Mr. Hugh Bailey
Assistant Editorial Board Editor
The Connecticut Post
Dear Mr. Bailey,
I read with surprise and dismay your recent oped suggesting that Republican Congressman Chris Shays should be re-elected. You asked rhetorically, "What's so bad with Chris Shays?", responding "He's pretty good on global warming. He supports alternative energy. He says he wants universal health care. What's so bad about all that?" You go on to conclude that, "Shays looks good on a whole list of issues," and assert, without explaining the rationale, that the suggestion "that Republican moderates are a group worth having around isn't without merit." You also suggest that the main rationale for getting rid of Mr. Shays, returning the Democrats to power, makes "getting Shays" a moot point.
Have our standards for public officials and their accountability to the voters sunk so low that any incumbent Republican should be re-elected as long as Democrats are in control and he can no longer do much damage? I would like to point out a critical reason that Mr. Shays should be removed from Congress that was not a factor in the last election: He lied to us. Chris Shays told voters repeatedly that he favored setting a timeline for the withdrawal of our troops from Iraq, and that most could be withdrawn in 2007 (Washington Post, August 25, 2006). He stated in debates with Democratic candidate Diane Farrell that he was "more anti-war than she is" because he favored a timeline, but she favored benchmarks. Yet once re-elected, Mr. Shays turned around and voted five separate times against setting precisely such a benchmark for withdrawal that he told the voters he favored. He justified his flip-flop by telling voters that he supported a timeline, but only if it were introduced by President Bush, the commander-in-chief. Mr. Shays certainly didn't tell voters about that little catch during the campaign. And now, while still maintaining that he supports a timeline for withdrawal, he is supporting John McCain for president, who has stated emphatically that such a timeline would create "chaos", and was tantamount to "retreat" and surrender" and that he would never support one. Should we voters really be expected to reward Mr. Shays with re-election for lying through his teeth to us about supporting timelines when hundreds of young Americans continue to be killed and wounded every month?
A couple of quick bits from Chris Shays' appearance on Where We Live with John Dankosky.
Talking about the withdrawal of our troops from Iraq, Shays stated,
"We have to define what 'leave' means."
This from a guy who in August 2006 told voters that he was in favor of a timeline and was quoted by the Washington Post as saying that most of our troops could be withdrawn by the end of 2007. This from a guy who told voters that he was more anti-war than was Diane Farrell, because he favored a "timeline" for withdrawal.
Both Ways came out with this perfect nugget that really captured the essense of our two-decade congressman:
"Our economy is stronger than people realize. But in my opinion, we are in a recession."
Priceless!
And what about off-shore drilling from the guy who has touted his vote against drilling in ANWR?
"We have to have drilling in our coastal regions."
He was asked why we should trust him to defend Social Security when he had co-sponsored two bills in the 1990's to privatize Social Security, and was one of Bush's earliest and most enthusiastic supporters of Bush's private accounts scheme to dismantle the system. Shays' response?
It's a distortion. He wants to divert one-third of all Social Security receipts to private accounts, but that doesn't mean he's in favor of dismantling the system. Does anyone think that the imminent retirement of the mass of Baby Boomers could be accomodated if we are taking away a third of all receipts from those paying in? Does Shays?
Faux moderate and Bush Neocon Chris Shays will appear on John Dankosky's "Where We Live" live call-in show tomorrow morning (Friday, July 11) on Connecticut public radio's WNPR. In Fairfield County, it is carried on 88.5 FM. Please call in or email your questions for Both Ways Shays.
Call during the Show:
(860) 275-7266
Or email questions and comments to:
wherewelive@wnpr.org
You have to get on the phone early, because Dankosky actually doesn't take many calls from listeners.
Now that Joe Lieberman has emerged as John McCain's lead attack dog against Barack Obama -- even going so far as to suggest that Obama's judgment could pose a danger to our safety -- there's some very interesting behind-the-scenes back-story to the Lieberman-Obama relationship that you should know about.
Specifically, a top official on Joe Lieberman's 2006 Senate reelection campaign tells me that Lieberman's staff practically begged Barack Obama to come in and endorse him at a critical moment -- requests that Obama agreed to, helping Lieberman minimize the damage from challenger Ned Lamont's recent entry into the contest.
"We needed him to strongly validate us as a candidate that liberal Democrats should not desert," the official tells me. "We went to the Obama operation with a very urgent plea for him to come out for us."
It's well known that Obama's 2006 endorsement was important. But it's not widely understood just how urgently the Lieberman people begged for Obama's help at a critical moment in Lieberman's career -- and in that light, just how much of a back-stabbing Lieberman's attacks on Obama now represent.
In response to the Lieberman camp's pleas for help, Obama subsequently endorsed him at a dinner of Connecticut Democrats later that month.
"It was a favor as huge as we could have gotten -- it was like a drowning man getting thrown a life preserver," the Lieberman official continued. "Just when Ned was trying to establish himself as a credible alternative on the war, Barack Obama came in and said, `Hey, I disagree with him on the war, but you should send him back to the Senate.'"
With friends like this, who needs enemies. It cannot be said enough - Lieberman cares for nothing but himself and his TV camera time.
As many of you probably know, I've been politically active on the internet for only a few years now; and next month will be the second anniversary of my blog. It's been quite the education, that's for sure. I greatly appreciate that you take the time to read this stuff (in fact, it frequently amazes me that anyone reads my blog!)
One thing that I lately find astonishing within the lefty blogosphere is the not-entirely undeserved but still surprising animosity between the supporters of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.
Joe Lieberman has been described once again in Greenwich Time as "a registered Democrat". Since he formed his Connecticut for Lieberman Party and assured the Secretary of the State that he would join that party as a precondition of his being listed on the ballot as a representative of a party, is it legal for him to be a member of the Democratic Party? Can he be purged from the party rolls? Is his backing of another party's candidate and his actions to campaign for those candidates a violation of Democratic Party regulations for which he can be dropped from the party's registration?
The NY Times had this bit of interesting news in yesterday's paper. A few minutes ago Attorney General Dick Blumenthal was on CNBC calling the news a "disgrace" and an "embarrassment". The question remains though as to where all this money is going, now over a billion dollars. According to the graph above virtually nothing is being spent for the fiscal year 2008, despite Jodi Rell appropriating $6.5 million for last year, which subsequently went unspent. And a 49 cent increase in a cigarette pack which went into effect on July 1, 2007 yielding even more revenue. The argument "Well, everybody does it" doesn't seem to wash either. Earlier this decade Connecticut under then Governor Rowland spent millions per year on cessation programs. And this year tiny Delaware will spend over $10 million (123% of its' allocation) for similar programs.
STAMFORD, Conn. - The refrain is a familiar one: Each year, the country's biggest tobacco companies have provided a bonanza to the states under a $246 billion legal settlement struck nine years ago, and each year a chorus of health care experts, nonprofit groups and policy makers, and even a major tobacco company, question where all the money went.
The vast majority of states spend only a sliver of the money on programs aimed at preventing young people from smoking and helping older smokers quit. Instead, the funds find their way into projects like sports stadiums, a North Carolina knitting plant and sprinklers at an upstate New York golf course.
This year, Connecticut, which the Census Bureau ranks first among the states in terms of median family income, ranked last among the states in terms of putting its share of the bonanza into prevention and cessation programs.
...
Connecticut, over an initial 25-year period, stands to receive at least $3.6 billion from the settlement. Of the nearly $1 billion that it has so far received, less than 1 percent has gone to prevention and cessation, according to the antismoking group.
The Hartford Courant profiles the success of CT's Working Families Party, whose candidates Larry Deutch and Luis Cotto won seats on Hartford's city council last month.
As significant as the electoral victories were, the WFP's ability to cross-endorse candidates, thanks to new election laws, has made an impact too. In New Britain, Greg Gerratana won a common council seat by just 22 votes, thanks in part to being cross-endorsed by the WFP.
"[B]eing a student of political science, you can see that whenever you're cross endorsed, it improves your chance of winning," [Gerratana] said.
Receiving the Working Families party seal of approval meant that voters who saw Gerratana's name associated him with the minor party's goals: affordable health care and advocating living wage ordinances, among other things.
But being cross endorsed provided Gerratana and candidates like him with a more tangible benefit: boots on the ground. The party went door-to-door to spread its message and win political seats, sent out campaign mailers and spoke with potential voters over the phone.
This kind of support can make a big difference in municipal elections. And the WFP's director, Jon Green, said his party hopes to play a political role in Hartford, New Britain and Norwalk, where it cross-endorsed seven successful candidates.
The WFP represents a group of voters who support working families issues: fair wages, good public schools, health care, and affordable housing. This group normally votes Democratic, but can swing in any direction depending on the policy positions of a particular candidate. In New York elections, the WFP has actually endorsed Republican candidates to get bipartisan support for its policy positions.
It's easy to see how the WFP can play an important role in Democratic primaries, and how it can continue to influence general elections by running candidates of their own, or with endorsements.
All this seems to be a good thing:
The legislation, [Susan Bysiewicz] said, gives voters more choices by expanding the political field in a state where 44 percent of registered voters are unaffiliated.
"We find that the more parties that field candidates and the more parties that are active, the better the voter turnout and the more choices voters have," Bysiewicz said.
Ridgefield gets a Green Thumbs Up Award: By committing to the purchase of 20% clean energy by the year 2010, Ridgefield wins a $20,000 solar energy array for the town building of its choice.
Mental health counts too: Congressmen Chris Murphy and Patrick Kennedy of Rhode Island discussed their efforts to get mental health coverage included in insurance plans.
Happy as clams: Oyster beds and clam beds are making a comeback in Long Island Sound. Good news for all those clammers and shellfish lovers.
A federal appeals court has upheld the corruption conviction of former Bridgeport Mayor Joseph Ganim.
The U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals has rejected Ganim's arguments that his sentence was unreasonable and other arguments.
Ganim was convicted after a 10-week trial in 2003 on 16 federal corruption charges. Prosecutors say he received more than $500,000 worth of kickbacks and bribes by steering city contracts.
Ganim has been serving a nine-year sentence at the federal prison camp in Fort Dix, N.J.
As ctblogger pointed out, CT still has a long way to go to improve its ethical standards. One of the biggest holes can be found in the codes of ethics in municipal government. This issue came into focus in East Haven during the first big week of gift-buying season:
Mayor April Capone Almon, who has pledged to tighten town ethics rules, issued a "clarification of gift acceptance policy" memo this week that prohibits department heads from accepting gifts worth more than $25 a year from anyone doing business or seeking to do business with the town. [...]
Capone Almon is planning to form a commission to do an overhaul of the town's Code of Ethics that the Town Council then would have to approve. But she said the clarification, modeled on language in the state Code of Ethics, will establish some clear rules until then.
However, not to let a good deed go unpunished, Almon's political rival threw a little mud on Almon's effort to revise the ethics code:
Former Republican Town Council member Dan McCann, who previously has raised objections to Capone Almon's selection of lawyer Patricia Cofrancesco to be East Haven's new town attorney, said that hiring Cofrancesco, who contributed $500 to Capone Almon's campaign in March, constituted "play for pay" and conflicts with Capone Almon's stated goal to tighten the town's ethics.
The East Haven case underscores one simple fact about CT municipal governments: Codes of ethics are a mess. In many towns and cities, ethics laws are toothless, confusing, ineffective, or simply nonexistent.
Can a developer put one of his employees on your Finance Board who can vote on projects affecting that developer without any kind of penalty? Too many town residents and town officials either don't know the answer to that question, or answer it "yes."
How does your town stack up, and what can be done? Keep reading below the fold ...
(This was a terrific event. Thanks to mbair for the video and diary. Sue has more about the "Honk for Piece" premiere here. - promoted by CaptCT)
Last night I was invited to attend a screening of the new movie, Honk for Peace, in Greenwich CT as part of the Connecticul Film Festival. Ned Lamont, Alan Schlesinger, the filmaker Corey Boutilier, the whole Lamont crew and of course, Hollywood Bob, all come out to see the film and enjoy some Q & A with Ned after the screening.
So imagine my surprise when Alan Schlesinger, the Republican nominee for the Senate race in 2006 completely repudiated the Bush administration on Iraq seen through the light of Iran
Follow me below the fold for another shocking repudiation of Bush foreign policy by a self-admitted former acolyte.
All-Star Transportation school bus driver Wendy Demers was fuming Friday afternoon that her weekly paycheck did not contain a promised raise and retroactive wages.
I've included Lt. Keith Heidtman who died on Monday and made some other changes. The original posted on Memorial Day has now been viewed over 2500 times.
(What Memorial Day here in Connecticut SHOULD be all about. Hope everyone takes 5 minutes today to watch and share with others. Thanks, Scarce - promoted by Maura)
I've updated this from exactly a year ago when I first made it for Memorial Day. I've used the original version of Samuel Barber's Adagio for Strings this time rather than the more well-known orchestral work.
(Here's a follow-up on a big local issue from New Milford. - promoted by ctblogger)
Yesterday, the drivers went back to work but I didn't write anything on it as there were no details available on what bargaining results ended the New Milford bus strike. Today, the NewsTimes had this report up:
On Saturday, the school bus drivers voted 48-11 to accept a five-year contract with All-Star Transportation, which the drivers said is a compromise between what they wanted and what the company is willing to pay.
The offer increased the starting pay from $11.40 to $12.33 and top pay for those with at least 10 years of experience from $14.75 to $15.95.
The contract provides drivers a first-year increase of 4 percent and as much as 5.25 percent in the final year.
At the school district office, Thomas Corbett, director of operations, was relieved to report the resumption of bus service at all six schools Monday went smoothly.
Judging by the previous numbers discussed, the drivers and All Star Transportation met pretty much in the middle on this. Thankfully we will not have to worry about this for the next 5 years.
The traffic on the roads was pretty crazy during drop-off and pick-up times and made a mighty strong case for the usefulness of Mass Transit for those of us that had to drive through it everyday.
(It's always worth keeping an eye on current and upcoming labor actions: the All Star Bus Company is a regional provider in NW Connecticut, so letters to your local Board of Ed (CC'd to All Star, of course) might clarify matters for the company somewhat. - promoted by mattw)
"Over the past year, the company has met continually with the union to iron out a fair economical contract that both sides could live with. Both sides have bargained in good faith and have a respectable relationship with each other. The company and the union understand that this is a new contract with several obstacles. A final proposed contract was offered to the union negotiating team on Friday. The union refused to recommend the contract, so it was withdrawn. All-Star Transportation urges the drivers to return to their job, which is servicing the students, parents and the Board of Education of the community of New Milford."
Here I thought it was All-Star's job, "servicing the students, parents and the Board of Education of the community of New Milford", since they were the company that signed the contracts with the city's school system. The drivers job is to drive a bus for All Star. Anyways...
I stopped by and talked to the drivers that are picketing out front of All-Star and asked them about the situation from their POV. Their complaints stem from the fact that they are paid about $2 per hour less than bus drivers in nearby communities. All they were asking for was a $1 raise. (More below the fold andx-posted here...)
Hobbled by his connection to the most corrupt group of politicians ever assembled in any political party's history, the GOP's David Capiello will toss his name into the meat grinder that almost every GOP candidate will have to face in the state of Connecticut because of the meat grinder they have created for the soldiers in Iraq.
MLN is powered by