Entitled "Dreams," Nappier's ad focuses on her commitment to the CHET program.
State Treasurer Denise Nappier released her first television advertisement, "Dreams" today. The ad highlights Nappier's successful efforts to create a tax deduction for CHET college savings deposits.
"A well-educated workforce is essential to keep Connecticut moving forward," said Nappier. "Although I'm a person most comfortable with numbers, what has truly touched me is the impact my work has on people. We held a ceremony this June to celebrate the CHET scholarship recipients-I was proud looking at all the families I the room. That's why I keep doing this work."
More than $836 million in qualified withdrawals have been taken to cover college costs for approximately 29,000 students. There are currently over 117,000 CHET 529 college savings accounts and total assets are more than $2.48 billion. That compares with 4,000 accounts and $18 million in assets in1999 when Nappier began to supervise CHET.
Nappier noted that the growth is largely a result of her proposal to create the tax deduction for CHET accounts in 2006 and other reforms she put into place making CHET more affordable and flexible for Connecticut's hard-working families. She reduced the minimum amount required to open a CHET account from $500 to $25 and negotiated significant reductions in management fees.
President Obama will campaign for Governor Dan Malloy Wednesday sometime after 8 p.m. at Central High School, 1 Lincoln Boulevard, according to a news release issued by the Connecticut Democratic Party.
The event is free and open to the public. Tickets will be distributed to the general public on Monday at 3 p.m. at 908 Wood Avenue and 2484 East Main Street, according to party officials. One ticket per person will be distributed on a first-come, first-served basis. Due to limited space, only a limited number of tickets will be distributed. Central High School gymnasium can accommodate roughly 2,000.
When this election season is over, Connecticut Republicans would do well to reorganize and find a new way of doing business.
They have established a bad habit of choosing losers, candidates whose political resumes include only voter rejection.
Why do state Republicans think it is going to work out better the second time around? The reality is that it is almost always going to be worse.
Connecticut Republicans could have chosen for this year's gubernatorial race a popular state legislative leader with a long history of winning races in his district.
Instead, the party went again with the loser, the factory-owning, union-busting, gun-protecting, yacht-riding candidate who is so wealthy he manages not to pay any income tax. He wants to be in charge of what taxes the rest of us pay, though.
Republican congressional candidate Mark Greenberg said Friday that the mass murder at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012 led him to his change his position on gun control.
Greenberg's comments came only hours after the National Rifle Association announced that it had downgraded its rating of Greenberg's candidacy from "A" to "F."
The downgrade came after Greenberg, a Litchfield businessman who is challenging first-term incumbent Congresswoman Elizabeth Esty in Connecticut's 5th District, surprised many Thursday night at the candidates' first debate by saying he "completely" agreed with Esty's support of universal background checks for gun purchases and a proposed ban on "straw" gun purchases.
After Esty questioned how the NRA could give him an "A" rating if he believed that, Greenberg joked that the NRA might switch that rating to an "F" after hearing what he had said.
And the NRA wasted no time in doing just that on Friday, blasting Greenberg for apparently making a "false" statement on a 2012 questionnaire in which he said he was opposed to subjecting private gun transactions to background checks.
The thing about negative campaigning is that it works - that's why everybody does it. It gets the party faithful up off the couch and to the polls, especially in years when their own candidates are less than inspiring. It also, as is clear, moves the polls. President Barack Obama was able to defeat Mitt Romney in part by painting a negative picture of him. Malloy is hoping to do the same to Foley, who, like Romney, is an awkward businessman who has a tendency to stick his foot in his mouth.
But what happens when a candidate wins an election based almost entirely on negative campaigning? How much political capital does someone really have if they are elected because of how much they made people fear their opponent? And what happens when someone deeply damaged by negative attacks gets into office? This, in part, is why Dan Malloy has never been a popular governor - not even during the beginning of his term. If Foley should manage to win, he'll find the same is true for him.
The problem is that negative ads and negative campaign speeches last only a moment in voters' minds, but they do remember the larger narratives. They also reinforce the political biases of partisans by turning the opposition into dangerous Others. This kind of attack makes compromise much harder once the election is over, and contributes to polarization. The disastrous results of this are already apparent at the national level.
It came in the closing moments of Thursday's debate, nearly 45 minutes after Republican challenger Tom Foley proposed a "contract" with Democratic Gov. Dan Malloy to refrain from personal attacks for the rest of the campaign. Foley used a question about "core values" to say that the candidates should be asked, "Are you a good parent?" It may not have been clear to some viewers/listeners unfamiliar with some challenges the Malloy family has faced. But it was pretty clear Foley was alluding to troubles Malloy's sons have faced and what that might say about Malloy as a parent. In a campaign filled with nasty, personal attacks, this one was beyond the pale.
One of Malloy's son's run-ins with the law has been well-documented. Another son was peripherally involved in a racially charged incident. Is it fair game to question the governor as a parent-and therefore his fitness as a governor- because of this? That will be for the voters to decide but the thought here is that using an opponent's family issues to try to discredit him is over the line.
It's not even so much that Foley subtly brought up Malloy's family challenges. It's more that he did so after spending the week since the last debate calling for a truce on negative attacks. He even proposed the contract against such attacks in the same hour he introduced Malloy's family into the debate.
Further galling was that it was Foley that started the debate attacks by referencing a corruption investigation of Malloy when he was mayor of Stamford. Malloy was cleared or any wrong doing and praised by the prosecutor for his cooperation. But in last week's debate, Foley dropped in it twice before Malloy responded, and did so with both barrels.
Malloy was correct in his assertion that Foley was fined for a campaign law violation; that Foley lied on an FBI questionnaire when he was nominated to be ambassador to Ireland; that he was less than forth coming about a 1981 road rage incident and lied when he said a police officer didn't write the police report on the incident when indeed one had.
Foley is proving to be an emperor without clothes living in a glass house (a scary visual to be sure). Both sides in this race are guilty of over-the-top negative campaigning. But using the past problems of an opponent's children to discredit him as a parent and therefore as a governor is unforgivable.
Here's what the dishonest gubernatorial candidate had to say about the poll from Quinnipaic last month that showed him leading Dan Malloy by six poiints.
This is Quinnipiac's first poll of likely voters for this election season. Prior polls were done with registered voters- the most recent published in May showed the two candidates tied. Other polls have shown Foley with a similar lead, and Foley said last week internal polling showed the same.
That was then, this is now...
Here's what Foley had to say about the latest Quinnipiac poll that indicates that his lead over Malloy has all but evaporated.
How's this for bipartisanship: Republican Tom Foley and Democrats supporting Gov. Dannel P. Malloy agree that Quinnipiac University's poll declaring the race a tie is accurate -- and that last month's survey giving Foley a six-point lead was faulty.
"I think this poll is right on," Foley said. "We never had a six-point lead."
Foley said he believes that Quinnipiac made a mistake and inverted the numbers for Democrats and unaffiliated voters on the poll's "turnout model," an assumption of how many Democrats, Republicans and unaffiliated will turn out to vote next month.
So last month, Foley was all smiles claiming that the poll from Quinnipiac that had him up over Malloy by six points mirrored his internal poll yet this month, he claims that the same polling institute "inverted the numbers for Democrats and unaffilaited voters on the poll's 'turnout model...'"
At this point, why would anyone believe anything that comes out of Foley's mouth?
If you were not at Quinnipiac University (in Connecticut) tonight to hear Diane Ravitch speak about our continuing battle to beat back the corporate education reform industry and re-take control of our nation's public education system then you not only missed an extraordinary speech, but you also failed to experience the hope that comes with seeing the glimmer of light which serves to push back the shadows associated with these dark times.
One by one Diane successfully challenged the lies and hoaxes being perpetrated by those intent on destroying and privatizing America's public education system. Over the course of ninety minutes she left the forces promoting the corporate education reform industry with nowhere to hide.
Her remarks were nothing short of a stark reminder of the words of Rachel Carson, of Silent Spring fame, who once said,
"We stand now where two roads diverge. But unlike the roads in Robert Frost's familiar poem, they are not equally fair. The road we have long been traveling is deceptively easy, a smooth superhighway on which we progress with great speed, but at its end lies disaster. The other fork of the road-the one "less traveled by"-offers our last, our only chance to reach a destination that assures the preservation of the earth" [Or in this case the most fundamental values of our society].
But in challenging the so-called education reforms at each and every step, Diane left the audience, as individuals and as a collective, with a sense that all is not lost.
While it is true that the task ahead may seem insurmountable, Diane's words of wisdom and courage and conviction were nothing short of a clarion call to return to the battle field with an enhanced sense of purpose and commitment.
We can and must retake control of public education in this country. We can renew the appreciation for teachers and the teaching profession and ensure that all of our children are provided with the learning environment, resources, knowledge and skills that they need and deserve to live meaningful and fulfilling lives.
Watching Diane's car drive out of the Quinnipiac parking lot and head back to New York, I was reminded of Margaret Mead's profound observation...
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."
The other equally profound fact was that none of our state's leaders, Democrat or Republican, were in the audience tonight.
Thus, even now, that glimmer of light and hope waivers...
But we will not be turned away from our path and the battle will continue.
If you ever have another opportunity to hear Diane speak, don't miss it.
Till then, read her blog at www.dianeravitch.net. It is not only a vital source of information, but you'll benefit from the hope and light that it provides.
UPDATE: Here's video of this morning Q-Poll presser (via CTNJ).
The latest Quinnipiac University poll has to be good news for Team Malloy.
Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy overcomes a six-point lead by Tom Foley, the Republican challenger, leaving the race a 43 - 43 percent dead heat, with 9 percent for independent candidate Joe Visconti, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.
This compares to a 46 - 40 percent Foley lead among likely voters in a September 10 survey by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University.
With Visconti out of the race, it's a 46 - 46 percent tie.
"Malloy has been able to cut into Foley's lead among men while increasing his lead among women, to break even over all. There is a gender gap in the race with Malloy ahead by 11 percentage points among women and Foley up 11 points among men," Dr. Schwartz added.
"While there are only 5 percent of likely voters undecided, 25 percent of voters could still change their minds.
"It looks like we're heading for another photo finish - just like in 2010."
Since the last poll, Malloy has been relentless on his critiquing Foley's record and it appears that the attacks are paying off.