As I watched the long hoped-for retirement speech of Joe Lieberman, I couldn't help thinking of my gratitude to Ned Lamont, the man who put an end to Lieberman's sanctimonious career.
It was that courageous man, Ned Lamont, who stood up against the war in Iraq, against Lieberman's support for numerous right-wing policies, who used his own money to run for Senate, who endured ugly attacks by the Far Right and grossly unfair treatment by our right-wing press, not least of which came from his own hometown Greenwich Time, and sparked the movement that led to the end of that war.
It was Ned Lamont whose courage and primary win emboldened Democrats across the country to stand up against the Iraq War, and who paved the way for anti-Iraq War candidate Barack Obama to win the presidency two years later. More than any other American, it was thanks to Ned Lamont that the last American combat soldier was withdrawn from Iraq last August.
Ned Lamont was savaged in the press by Dick Cheney, and right-wing talking heads like Bill O'Reilly and David Brooks. But it was Ned Lamont who exposed Joe Lieberman not only as a Neo-Con supporter, but also proved that he could be beaten, and should be defeated.
I would love to see Ned Lamont taking the oath of office on the floor of the United States Senate in January 2013. He certainly is qualified; he certainly has the guts. And he would destroy the North Carolina backwoods WWE peformer Linda McMahon. He's earned a run, and our votes.
Incumbent General Assembly Republicans from Greenwich have run away and hid from their Democratic challengers. Greenwich DTC Chairman Frank Farricker submitted this oped to Greenwich Time nearly two weeks ago, taking the Republicans to task for refusing to debate and hiding from their records, but GT has refused to publish it. No explanation given. Here's the oped:
Greenwich's Republican incumbents in the General Assembly are running away from open debates on the issues before the voters with their Democratic challengers. Greenwich Republicans are taking no chances to fool the voters with their silence, hoping their registration advantage is the only thing that matters. The League of Women Voters has inexplicably asserted that it is unable to reschedule the debates with Democratic candidate Howard Richman, who is running for representative in the 149th district, and Claude Johnson, who is running for representative in the 151st. Apparently, the single debate on GCTV Channel 79 that Fred Camillo had with Claude Johnson was enough to convince these candidates that they did want any part of a widely attended public debate with their Democratic challengers.
Perhaps they understand that this town is quickly shifting away from the Republican dominance that prevailed for so many decades. Since 2004, Republican voter registration in Greenwich has fallen from 45% to just under 38%, while over that same period, Democratic voter registration has risen from 20% to nearly 28%. That's tantamount to a seismic change in political orientation in a short time, and certainly a major reason that Republicans Floren and Camillo are looking for cover, rather face the voters in free and open debate with their Democratic opponents.
Greenwich Time has stepped up and offered to sponsor debates and provide a moderator to fill the vacuum of LWV's refusal to reschedule the debates. Yet despite repeated attempts to obtain commitments from the Republicans candidates, none has agreed to take part, choosing instead to hide from the voters. Clearly, Camillo and Floren are attempting to run out the clock on debates, and close off any possibility of facing off against their Democratic opponents before the voters.
Floren and Camillo need to answer to the voters on a wide variety of issues. Ms. Floren needs to explain to voters why she has missed fourteen roll call votes this session of the General Assembly, including votes on bills requiring seat belts on school buses, saving taxpayer funds by allowing towns to delay implementation of revaluations, and a bill raising minimum credits for high school graduation so that our students can compete in the workplace. And she needs to explain to the voters why she has waffled on public financing of state elections. Fred Camillo needs to tell voters why he deserves to be re-elected when he has yet to introduce a bill that has been passed into law, nor provide any significant input on any other legislation that has. A debate would also bring out the fact that Camillo voted against public financing, yet went ahead and accepted public funds for his own campaign. A debate would bring out the fact that with two degrees in civil and mechanical engineering, Claude Johnson is well placed to help change the system that has made Connecticut's utility rates the highest in the continental United States. Democratic candidate Howard Richman wants voters to know that he will push for Connecticut to be granted a seat on the MTA board that overseas operation of Metro-North, and that he supports Sustinet, the self-insured health plan that will provide affordable health insurance for Connecticut.
Apparently, Greenwich's Republican legislators just don't believe that the voters deserve to hear free and open debate between candidates who will represent them in Hartford, and they don't want to answer troublesome questions about their performances in office. They just don't believe that after so many decades of Republicans' being automatically elected and re-elected to the General Assembly, they owe the voters a full discussion of the issues, or to answer questions from residents here in real time.
Ned Lamont made an appearance at yesterday's annual picnic put on by the Greenwich Democratic Town Committee, and quickly reminded everyone in attendance what a gracious, courageous, dedicated Democrat he truly is. Ned spoke up in support of all of the Democrats running this fall. But he prefaced that support by remarking that the low turnout in August was bad news for him, but that it is also bad news for Democrats in the general election this fall. He strenuously urged everyone there to work to get out the vote, to elect a Democratic governor, to keep Jim Himes in Congress, and also to elect Democrats to the General Assembly. No bitterness from Ned, no recriminations. He proved that he is a bigger man than that, and he also proved that he understands how important it is to elect Democrats, no matter how his personal campaign ended. Talk about a class act.
Also for those of you who don't know, Greenwich has not elected a representative to the Connecticut House of Representatives sinc 1912. This year two Democrats are running: Claude Johnson in the 151st district, and Howard Richman in the 149th district. We also haven't elected a Democrat to the state senate since 1930- Alan Barton. The granddaughter of that state senator is now running for state senate: Nancy Barton, who retired as chief counsel for GE Capital. Barton has served several years on Greenwich's BET. She is running against billionaire Scott Frantz, who took the dubious distinction of registering the worst environmental voting record in the State Senate this year. No surprise he's a Republican, right?
I met Frank Farricker at Democratic first selectman Lin Lavery's rally at Armstrong Court in Greenwich on Saturday and asked him more questions about Republican First Selectman Peter Tesei's handling of Greenwich's stimulus request. Frank shed more light on Tesei's abysmal handling of the request, which resulted in the town's being awarded just $4 million, a fraction of what other municipalities received.
I asked Frank Farricker why he was invited by Tesei to that last-minute Christmas Eve 2008 meeting on the stimulus, when Frank isn't a selectman or in line to participate. Farricker, a former candidate for first selectman in 2007, serves on the town's Planning & Zoning Committee. In fact, according to Farricker, it was he and not Tesei who called that meeting. Farricker had received data from a friend in state government about requests from other towns and Farricker was appalled that Greenwich was missing out on a lot of potential federal funds. He called Tesei and urged him to submit a bigger request. According to Farricker, Tesei had asked the head of the town's public works department to put in a request, and it came to less than $4 million. In contrast, Bridgeport's mayor Bill Finch requested over a billion dollars from the bill, and had already submitted his full detailed request.
Greenwich's incumbent Republican first selectman Peter Tesei has been trying to make hay with accusations in a mailer by Democratic challenger Lin Lavery. Lavery listed among three charges that Tesei was engaging in cronysim in actions regarding the town's harbor master. Tesei's campaign went ballistic, accusing Lavery of lying and getting the facts all wrong. But Tesei then went out and demonstrated that he is most certainly engaging in rampant cronyism by having a committee whose members are almost all Republicans hand-picked by him call a press conference to attack Lin Lavery.
But you know Tesei has a problem when Hearst Newspapers Senior Vice President and Greenwich resident Lincoln Millstein, who spends most of his time slamming Democrats, backs Lin Lavery to the hilt on this issue. If Peter Tesei learns nothing in this campaign, he should learn that one should never- ever!- triple the docking fees on a newspaper executive in an election year! Lincoln Millstein writes on his blog, titled "No Denying the Ham-handed Handling of the Harbor Master Apointment in Greenwich", that the
"so-called Coastal Resource Advisory Committee (wanted) to keep this piece of public business out of public scrutiny. Why else would you stack the committee with members who resemble a Republican fund-raising dinner?"
He goes on to write that after his mooring fees were nearly tripled:
"Peter Tesei assured us all that nothing will be done this year and that the selectmen would delay enforcement of the new policies recommended by the committee. One week later, the new mooring fees went into effect. Huh?
"But this really isn't about the $100 mooring fee...This is about representation, which I believe is the core issue being raised by Lin Lavery. Yes, yes, she confused harbor master with dock master....But she is not wrong that there was a process of insider politics that infected the coastal advisory committee. It's insiders calling insiders with virtually no public oversight. And the guy we trusted to watch over this, Peter Tesei, was nowhere until the lid exploded."
Millstein ended by seconding Greenwich Time's endorsement of Lin Lavery with his own personal endorsement (again, Peter, never raise a newspaper executive's mooring fees in an election year. This is what can happen!):
I believe Lin Lavery will attempt to broaden engagement of the public in Greenwich across a significantly wider constituency. And I believe that engagement will be a good thing for Greenwich. She may not succeed. And I already know she doesn't know the difference between a harbor and a dock. But given the declining state of the town and its schools, I think it's worth a try - for a change.
Tuesday could definitely be Lin Lavery's day in Greenwich. She has the momentum, Greenwich Time has endorsed the entire Democratic slate for the first time in living memory, and even Hearst executive Lincoln Millstein has soured on the incumbent Republican, accusing him of "insider politics" and being nowhere until it all exploded. And if voters understand how badly Tesei botched the town's request for federal stimulus funds, Lavery could come out on top!
Republican cronyism was on full display on Friday afternoon at Greenwich Town Hall as Peter Tesei's hand-picked Republican "First Selectman's Committee on Coastal Management" held a press conference to denounce Democratic challenger Lin Lavery for her accusations of cronyism against Tesei. The problem was that of the committee's nine members, eight were Republicans put there by Tesei. One was unaffiliated; none was a Democrat. The committee even included John Raben, the chairman of Greenwich's Republican Town Committee. Four of the eight Republicans were listed as Tesei supporters on his website. And to show how the town's volunteer committees have been politicized since Tesei took over two years ago, it was Tesei's secretary who called the press conference for the committee.
The committee called a press conference to refute Lin Lavery's charge in a mailing this week that the Republican incumbent had engaged in cronyism. Indeed, it was Tesei who changed the job of harbormaster so that he would no longer be the director of parks and recreation. He then transferred money to his control and had a well-known local politician put on his payroll.
In fact, the coastal management committee displayed for all that cronyism in which Republican incumbent Tesei has been indulging for the past two years. While his Republican predecessor Jim Lash had been scrupulous in keeping sitting Republican and Democratic town committee members off the "Selectmen's Nominations Advisory Committee", which had been chaired by Lin Lavery, the very first nomination to that committee that Tesei made was David Theis, the vice chairman of the RTC. That led the SNAC's chairwoman Mary Ellen to protest the slide into partisanship.
Lin Lavery also sharply criticized Tesei for politicizing SNAC. Tesei contended that he was only putting Theis there because he was qualified for the job. Right!
Since Tesei came in, he's appointed sixty two people to town committees. Guess how many were Democrats? Three. Yep, in a town whose voter registration figures show Republicans with 38% and Democrats at 26%, virtually all of the members of the critical volunteer committees that do yeoman's work for the town are Republicans. And David Theis? He's Peter Tesei's running mate for selectman!
Tesei thought his crony-laden committee could get away with criticizing Lavery and pretending to be a town committee of concerned citizens indignant at her criticism. But thankfully Frank Farricker and Dave Roberson, Democratic Town Committee member and chairman respectively, got wind of it, showed up at the Gisborne Room of Town Hall and verbally cut loose with a flood of criticism. For all the reporters in attendance, Farricker unleashed a torrent of outrage on the assembled Republicans, exposing them for the cronies they were, recited how many of them were major Republican campaign donors, how many were participating in Tesei's campaign and left no one in attendance in any doubt that this was a cheap stunt by Tesei to use what was supposed to be a non-partisan volunteer committee to score political points against his Democratic opponent. Dave Roberson pointed out that this was an attempt to divert attention away from Tesei's having lost Greenwich a $1.5 million earmark for flood control, which he blamed on a town employee who wasn't even remotely responsible for that earmark or flood control. He's also trying to deflect criticism for having botched the town's request for federal stimulus funding. He only intended to ask for $17 million, while Bridgeport, with twice the population, asked for over a billion.
The economy is suffering, budgets are under pressure, and Greenwich enjoys no immunity to the downturn. Hard times mean that Greenwich cannot afford to pass up any source of funds. Yet Greenwich first selectman Peter Tesei did just that, dropping the ball repeatedly on the town's requests for federal assistance, and ultimately costing Greenwich tens of millions of dollars in federal aid it should have received. Not only was Mr. Tesei the last first selectman and mayor in the fourth congressional district to apply for federal stimulus funds, he was also the last municipal executive in the entire state to submit a funding request. Hard against the deadline to apply for stimulus funding, Mr. Tesei's foot-dragging precipitated a last-minute meeting with congressman-elect Jim Himes on Christmas Eve to submit the town's request. Mr. Tesei interpreted the criteria for stimulus projects so narrowly that he brought to the meeting a proposal totaling only $17 million. In contrast, the city of Bridgeport, with twice the population of Greenwich, had already applied for $868 million in stimulus funding. Stamford, with close to double Greenwich's population, had formally requested $414 million. Westport, with half our town's population, asked for approximately $100 million.
If you want to know the definition of "loose cannon", just look at Lincoln Millstein's blog on Hearst newspapers. Millstein, a senior vice president at Hearst, meaning that he's one of the company's top five executives, has repeatedly printed bizarre comments on his blog, "Lincoln's Log", which he features in the online edition of Greenwich Time (he's senior VP for digital media). He's printed weird stuff before, calling Greenwich's Democratic board of education candidates "bobblehead dolls", and the chairman of the Greenwich DTC every name in the book, including "apparatchik". But now he's gone after former Greenwich Democratic first selectman Dick Bergstresser, who served from 2001-2003. Millstein writes on his blog that "Dick Bergstresser
was the Jimmy Carter of Greenwich politics who had no discernible executive skills. He only benefitted from the enmity toward Lolly Prince who was punished for allowing Stamford to successfully penetrate Greenwich Point..."
Ms. Leslie Moriarty, Vice Chairman
Ms. susan Elllis
Ms. Natalie Queen
Mr. Jonathan Cohen
Ms. Nancy Kail
Dear Democratic Board of Education Members of Greenwich,
Newly installed schools superintendent Dr. Sidney Freund has come to the shameful and indefensible decision that our students should not be permitted to view the address to our nation's students by United States President Barack Obama as scheduled on Tuesday, but to indefinitely postpone it. This is not Alabama, or some other ignorant Southern backwater community, but Greenwich, Connecticut. Congressman Jim Himes has called the decision to refuse to show the broadcast to students on Tuesday as a "disservice" to our young people, and state education superintendent Mark McQuillan has also condemned moves by local superintendents to postpone or cancel viewing of the president's broadcast. Dr. Freund mentioned that he thought it was possible that President Obama's address could be politicized. But his decision to censure the address to our nation's students is itself a blatant politicization, and an implicit endorsement of the right-wing campaign to prevent the president of the United States from communicating with our youth, just as previous Republican presidents have done.
It is clear that Dr. Freund's excuses regarding needing time to arrange technical equipment and develop discussion material are simply smoke screens aimed at diverting attention from what is actually his political decision to snub the president of the United States. As quoted in Greenwich Time, he had at least a week to iron out any technical and scheduling difficulties associated with the address, and the school system was able to show President Obama's inauguration live in January with little disruption or technical difficulties.
You have been elected to seats on the Board of Education specifically reserved for Democratic members in order to make sure that Democratic voters and residents have their voices heard on that important body. I harbor no expectation that your Republican counterparts will do the right thing regarding this issue. The question now is whether you will take your responsibilities as Democratic members seriously and stand up against this shameful decision by the superintendent who reports to you.
It's time to make a stand and overrule Dr. Freund who reports to you. You might find doing so distasteful, but permitting this shameful decision to stand would be even worse.
You occupy Democratic seats on the Board of Education. It's up to you to speak out as Democrats and Americans and to act. Doing nothing is not an option.
Newly installed Greenwich Public Schools superintendent Dr. Sidney Freund has decided to cave in to exactly ten right-wing crazies and to refuse to air President Obama's live broadcast to Greenwich students on Tuesday. Dr. Freund stated that students will not view the broadcast live as scheduled, but "at a date to be determined". According to Superintendent Freund, he decided to postpone viewing the president's address "primarily (because the) school district needs time to ensure that technical capacity is in place." Yet that assertion appears to be false, since a Greenwich Time article quotes Freund as stating that he spent 30% to 40% of his time last week dealing with this issue. Clearly he had time to deal with the technical issues surrounding the viewing, especially given that the school system was able to arrange for live viewing of President Obama's inauguration in January. He also put forth the excuse that he needed to have an "instructional team" develop "age-appropriate activities to accompany viewing of the president's address."
What a crock! The president didn't ask school systems to come up with activities to accompany the address, but merely to permit American students to view the address on Tuesday.
According to Greenwich Time, Dr. Freund received exactly ten- yes, ten- emails protesting permitting students to hear their president address them, and five in favor of preparing the schools to permit students to view the address. Those few communications spurred Dr. Freund to engage in "careful consideration of all perspectives", after which he decided to pull the plug on the president of the United States.
In essence, it only takes a tiny handful of crazies to make new superintendent Freund act like the head of a school system in Alabama, or the Texas panhandle, or some other place full of uneducated, right-wing extremists. There is little excuse for Dr. Freund's cop-out, because he served for years in nearby Dobbs Ferry, New York.
And Congressman Jim Himes thinks Superintendent Freund is full of crap also. Congressman Himes issued the following statement on Sunday night:
"As a Congressman and as a father to two young girls (who attend Greenwich public schools), I urge all local schools to provide their students the chance to listen to the President's address to school children on Tuesday. Denying children the rare opportunity to hear directly from their President is a disservice to them as students and as young citizens. The President will encourage students to do what we all know is right: to work hard to prepare themselves to be successful citizens in the greatest democracy in the world.
"Whether we agree or disagree with everything the President says, this is a rare chance for classes and families to discuss and debate the President's speech and to develop the thoughtfulness and critical faculties necessary for success in an increasingly complex and challenging world."
It is all the more shameful, because Dr. Freund couched his language announcing that students would not be permitted to view the Tuesday address in language suggesting that they would: "District to View President's Address to Students", was the title of his press release. He also states, "this is a teachable moment", but just not on the scheduled day of Tuesday, apparently. Yet the truth was precisely the opposite.
And, according to the Greenwich Time article, Connecticut's State Commissioner of Education Mark K. McQuillan:
sent a memo to school superintendents Friday calling the controversy over the president's speech 'truly unfortunate,' 'inaccurate' and 'beyond the definition of responsible civil discourse'"
When the state superintendent of schools refers to postponing viewing of the president's address "beyond the definition of responsible discourse", and our United States congressman calls it a "disservice" to our young people, you know that Dr. Freund has come to a lousy decision.
Will Greenwich students be shown the president's address "at a date to be determined"? Frankly, I doubt it. A couple more right-wing nutjobs will send him emails, and he'll determine that it has to be put off yet again for another to be conjured up reason.
It is a very bad beginning for the new Greenwich Public Schools superintendent. Too bad, because he's the seventh superintendent in just over ten years.
On Thursday night the other Democratic candidate for Chris Dodd's senate seat, Roger Pearson of Greenwich, addressed his hometown Democratic Town Committee. Here's who he is and what he said.
Roger Pearson served as the town's first selectman from 1983 to 1985, his election largely resulting from dismay at the dismal handling of the town's traffic problems by Republican first selectwoman Rebecca Breed after the collapse of the I-95 bridge through the town in 1983. That collapse led all of that traffic to be rerouted through Route 1, clogging local roads, and leading to the curious consequence of drug dealers using the town as a new market for their wares. At the end of his term, the town Republicans promptly voted him out of office. Mr. Pearson gained some unwelcome notoriety after his term ended by pulling over and ticketing motorists without the authority to do so.
Apparently Roger Pearson's father Samuel Pearson was a partner of Dreyfus Funds founder Jack Dreyfus in the 1960's. Roger Pearson graduated from American University in Washington, D.C. At AU he worked for the university newspaper and recounted covering the return of President Kennedy's body to the White House in the middle of the night after Kennedy's assassination. After university, Pearson worked on Capitol Hill for Congressman Michael Feehan, who he said was notorious for not proposing legislation. Pearson decided not to challenge for McKinney's congressional seat in 1987, but did challenge new congressman Chris Shays unsuccessfully in 1988.
Pearson began by talking about Kennedy's assassination and then spent a good deal of time discussing the legislative accomplishments of Lyndon Johnson, including the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which he noted Barry Goldwater opposed, and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. He stated that the Voting Rights Act "gave us this president", President Obama. He also listed Johnson's accomplishment in passing the Fair Housing Rights Act of 1968, which outlawed discrimination in housing. According to Pearson, Lyndon Johnson would have gone down in history as one of America's greatest presidents, had it not been for the Vietnam War.
Pearson then went on to his history with Greenwich, saying that he moved to town in 1974 when Democrats "weren't even an afterthought." He ran on the ticket with Ruth Sims, who won in the famous "tie vote". He listed his accomplishments in town government as being the conversion of the old Town Hall into the current Greenwich Arts Center, the creation of the Nathaniel Witherall Nursing Home, the creation of the police department's pistol range, and the addition of between 300-400 new parking spaces by "re-striping".
He then rhetorically asked, "Why am I challenging Chris Dodd?" He answered, "I think (Dodd)'s become the "bank senator'. He is one of the prime culprits." He continued that "Dodd shepherded through the Graham-Leach-Blyly Bill that repealed Glass-Steagel." Pearson explained that when Chris Dodd voted for the repeal of Glass-Steagel in 1999, just 5% of all mortgage loans were "sub prime"; in 2007 when the housing decline began, 30% of all mortgages were sub prime."
Pearson went on to criticize Dodd for running for president in 2008: "he announces he's moving to Iowa. Then he comes in seventh, behind 'uncommitted'. He has lost his way." He also stated that he is against "professional politicians" and that "thirty years is enough, and it's time for a change."
Pearson also emphasized that he is committed to campaign finance reform, and criticized Dodd for taking substantial sums from the banking industry and from AIG.
Pearson also revealed that he was not his own first choice to challenge Chris Dodd, but that he had urged Ned Lamont to run against him. Pearson added, "I think that Lamont will have trouble running for governor in 2010," and that he'll have trouble against Lieberman in 2012. He added that, "I don't think Lieberman should have gotten a free ride, a free pass. I don't think that Dodd should get a free pass to the nomination."
Pearson then admitted that, "I'm not going to trounce (Dodd). If anything, he's going to trounce me."
Returning to campaign finance reform, Pearson remarked, "It's a bit obscene how we elect people to office today."
He then remarked that he has been having a good time in retirement, and that he has four young children. But, he continued, "I think I have something to say. I think the president has it right on health care." He also said, "I think you see the passion I have."
Pearson revealed that Jack Trout is advising him on his campaign, and that Trout is also advising Nancy Pelosi.
When he completed his remarks, Pearson took questions, the first of which dealt with Joe Lieberman. Pearson acknowledged that he had backed fellow Greenwich resident Ned Lamont in the Democratic senatorial primary in 2006, but that he had switched his support to Lieberman in the general election. He complained that he had tried to call Lamont campaign manager Tom Swan three times, but had not been able to get through to him. On the other hand, Lieberman had spoken to him and assured him that he supported establishing a timetable for the withdrawal of our troops from Iraq. He continued, "But Lieberman has disappointed me."
Concluding his remarks, Pearson stated, "I think Chris Dodd has done all in his power to turn this into a red state." Then he said that he will formally announce soon that he is running for U.S. Senate.
This won't be my magnum opus as far as posts go, because I showed up at 3:30 when Jim's Old Greenwich constituent meeting began at 3pm at the town's central meeting place Jenny Lawton's Arcadia Coffee Shop. But I picked up a few things.
First, Jim did a lot of listening. It was a relatively small group of people in the cozy coffee shop and everyone pulled their chairs in a circle around our newly minted congressman (also partly because acoustics in the old former post office were bad). But here goes.
To a constituent who warned against protectionism, Himes remarked that he, too, was wary of protectionist elements in the Stim, as, he added, was President Obama. But he thought that the bill was not overly protectionist.
To a question about how the transportation funds in the Stim would help Metro North he gave a long answer. First he told us that he tried very hard to get on the Transportation Committee, making two formal requests to the Democratic leadership, only to be rebuffed. But he added that he has joined the subcommittee on transportation of his Financial Services Committee, so he's involved in that way. One will recall that his Republican predecessor Chris Shays scoffed at the idea that he should join the Transportation Committee, and never tried during his two decades plus in D.C. One of his favorite lines was, "It just blows me away to find out that the federal government spends more on transportation in Connecticut than the state does." Funny how that never caused him to think that perhaps he's in a position to influence the biggest source of funding for the state's transportation system. No, Shays persisted in asserting that transportation was the state's responsibility, not Washington's. But I digress.
Himes stated that Metro North's problem with the Stim was that there weren't any "shovel-ready" projects involving the commuter rail line. He added that several voices are pushing hard for the construction of the Springfield-New Haven line, and that it might be funded at some point.
He also revealed that he is working hard with Jerold Nadler of New York on moving the bridge-rail link from New York forward, which would ease pressure on I-95 by diverting a lot of cargo from trucks onto rail.
He also pointed out that the federal transportation bill (TEA-LU) is up for renewal this summer, and that increased funding for mass transit could be in the offing.
Himes also remarked that he has joined the 70-member Sustainable Energy Caucus, which is pushing for funding for renewable energy sources. He also pointed out that the House passed the largest funding measure ever for sustainable energy development as part of the federal stimulus bill.
Since the mainstream newspapers no longer report on DTC meetings in Greenwich, it makes sense for the internet to pick up the slack! Here goes!
At last night's meeting of the Greenwich Democratic Town Committee at Town Hall, Democratic Selectwoman Lin Lavery reported that the town had contacted Congressman Jim Himes (D-4CD) to help request federal funds from the federal stimulus package. Himes told her that Greenwich was the last town in his congressional district to contact him about federal help. Himes arranged to meet town officials to discuss eligible projects and to decide on those that would qualify. At first, Lin Lavery was excluded from the meeting by the Republican First Selectman Peter Tesei, only inviting Democrat Frank Farricker, who serves on the Greenwich Planning & Zoning Commission. But Himes requested that Lavery be permitted to attend, and she was brought in to the meeting.
Jim Amman appeared before the Greenwich DTC last night. It was a bit of a surprise. And Amman appeared bewildered to be down in this part of the state. A fish out of water?
First, Speaker Amman had to sit in the front row as speakers trashed Joe Lieberman, whom he'd supported to the hilt in 2006. When he did speak, I think it would be fair to say that he didn't connect with his audience.
Amman talked about transportation, and his pride that the state's investment in new rail cars was about to reach fruition with their delivery. But then he said that the price of oil is coming down and there was a gasoline price war with gas now selling for $1.89. That brought out a spontaneous chorus of comments, laughter and questions of "where?" Because the cheapest gas you can buy in Greenwich is $2.49. He said oil price was $1.89 in Colchester (where?). There were a number of people who interrupted him to ask him to outlaw zone pricing and opined about how the price of gas declined as you went east along I-95. He seemed surprised by the sentiments. And he perplexed his audience by saying that the problem with zone pricing was that he and his colleagues didn't have the "data". That bewildered his audience even more. From our perspective, just what "data" does one need? For years we've known that gas costs a heckuva lot more in our region than elsewhere in the state. So how in the world could legislation outlawing the practice be hung up on data?
(Make your voice heard and urge your local DTC and State Central to censure Lieberman. - promoted by ctblogger)
Last night the Greenwich Democratic Town Committee voted overwhelmingly to
"publicly censure and repudiate the words and actions of Joe Lieberman and to ask that he resign from the Democratic Party of the state of Connecticut."
It also overwhelmingly adopted a resolution criticizing Senate Democrats for not stripping Lieberman of his committee chairmanship. The votes were all the more significant since they were taken in full view of speaker of the state house of representatives Jim Amman, who was sitting in the front row.
This writer urged members to remember that it is sometimes up to the grass roots to guide our leaders, rather than the other way around. And I urged the members to remember that it was Greenwich's own Ned Lamont who sparked the Democratic Party's revival in 2006 that culminated in Barack Obama's victory and the booting out of Fairfield County's faux-moderate Republican Chris Shays. And I reminded members that Lieberman not only refused to endorse Greenwich's Jim Himes, but actually praised Shays. Debunking Lieberman's own spin that he was guilty only of making some statements "in the heat of the campaign" that he regretted, some recalled that Lieberman ran for both vice-president and senate in 2000, which, winning the former, would have resulted in the Republican governor's naming a Republican to his seat.
Jim Amman, who supported Lieberman even during the general election, sat quietly in the front row as we raked Lieberman over the coals.
Frankly, President-elect Obama is making a mistake in extending an olive branch to Lieberman. Someone like Lieberman will never do the right thing, he can never be trusted, and restoring him to a leadership position is asking for trouble.
I urge every other Connecticut DTC to stand up against Lieberman, pass the petition to censure Lieberman and demand that he resigns from the party. Harry Reid and his fellow Senate Democrats were just plain wrong to pander once again to Lieberman. We Nutmeggers do not have to knuckle under like that. We know Lieberman only too well, and we know that it is time to call him the disgrace that he is, not to reward him for his dishonesty and disloyalty.
This is about accountability. I was highly offended that your newspaper printed that hateful, bigoted, and blatantly inaccurate letter regarding Senator Obama, and I urged your editor Kristan Zimmer to print an apology to your readers and the Greenwich community you serve for having done so. Ms. Zimmer refused to do so, and refused in a most peremptory fashion. It is indeed heartening to know that you now agree that the letter should not have been printed in the first place. That represents a positive step. Now your paper needs to acknowledge its misjudgement in print and offer an apology. Your readers and my community deserve both.
We all love to bash the traditional newspapers in Connecticut. It's so easy to do and I know that many people here dislike the Stamford Advocate and the Greenwich Time almost as much as they dislike the Danbury News-Times and the Connecticut Post.
However, if reports in Editor and Publisher are correct, MediaNews Group, which owns the Danbury News-Times and the Connecticut Post is making a bid for the Stamford Advocate and the Greenwich Time. Will this result in more media consolidation? Will the Advocate and the Time end up with the same standards as the News-Times or the Post?
Jim Lash, current Greenwich First Selectman, will challenge Jodi Rell for the Republican nomination in 2010.
An article in today's Greenwich Time discussed the frustrations of Greenwich Republicans with Rell's budget plan, among other things.
The disgruntlement has reached a point that top party members in town are already predicting Rell would lose a Republican primary in 2010 if she ran for re-election.
It's been a longstanding Greenwich rumor that Jim Lash has ambitions for higher office. With some of the state's wealthiest and most influential Republicans already making public comments about a 2010 primary, and Shays looking like he'll want to run for re-election in 2008, I think a 2010 primary run is Lash's next move after he steps down as Greenwich's First Selectman.
MLN is powered by