more than
55,000 jobs were lost statewide in the past decade, a period that
included strong economic growth as well as two recessions.
"Even strong growth in (the economy in general) may not translate into
rapid improvement in employment," the report said.
In eastern Connecticut, said Carstensen, workers can no longer count on
the continual expansion of the region's two casinos and would be better
served by playing off the strengths of Pfizer Inc.'s pharmaceutical
research site in Groton to attract biomedical and biotech companies.
"Pfizer is a real magnet," he said.
But Carstensen said Connecticut doesn't have a particularly aggressive
approach toward attracting growing businesses. Instead, the state takes
an old-fashioned, "scatter-shot" approach in going after individual
companies rather than certain types of businesses that can be clustered
together to take advantage of common skill sets.
"Unless the state adopts policies and makes strategic investments to
change this progressively deteriorating pattern, a jobs recovery may
never arrive," Gunther said in his report. "To change this pattern,
government investments must be more than countercyclical Band-Aids."
Gunther, in an interview Tuesday, said new businesses devoted to the
knowledge economy and alternative-energy solutions should be promoted
to generate long-term jobs growth. Among the businesses Connecticut
should encourage, he said, are those related to stem-cell research,
electric-car production and wind and solar power.
At the same time, he said, "Connecticut must pay a little attention to
the firms they've (already) got." He added that the state needs to do a
better job of retaining educated people with specialized skills, such
as scientists laid off from Pfizer who have expertise in biotechnology.
The report said two business sectors - the finance, insurance and real
estate fields as well as manufacturing - have been the bright spots in
the state's economic performance. But Gunther sees a "critical
weakening" in these sectors because of a rise in outsourcing.
"Neither will generate net new jobs for the state," the report said.
A state budget crisis makes this year a difficult one in which to
address Connecticut's ebbing jobs growth, Gunther noted, but something
needs to be done to stem the employment tide. Carstensen took heart in
the likelihood that new jobs initiatives would be tackled in the coming
legislative session and would be pushed by various gubernatorial
candidates.
"At the very time that it is hardest to take the steps central to
driving a fundamental structural change in the state's economy is
exactly when, because of the unique characteristics of Connecticut's
economy, it is most needed," Gunther said in his report.
COUNTERSUIT:
Computer Firm Owner
Awarded $18 Million In Countersuit Against State
Hartford Courant
By DAVE ALTIMARI and EDMUND H. MAHONY
January 30, 2010
A case that started with the attorney general promising to recoup state
money from an East Hartford computer company could end up costing the
state more than $18 million instead.
In a stunning verdict Friday, a jury at Superior Court in Waterbury
sided with Gina Malapanis, owner of Computers Plus Center Inc., that
state officials had violated her or her company's civil rights and
ruined her business with false claims that she had broken her state
contract.
The long-running court battle began in 2003 when the state sued
Computers Plus Center Inc., seeking $1.75 million in damages. At the
time, Attorney General Richard Blumenthal said that, for more than 10
years, the company had been selling the state computers that lacked the
proper parts.
Computers Plus had already sold the state thousands of machines when in
2003 Gregg "Rock" Regan, then head of the state Department of
Information Technology, said the company sold the state 44 computers
that did not work.
State officials said the proper memory chip was not installed and that
generic chips were used instead. When Regan's office did an internal
audit of other computers sold to the state by Computers Plus it found
that the computers were missing a second network interface card.
At that point Blumenthal filed the civil lawsuit and state police began
investigating the company.
Police arrested Malapanis, of Hebron, in June 2004 and charged her with
first-degree larceny for allegedly bilking the state of more than
$300,000.
On the day of Malapanis' arrest, Blumenthal said: "My office will
continue to vigorously pursue our lawsuit against Computers Plus Center
and its owner to recover money that the state alleges was wrongfully
charged. I remain determined to win a full and fair recovery" of
taxpayer money.
But the criminal charges were later dropped, and Malapanis filed a
countersuit against Regan and the state claiming the state had denied
her civil rights and ruined her business.
It was her countersuit that the jury ruled on Friday in awarding
Malapanis about $18 million. The trial was before Judge Barry Stevens.
The status of the state's civil suit against Malapanis was unclear
Friday.
Attorney James Wade of Hartford, who represented Malapanis, would not
comment on the verdict.
Blumenthal said the state will fight the multimillion-dollar award.
"This verdict against the Department of Information Technology is
wrong, inconsistent with law and evidence presented at trial," he said.
"I will vigorously and aggressively fight to reverse this flawed
finding. We will immediately ask the court to throw out the award and
verdict as a matter of law. If the verdict stands, we will appeal."
Copyright © 2010, The Hartford Courant
MUTUALLY SHARED SERVICES
FORUM: CT Regional Economic Development
Thursday, January 15, 2010 at CCSU, discussions among municipal
officials, planners (APACT), OPM, CARPO, ACIR and more organizations,
we suspect (we saw CCM there). CT-N videotaped the keynote and
the opening session on affordable housing.
OPM Secretary Bob Genuario gave that keynote address; it was
noted that the "Rainy Day" fund was appropriately emptied out ($1.4
billion) in October, similarly to the $600,000 spent in one night at a
previous crisis point some years back. The next 2-year budget
will be written without any "Rainy Day" or Federal "Stimulous" money to
fall back upon. The good news is that we are in better shape than
California, Michigan, Massachusetts and a host of other states - we
should benefit if and when any new programs from DC come along...
"Oz" Griebel addresses planners and business persons regarding regional
economic development "break-out" session panel. "Over the next
four years" Mr. Griebel suggests that policies change to encourage
business; Joint Development the only way to go, with
overbearing COG not the answer, says another presenter. Old
mills, small town revitalization also discussed. It is pointed
out that "CEDS" are in 8 areas in CT covering 138 towns, but that 30
plus other communities are not so organized. This makes
for a fragmented-looking state and less likely, thus, to attract
Federal $$ - that's the way we heard it!
Where
will Dodd's money go?
DAY
David Collins
Article
published Jan 8, 2010
Certainly Chris Dodd's cozy approach to landing campaign contributions
from big banking interests was part of his political undoing. And
so
now, in the wake of Dodd's departure from the Connecticut Senate race,
the $2.1 million question is: Where will all that campaign money go?
Actually, there could be more than $2 million. That's how much the Dodd
campaign had on hand at the end of the last reporting period. The new
tally, including money raised and spent in the final months of 2009,
won't be in until later this month.
I put a call in Thursday to the senator's press office, to ask whether
any plans have been made for emptying the war chest, now that the
candidate has left the battlefield. No one responded to a message
inquiring about the money. I'm sure they're busy, or maybe just no
longer interested in answering calls from the press.
The former candidate has some choices in what he can legally do with
the money, but none of them include keeping it for his own personal
use. He can return it, of course, but evidently that isn't done
very
often in these situations. It's a bookkeeping headache for one thing,
especially when it gets down to the small donor level. Some might
also
suggest that it is vaguely impolite, returning something that's been
given to you, no matter how businesslike the arrangement might have
seemed.
And, really, giving the bank back its PAC money seems almost as
unseemly as taking it in the first place. He can give it to
charity.
This seems like a sensible option, almost like laundering it.
Picking the charities that would appeal to all your original donors
might be challenging, though. According to the Center for Responsive
Politics, Dodd's top four contributors since 2005 were Citigroup, SAC
Capital Partners, United Technologies and the Royal Bank of Scotland.
Who do bankers usually give money to, other than politicians?
He can also give it to other candidates. This seems reasonable,
since
it's money the donors intended to be used in support of a political
campaign in the first place. Attorney General Richard Blumenthal,
already the pick of much of the party establishment to succeed Dodd,
would be a likely recipient. But would Blumenthal be foolish
enough to
take the same money that helped sink the Dodd candidacy? At best it
would seem jinxed.
He can also leave it right where it is, evidently forever. This
is
perhaps the most likely scenario. It is in fact what a lot of
retiring
congressmen have done when they've turned to new careers in lobbying.
What better way to ingratiate yourself with the old cloakroom gang than
to parcel out baubles from the old campaign days?
If Dodd's press office did call back Thursday, I would have expected
them to say no decisions have been made yet about what to do with the
campaign money. After all, the senator did only just drop out of the
race Wednesday. Still, I don't expect any announcements about the
Dodd
campaign money for a long time, maybe long after people even remember
how mad they once were at the chairman of the banking bailout.
3
Democrats — 2 senators, 1 governor —
to retire
YAHOO
By LIZ SIDOTI, AP National Political Writer
January 6, 2010
WASHINGTON – With the 2010 election year barely under way, two senators
and one governor — all Democrats — ditched plans to run for re-election
in the latest signs of trouble for President Barack Obama's party.
Taken together, the decisions by Sens. Chris Dodd of Connecticut and
Byron Dorgan of North Dakota as well as Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter
caused another bout of heartburn for Democrats as they struggle to
defend themselves in a sour political environment for incumbents,
particularly the party in charge.
As 2009 ended, Democrats watched a string of their House members
announce retirements and one congressman defect to the GOP.
Now, with Dodd, Dorgan and Ritter out, Republicans have even more to
crow about, if not better opportunities to pick up Democratic-held
seats.
Democrats, who have a 60-40 Senate majority that includes two
independents who vote with them, now will have to defend four open
seats in the Senate. The others are Delaware and Illinois, where Sens.
Ted Kaufman, who replaced Vice President Joe Biden, and Roland Burris,
who replaced Obama, aren't running for full terms.
Among governors, Democrats are seeking to maintain their 26-24 majority
in a year when those elected will oversee the redrawing of
congressional and legislative districts for the next decade.
Republicans and Democrats alike say they now expect competitive races
for the Senate seat in North Dakota, a GOP-tilting state, and the
governor's seat in Colorado, a pivotal swing state that has trended
toward Democrats in recent years but may be shifting back toward
Republicans.
But in Democratic-leaning Connecticut, Dodd's retirement may actually
heighten the likelihood that the seat he's held for five terms will
remain in Democratic hands. The party can now recruit a more popular
candidate to run, bolstering the prospects of thwarting a Republican
victory.
Longtime
Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal told The Associated
Press on Wednesday morning that he will run for Dodd's seat.
Blumenthal, a Democrat, is seen as one of the state's most popular
politicians. He planned to publicly announce his candidacy later
Wednesday.
Considered by many insiders to be the most endangered Senate Democrat,
Dodd planned to announce his retirement Wednesday, according to
Democratic officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity because
they weren't authorized to publicly pre-empt the senator's remarks.
Dodd told Democrats of his plans late Tuesday.
Dodd, 66, is chairman of Senate Banking Committee, which was at the
center of efforts to deal with the economic meltdown. And he has played
a prominent role in the debate over overhauling health care, taking
over for his friend Ted Kennedy during his illness and then after his
death. Dodd underwent surgery for prostate cancer in August; he said it
was in an early, treatable stage.
His poll standing has fallen precipitously since 2008.
Dodd ran for the Democratic presidential nomination that year, moving
his family to Iowa for weeks before the caucuses and angering
Connecticut constituents. He dropped out after a poor showing in Iowa.
The senator also has drawn criticism for his role in writing a bill
that protected bonuses for executives at bailed-out insurer American
International Group Inc. and for allegations he got favorable treatment
on mortgages with Countrywide Financial Corp.
Early polling in the race showed him consistently trailing potential
GOP challenger Rob Simmons, a former House member who is competing for
the Republican nomination against World Wrestling Entertainment
co-founder Linda McMahon.
Dorgan, the chairman of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee and a
member of the Senate Democratic leadership, said Tuesday he reached his
decision after discussing his future with family over the holidays.
"Although I still have a passion for public service and enjoy my work
in the Senate, I have other interests and I have other things I would
like to pursue outside of public life," said Dorgan, 67.
The move stunned Democrats.
They were confident heading into the new year that Dorgan, a moderate
Democrat in a GOP-leaning state, would run for re-election even as
rumors intensified that Republican Gov. John Hoeven would challenge him
in November. Early polling showed Dorgan trailing Hoeven in a
hypothetical contest, and Democrats expected a competitive race if the
matchup materialized.
Hoeven has not announced a candidacy but he told The Associated Press
on Tuesday that he was "very seriously" considering one.
Democrats quickly started recruiting a candidate to run in Dorgan's
place. Democratic Rep. Earl Pomeroy may be interested as well as Heidi
Heitkamp, a former state attorney general and tax commissioner who was
defeated by Hoeven in the 2000 gubernatorial race.
In Colorado, Democratic officials informed Tuesday of Ritter's decision
said the governor planned to announce Wednesday that he won't run for a
second term in November.
Elected in 2006, Ritter was among those Democrats who helped the party
make inroads into what was once a solidly Republican state. He helped
pave the way for Obama to win Colorado in 2008 and had been widely
considered a rising star in the Democratic Party.
Top contenders to replace Ritter on the Democratic ticket include
Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar and
former House Speaker Andrew Romanoff.
Two Republicans are seeking the GOP nomination: former Rep. Scott
McInnis and businessman Dan Maes.
Senators Up for Election in 2010
Line Up for 2010
Senate Races
16 Democratic seats
Evan Bayh (IN)
Michael Bennett (CO)
Barbara Boxer (CA)
Christopher Dodd (CT)
Byron Dorgan (ND)
Russell Feingold (WI)
Daniel Inouye (HI)
Ted Kaufman (DE) - retiring
Patrick Leahy (VT)
Blanche Lincoln (AR)
Mikulski Barbara (MD)
Patty Murray (WA)
Harry Reid (NV)
Charles Schumer (NY)
Senator replacing Barack Obama (IL)
Senator replacing Hillary Clinton (NY)
19 Republican seats
Robert Bennett (UT)
Christopher Bond (MO) - retiring
Sam Brownback (KS) - retiring
Jim Bunning (KY)
Richard Burr (NC)
Tom Coburn (OK)
Mike Crapo (ID)
Jim DeMint (SC)
Chuck Grassley (IA)
Judd Gregg (NH)
Johnny Isakson (GA)
Mel Martinez (FL) - retiring
John McCain (AZ)
Lisa Murkowski (AK)
Richard Shelby (AL)
Arlen Specter (PA)
John Thune (SD)
David Vitter (LA)
George Voinovich (OH) - retiring
Source: Council for a
Livable World
House
overrides veto, adds $3 million to public funding for governor
By Mark Pazniokas and Keith M. Phaneuf,
CT MIRROR
August 13, 2010
The House of Representatives voted
106 to 30 today override a veto of a bill that preserves the state's
public financing of campaigns and doubles the general-election grant
for gubernatorial candidates. Today's vote means that Dan Malloy, a
Democrat and the only remaining publicly financed candidate for
governor, can expect to receive $6 million next week from the Citizens'
Election Program, instead of $3 million.
“Today, the Legislature saw fit to
preserve a system that gives candidates who aren’t wealthy a chance to
compete and the ability to run a campaign that isn't funded by
corporate and special interests,” Malloy said in a statement emailed to
reporters.
When
the bill originally passed on July 30, legislators did not know if the
bill would favor a Democrat, a Republican or neither.
The only publicly financed
Republican candidate for governor, Michael C. Fedele, lost the GOP
primary Tuesday to Tom Foley, a Greenwich businessman who loaned his
own campaign $3 million. In the Democratic primary, Malloy defeated Ned
Lamont, who gave his own campaign $8.6 million. House Minority Leader Lawrence F. Cafero
Jr., R-Norwalk, said the bill was wrongly titled as An Act Concerned
Clean Elections. It should have been called "An Act Concerning Dan
Malloy," Cafero said.
"In my 18 years in the House of
Representatives," Cafero said, he could not recall "the House passing a
bill for one man."
A unified Democratic caucus cast all
106 yea votes, five more than needed to override Gov. M. Jodi Rell's
veto. The Senate voted to override last week.
Rep. Shawn W. Johnston of Thompson
was the only one of the 114 House Democrats to vote against the
override. Seven others were absent. All 29 Republicans present voted to
uphold the override. Eight others were absent.
Eleven of the 18 Democrats who voted
against the bill last month swtiched to override. They are:
Jason W. Bartlett of Bethel, Juan R.
Candelaria of New Haven, Paul Davis of Orange, Kim Fawcett of
Fairfield, Karen Jarmoc of Enfield, Christopher Lyddy of Newtown, Corky
Mazurek of Wolcott, Steven Mikutel of Griswold, Frank N. Nicastro Sr.
of Bristol, Kathleen M. Tallarita of Enfield and Elissa T. Wright of
Noank.
The bill is a reaction to a court
decision that otherwise limits the available public financing for
governor, not the result of lobbying by the Malloy campaign. But some Republicans intend to make
Malloy pay a political price for accepting more money from the
Citizens' Election Program in the midst of a fiscal crisis.
"The fact that Dan Malloy is
rattling his tin cup outside the legislature is absurd. Dan Malloy
should be ashamed of himself," said Chris Healy, the Republican state
chairman.
Healy stood outside the chamber
before the vote with a tin cup, affixed with Malloy's name and photo.
It contained coins and a dollar bill. Beth Rotman, the executive director of
the Citizens' Election Program, confronted Healy, who told her he would
continue to work for the abolition of the program. Nancy DiNardo, the Democratic state
chairwoman, had offered Healy a deal on limiting campaign expenses.
"If Healy really feels so strongly
about limiting the amount of money going into the Citizens' Election
Program, here's an idea: if he can convince Tom Foley to abide by a $3
million spending limit in the general, I'm quite certain that I can get
Dan Malloy to do the same," she said. "We'll wait for his answer."
Under existing law, Malloy would
have ended up with $5.5 million in public financing for the year: $2.5
million for the primary and $3 million for the general election. Rell vetoed the bill shortly after
passage, saying $3 million was sufficient for a general-election
campaign. But no candidate has won with so little general-election
money in recent decades. Rell spent $4 million on her 2006 campaign,
while Gov. John G. Rowland spent $6.6 million in 2002 and $6.9 million
in 1998.
The Senate overrode Rell's veto five
days before the primary, but the House was unable to round up the 101
votes necessary for an override until this week. The delay put the House in the position
of passing a bill with a provision that benefits only Malloy.
"That perception is terrible," said
Rep. John Hetherington, R-New Canaan. "The conclusions that people will
draw from that are terrible."
Several of the Democrats who
switched defended their votes, knowing that Republicans may use them
against them in re-election campaigns.
"I wanted to make my decision based
on policy," Rep. Jason W. Bartlett, D-Bethel, said afterward,
explaining why he reversed his earlier position and supported the
override today. Leaving publicly financed candidates with no option to
counter a self-funded opponent who spends huge dollars late in the race
"really hobbles anyone participating in the program."
Bartlett added that the legislation
enacted today isn't perfect, ‘but time is running out. Much of my
consideration was about timing and coming up with a fair process."
Another Democrat who switched
positions to support the override, Frank N. Nicastro Sr. of Bristol,
said he feared the entire campaign finance system enacted in 2005 to
clean up state elections was in jeopardy if nothing was done.
"We needed to do this today to move
this whole thing forward," he said. "We can work on it some more in the
session next year."
Nicastro disagreed with Republicans
who argued most voters would disagree with increasing public grants for
gubernatorial candidates. "I truly did a lot of soul searching and
talked to a lot of my constituents," he said, adding Bristol residents
want to see the current campaign finance system preserved. "They said,
‘Frank, do what you have to do.'"
But Cafero said afterward that the
Democrats' intentions will be obvious to the voters.
"I think the people are going to see
it for what it was," he said. "The primary substance of this bill was
an act concerning Dan Malloy, and no one else."
Two
courts hand down contradictory rulings on public financing
CT MIRROR
By Mark
Pazniokas and Keith M. Phaneuf
July 13, 2010
In a dizzying
one-two punch of state and federal court decisions today,
the public financing of campaigns in Connecticut was upheld, but key
provisions that could affect the race for governor were invalidated.
A federal
appeals court ruled that the state cannot give supplemental
grants triggered by an opponent's spending, while a state judge
separately denied a motion to bar Republican gubernatorial candidate
Michael C. Fedele from receiving $2.18 million in public financing.
Fedele's grant
includes money that the federal court says was
inappropriately given, but there is no legal prohibition on him from
spending the $2.18 million awarded to him last week by the State
Elections Enforcement Commission under the Citizens' Election Program,
part of sweeping campaign finance reforms passed in 2005.
Superior Court
Judge Julia L. Aurigemma today denied a request by
Fedele's GOP rivals, Tom Foley and Oz Griebel, for a temporary
injunction stopping him from spending his public grant. Foley
immediately appealed to the Connecticut Supreme Court.
"We are
disappointed in the judge's decision today, but we look forward
to a trial on the merits of these issues and plan to appeal this
preliminary ruling," said Justin Clark, Foley's campaign manager.
The U.S. Court
of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit issued two decisions
today in response to a ruling nearly a year ago by U.S. District Court
Judge Stefan Underhill, who declared the public financing law
unconstitutional, saying it discriminated against minor parties. It
overturned Underhill on several issues and returned the case to him for
further action.
The appellate
court found no discrimination against minor parties, but
it concluded that a bar on contributions and solicitations by lobbyists
and their spouses violated free-speech rights under the First Amendment.
Most
significantly for candidates seeking public financing, the
appellate court negated an order by Underhill that would have imposed
an injunction on the program until all its constitutional defects were
cured by legislative action.
"Underhill's
decision would have padlocked the program completely,"
said Beth Rotman, director of the Citizens' Election Program.
She praised the
state court and said the state will immediately seek a
stay from the U.S. Supreme Court of the federal decision, citing the
impact on statewide primaries for governor that are less than a month
away.
Gov. M. Jodi
Rell said the legislature should quickly alter the law to
comport with the federal decision, which Attorney General Richard
Blumenthal says leaves most of the public financing program intact
"Today's
decisions uphold significant provisions of the Citizens
Election Program and the state's ban on political contributions by
state contractors, but strike down bans against lobbyist donations and
solicitations of contributions. The decisions also strike the provision
providing additional funding to candidates when an opponent spends
beyond a publicly financed candidate's threshold," Blumenthal said.
The court
decision does not affect the ability of candidates' to seek
and obtain public financing, but it bars them from obtaining
supplemental grants triggered by an opponent's excessive spending, a
long-term complication to the campaigns of the two publicly financed
candidates for governor, Fedele and Democrat Dan Malloy.
"Today's
decision is just one step in a long process, a process that I
am confident will result in Connecticut's public financing law
remaining in place. In the short-term, the decision has no impact on
the primary election I'm engaged in - I'm as confident as ever that
we're going win on August 10th because this campaign represents values
and experience that money can't buy," Malloy said.
The campaign of
Democrat Ned Lamont, who has opted out of the voluntary
public financing program to use his own wealth and privately raised
funds, had no comment on either court decision.
"This was a
frivolous lawsuit," Fedele said of the action initiated by
Foley and joined by Griebel. "It was Tom Foley trying to silence me."
Fedele said he
that tomorrow he will launch a media campaign, including
television advertisements, and that he plans to spend all $2 million in
public funds available to him in less than one month. The gubernatorial
primaries arer Aug. 10.
"We have a plan
and we are ready to go," Fedele said, predicting
Foley's lawsuit and planned appeal would weaken his standing with
voters. "While Tom Foley spends his time with his lawyers, I'll be
spending it with the people of Connecticut."
Foley's
campaign issued a statement expressing its disappointment with
the federal decision. It had no immediate comment on the rejection of
its request for an injunction.
The
supplemental grants were not a factor in legislative races two
years ago, when only one legislative candidate was given an extra grant
of a few hundred dollars.
"Campaign
finance is alive and well," Rell said.
But the court
struck down a ban on contributions by lobbyists, a
provision demanded by Rell over the warnings of lawyers that it might
be unconstitutional. The court found that the state made compelling
case to restrict the free-speech rights of lobbyists.
"I'm
disappointed to say the least," that bans on lobbyist
contributions, and on the ability of lobbyists and contractors to
solicit contributions for candidates from their clients, were struck
down, Rell said. "I still think that whatever we could do to keep
special interests out of campaigns I would support."
House Speaker
Christopher G. Donovan, D-Meriden, and Senate President
Pro Tem Donald E. Williams Jr., D-Brooklyn, were reviewing their
options for a special session consider legislative fixes. Still,
Donovan found the overall decision good news for advocates of public
financing.
"We came out on
top," he said. "We kept the public financing."
The governor
said she believes the legislature should act quickly in
special session to resolve the lobbyist contribution issue, suggesting
a $100 limit. That was the legal advice Rell rejected in 2005, when the
campaign finance reforms were passed.
"I think it
would be very simple for the legislature to put the same
threshold in place that they put for everyone else," she said. "I think
that would be an easy fix."
"I believe
campaign finance reform works," she said. "I support it. I
believe that the Republicans would benefit from campaign finance reform
because I think it helps to level the playing field."
By late
afternoon, advocates of public financing were pressing legislative
leaders to act quickly.
"The enactment
of Connecticut's reform was one of Connecticut's
proudest moments," said Tom Swan, executive director of the Connecticut
Citizen Action Group. "It is time for the legislature to act. This late
in the election cycle it is important for the legislature to clarify
the rules under which people are running in the fall. We call on the
legislature to come into special session to enact a fix."
"Connecticut
voters overwhelmingly support the landmark Citizens'
Election Program," said Cheri Quickmire, executive director of Common
Cause. "The legislature and the Governor should act quickly to amend
the program to comply with the court ruling. Candidates are mid-stream
and the primary is weeks away."
In the race for
governor, the ability of Fedele to collect a further
supplemental grant triggered by the spending of Tom Foley seems in
question. The appellate court struck down that provision.
Malloy already
has collected and, presumably spent, a supplemental
grant of $1.25 million triggered by the spending of his opponent in the
race for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination, Ned Lamont. Fedele
received a basic grant of $1.25 million and a supplemental grant of
$937,500.
Based on
Foley's continued spending, Fedele was expected to seek and receive
another $312,500.
Opponents and
supporters of public financing praised the mixed federal decision.
"Connecticut's
so-called Citizens Election Program is fatally flawed
and should be repealed. The law's perverse incentives, convoluted
logic, and unconstitutional provisions have already had a shameful
impact on this year's elections, regardless of which candidates
ultimately are nominated and elected," said Fergus Cullen of the Yankee
Institute.
But Secretary
of the State Susan Bysieiwcz credited public financing
for a 12-year high in the number of candidates running for General
Assembly. She said public financing has encouraged that trend.
"Candidates for
state office in Connecticut still need clarity on the
rules for raising and spending campaign funds, and I hope we soon get
the clarity we all seek," she said. "We must not forget the big
picture, which is that we need to stay committed to concept of clean
elections in Connecticut."
CT
budget woes threaten Campaign Finance Reform here in Connecticut!
Supreme Court rolls back limits on
spending by corporations in federal election campaigns
Hartford Courant
MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press Writer
10:19 AM EST, January 21, 2010
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court has ruled that corporations may
spend freely to support or oppose candidates for president and
Congress, easing decades-old limits on their participation in federal
campaigns.
By a 5-4 vote, the court on Thursday overturned a 20-year-old ruling
that said corporations can be prohibited from using money from their
general treasuries to pay for their own campaign ads. The decision,
which almost certainly will also allow labor unions to participate more
freely in campaigns, threatens similar limits imposed by 24 states.
It leaves in place a prohibition on direct contributions to candidates
from corporations and unions.
Critics of the stricter limits have argued that they amount to an
unconstitutional restraint of free speech, and the court majority
apparently agreed.
"The censorship we now confront is vast in its reach," Justice Anthony
Kennedy said in his majority opinion, joined by his four more
conservative colleagues.
However, Justice John Paul Stevens, dissenting from the main holding,
said, "The court's ruling threatens to undermine the integrity of
elected institutions around the nation."
Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor joined
Stevens' dissent, parts of which he read aloud in the courtroom.
The justices also struck down part of the landmark McCain-Feingold
campaign finance bill that barred union- and corporate-paid issue ads
in the closing days of election campaigns.
Advocates of strong campaign finance regulations have predicted that a
court ruling against the limits would lead to a flood of corporate and
union money in federal campaigns as early as this year's midterm
congressional elections.
The decision, written by Justice Anthony Kennedy, removes limits on
independent expenditures that are not coordinated with candidates'
campaigns.
The case also does not affect political action committees, which
mushroomed after post-Watergate laws set the first limits on
contributions by individuals to candidates. Corporations, unions and
others may create PACs to contribute directly to candidates, but they
must be funded with voluntary contributions from employees, members and
other individuals, not by corporate or union treasuries.
Mass
Vote Signals End of an O-ra
NYPOST
By MICHAEL BARONE
Last Updated: 8:56 AM, January 18, 2010
Posted: 1:17 AM, January 18, 2010
Year one of the Obama administration ends Wednesday. Another era may
come to an end the day before, when Massachusetts voters choose a
senator to fill the three years remaining in the term of Edward
Kennedy, who held the seat for 47 years.
If Republican Scott Brown wins that election -- and he seems to have an
excellent chance to do so -- that election will mean the end, after
just seven months, of the Democrats' 60-seat Senate supermajority.
That era began in July, when Al Franken was seated after protracted
litigation over the result in an election in which both he and
incumbent Republican Norm Coleman got an underwhelming 42 percent of
the votes. And Franken was the 60th Democrat only because in the
preceding April Arlen Specter, in his 29th year in the Senate and
facing defeat in the Republican primary, switched parties for the
second time in his political career.
Going back a little further, Democrats owed their 60 seats to the
victories in 2006 of Jon Tester by 3,562 votes in Montana and Jim Webb
by 9,329 votes in Virginia. In the 435 House races each year, close
races tend to be split evenly between the parties. But in the 30-some
Senate races in each cycle, a small number of votes can make a huge
difference in the balance of power in that chamber.
So the Democrats' supermajority was the result of a series of happy (or
unhappy, depending on your point of view) accidents. The same was true
of the 55-45 majority the GOP held three years ago.
The very real possibility that the Democrats may lose their 60th seat
-- and in Massachusetts, the only state George McGovern carried in 1972
-- suggests that it was perhaps not such a happy accident for them in
the end.
Barack Obama got 62 percent of the vote in Massachusetts in 2008. His
percentage was lower in 42 other states. With the Massachusetts seat in
jeopardy, no Senate seat in those 42 states can be considered utterly
safe for Democrats in today's climate of opinion.
That climate might have been different if Democrats had never gotten
that 60th seat. In that case, they would've had to bargain with
Republicans to pass a health-care bill and might even have proceeded on
the genuine bipartisan approach that Obama promised in his campaign.
We might have been spared the spectacle of the Louisiana purchase ($300
million for Mary Landrieu's vote) and the Cornhusker hustle (Ben Nelson
got Nebraska exempted from Medicaid increases). Or at least the onus of
such spectacles would fall on Republicans as well as Democrats.
But with 60 seats, the Democratic leadership took the partisan path and
the Obama White House supinely went along. They ignored the abundant
evidence that most voters increasingly opposed their
government-directed health-care bills.
The 60th seat was a temptation, and like Oscar Wilde, the Democrats
were able to resist anything except temptation.
Obama has acknowledged that the Democrats' health-care legislation is
unpopular. He says the public will come to like it when it goes into
effect (although some taxes kick in before the supposed benefits).
Other Democrats say that once they pass it they can then persuade
voters it's a good idea, as if they haven't been trying to do that for
most of a year and conspicuously failing.
But their bill isn't going to pass if Brown is elected. Some Democrats
are talking about delaying his swearing in and passing a bill in the
meantime. Doing that in open defiance of the clearly expressed views of
(Massachusetts!) voters would touch off a political firestorm unlike
any we've seen since Richard Nixon fired special prosecutor Archibald
Cox. Democrats up for re-election like Evan Bayh and Blanche Lincoln
should understand that and not go along.
Obama was supposed to be a great persuader. It turns out that's only
half true. He did persuade most of us that he should be president. But
in Year One, he has failed to get most of us to support his major
proposals. He's even moved us in the other direction. That's clear,
whatever happens in Massachusetts.
NOTE: This is not necesarily a
complete or up-to-date report...DEMOCRAT or REPUBLICAN
CONNECTICUT STATEWIDE CANDIDATES
2010 SO FAR (SOME WITHRAWN, SOME CHANGED OFFICE, SOME NOT DECLARED)
Aerial
shots of 2 gubernatorial
candidates' Greenwich homes - Foley,
(R) and Lamont (D).
Former State Senator from Stamford/Darien George Jepsen
Jepsen qualifies for public financing
in AG's race
Keith M. Phaneuf
July 12, 2010
Democrat George C. Jepsen announced this morning he has raised the
preliminary funding necessary to qualify for a $750,000 grant from the
state's Citizens Election Program to support his bid for attorney
general.
The former state party chairman and former state Senate majority leader
submitted records today at State Elections Enforcement Commission
headquarters showing he raised more than $75,000 in amounts of $100 or
less from more than 1,300 individuals.
Public financing "is the key to keeping special interest money out of
politics," Jepsen told reporters outside of SEEC headquarters on
Trinity Street immediately after his filing.Jepsen is unopposed for the
Democratic nomination, and will face the winner of the GOP primary
between Avon lawyer Martha Dean and Ross Garber of Glastonbury,
former chief legal counsel to the governor's office under John G.
Rowland. Both Republican candidates have said they would not use public
funds to support their candidacies.
"I think that they would be unwise to be critical of those in public
financing," Jepsen added. The public supports the program. The public
supports keeping special interest money out of politics."
Endorsement time: Who has
the weight?
CT MIRROR
Mark Pazniokas
May 14, 2010
In the race to land endorsements before next week's nominating
conventions, Gov. M. Jodi Rell isn't playing hard to get. She's not
playing, period.
The popular governor said Thursday she will endorse none of her
would-be successors as governor, nor will she cast as vote as a
super-delegate to next week's Republican nominating convention.
"I like everybody," Rell said. "I know all these people."
Others are not as reticent. From the ranks of the obscure and the
influential, the has-beens and rising stars, candidates are waving
testimonials as evidence of momentum and strength.
Some are bartered. Others reflect the giver's cold-eyed view of who can
win, who is best for the party - or for them. Some are expressions of
old friendships or grudges, without strings or subtext.
Ned Lamont trumpeted endorsements from the Democratic mayors of
Bridgeport and New Haven. Michael Fedele waved a bouquet from the House
Republican leader, Oz Griebel from the Senate Republican leader.
Today, Fedele is expecting an endorsement from former U.S. Rep. Chris
Shays, R-4th District. Dan Malloy will accept a testimonial from U.S.
Rep. John B. Larson, D-1st District. On Thursday, it was Waterbury
Mayor Michael Jarjura embracing Malloy and Ridgefield First Selectman
Rudy Marconi endorsing Lamont as Marconi ended his own campaign.
On goes the quickening drumbeat of endorsements, all building to next
week's big dances in Hartford: the Democratic and Republican nominating
conventions.
Some have more value than others.
For Griebel, a Hartford business leader seeking the GOP nomination, the
endorsement of an insider like Senate Minority Leader John P. McKinney,
R-Fairfield, probably bestowed a bit of credibility to a candidate who
never has sought office.
It certainly did not hurt him when the Republican town committee in
Fairfield took a straw poll: Griebel won, beating two sons of Fairfield
County, businessman Tom Foley of Greenwich and Fedele, the lieutenant
governor, who lives in Stamford.
Others are not surprising.
The affection House Minority Leader Lawrence F. Cafero Jr., R-Norwalk,
feels toward Fedele was well known before Cafero's public endorsement
this week.
"Mike Fedele has been a personal friend of mine for over 20 years,"
Cafero said. "I have served with him in the state legislature, I have
worked with him as lieutenant governor. Mike Fedele possesses
both the legislative and executive experience we need today in order to
get the job done tomorrow."
Fedele said he was "especially proud" to receive Cafero's support,
which gave him an opportunity remind reporters he has the support of 23
"super-delegates," elected officials who are convention delegates by
dint of their office. But the super-delegate he'd probably most like to
get -- the one he thought he had -- is Rell.
She is not seeking re-election after 26 years as a legislator,
lieutenant governor and governor. Six Republicans are trying to succeed
her, including Fedele, Griebel, Foley, Danbury Mayor Mark Boughton,
former Congressman Larry DeNardis and Christopher Duffy Acevedo.
Rell said she's come in recent years to know and like Griebel, the
president of the MetroHartford Alliance. Boughton is practically a
neighbor to Rell, who lives in the Danbury suburb of Brookfield.
"He's a good a good candidate," Rell said of Boughton. "Mike Fedele, I
chose him to be my lieutenant governor. He's a good candidate. He'd
make a good governor. All of them would. I think we'll let the
delegates decide."
Rell said too much often is made of endorsements.
"It really applies to each individual person who makes the
endorsement," said Chris Healy, the Republican state chairman. "It's
never bad to have an endorsement. What level of productivity you get
from it is the next step."
The endorsement of Democrat Lamont by Mayor John DeStefano of New Haven
and Mayor Bill Finch of Bridgeport carries with it the promise of help
with delegates.
New Haven, which will have the largest Democratic delegation, tries to
vote as a bloc. Finch is loaning Lamont his chief of staff, Adam Wood,
to manage the convention.
For Malloy, the former Stamford mayor and Lamont's Democratic rival,
the biggest endorsement may have come Monday from Comptroller Nancy S.
Wyman. Technically, she accepted Malloy's invitation to be his running
mate.
But implicit in the acceptance was Wyman's view that Malloy is a
credible candidate, even though he will lack Lamont's resources. By any
measure, it was an endorsement.
"Certainly some of them are probably helping delegates who are
undecided," Democratic State Chairwoman Nancy DiNardo said of the
endorsements. "It helps at the convention, and I think for some people
it may help with Democrats in the primary."
One dividend of Wyman's joining the ticket was the Larson endorsement.
He has told staff he was swayed by the idea of a Malloy-Wyman ticket.
"There's endorsements, and there's endorsements," said Richard Foley,
the former Republican state chairman. "A congressman brings weight. A
state chair brings weight. A governor brings weight."
DEMOCRATS
Musical
chairs for Democrats - and the best of all - running for Comproller,
the person who invested with...Bernie!
L
to R: Since Nancy Wyman is running with
Dan Malloy as his Lt. Gov., Comptroller spot on under-ticket is
open...so Kevin Lembo, the Healthcare Advocate,
decided to run for Comptroller (see link for other
name). According to polls, prior to the news of Dick Blumenthal's move,
standing atop the declared candidates for CT
Gubernatorial race 2010 (Democrats) is Sec'y Bysiewicz - now running
for AG (since Richard Blumenthal
decided to run for
the US Senate
with Dodd's retirement); former
Mayor Dan Malloy, former candidate for U.S. Senate Ned Lamont, seek
Gubernatorial spot. And First Selectman Mary
Glassman (Dan Malloy's choice for Lt. Gov. in 2006, who actually ran
with John DeStefano, now jumps to Lt. Gov.
spot with...Ned Lamont...touting New Britain roots and Italian
heritage - always good in CT). With Nancy Wyman moving up the
ticket, there are some Democrats who are definitely in the race for
Comptroller, and others who are possibly weighing a run. Rudy
Marconi, First Selectman of
Ridgefield pulls out, throws his support to Ned Lamont, and FORMER
SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE JIM AMANN
FIRST TO DECLARE, NOW OUT OF RACE.
REPUBLICANS
REPUBLICAN
NAMES SO FAR...
Lt. Gov Fedele, and former U.S. Attorney
Kevin O'Connor, perhaps. And now, Ambassador Tom
Foley. Oz Griebel ("Transportation Strategy Board") declares for
Governor, too. Mayor of Danbury Mark Boughton - now on Mike
Fedele's ticket and others would like to have him, too! Check out
his "Scott Brown" effect. Let's
not forget Larry Denardis, either (former Congressman).
Musical chairs for Democrats continues...
Malloy: Casino issue cost him
Bridgeport endorsement
Ken Dixonand Keila Torres, Staff Writers
Published: 04:46 p.m., Saturday, July 24, 2010
Dannel P. Malloy, the Democrat running for the party's gubernatorial
nomination, says he probably lost the endorsement of Bridgeport's
Democratic Town Committee because of lingering resentment over the
city's failed bid for a casino back in 1995.
Malloy, the former 14-year mayor of Stamford, told the editorial board
of the Connecticut Post last week that Mario Testa, the powerful local
party chairman, also prevented him from addressing the entire town
committee earlier this year.
Malloy said Testa chose not to endorse him after Malloy pointed out
major legal obstacles and a general lack of interest among Indian
tribes to locate a new casino in the city.
Malloy said he was left with the impression that Ned Lamont, of
Greenwich, got the town committee endorsement because he either didn't
oppose a casino in the city or supported one outright.
Testa said Friday that neither Malloy nor Lamont met with the entire
town committee and that Lamont -- who also won the endorsement of the
New Haven Democratic Town Committee -- did not agree to back a
Bridgeport casino bid.
Testa said that he asked Malloy if he would support Indian-financed
slot machines in Bridgeport similar to the facility in Yonkers, N.Y.
"He told me more or less, no," Testa recalled in a phone interview. "He
left it open."
Testa recalled that a citywide vote prior to a special session of the
General Assembly back in the fall of 1995 indicated overwhelming local
support for a casino. Subsequent legislation was defeated in the state
Senate, though, with solid opposition from Stamford-area lawmakers, who
claimed it would cause further congestion along the Interstate 95
corridor.
"Dan had the opportunity to help the city of Bridgeport when we had the
referendum on the casino," Testa said. Malloy, the longest-serving
Stamford mayor, was first elected in November 1995, about two weeks
before the issue failed in the Senate.
Two months ago, on May 22, just as the Democratic state convention was
about to select Malloy as the endorsed gubernatorial candidate, Testa
admitted that he harbored a grudge with Malloy over the failed 1995
proposal.
"Definitely, some of our people do resent that. If we had a casino in
Bridgeport, Bridgeport would be a different place," Testa said in an
interview standin