I received this email from Faith Middleton, the host of WNPR's political talk show "Politics, Burgers & Beer":
Ken (University of Connecticut professor Ken Dautrich) has not been on the show for almost a month. He took a leave of absence until the committee investigation of the UConn contract and Ken's work on it is resolved.
Dautrich has not appeared since October 15. Middleton also notes that tomorrow at 3pm she will broadcast "a special edition" of PP&B, but didn't note what would make it "special".
Ms. Middleton still does not appear to understand that Professor Dautrich should not be permitted back on that program due to his being unalterably compromised by his actions. Nor does Ms. Middleton seem to understand that simply quietly to permit Mr. Dautrich to leave the show without making a public statement about that change is a mistake and damages WNPR's reputation.
But at least he's gone, and that's a step forward.
Proving beyond the shadow of a doubt that WNPR and Faith Middleton have zero regard for journalistic ethics, "Politics, Burgers & Beer", WNPR's political talk show, went on yesterday with Ken Dautrich still on the show and still identified as "UConn's Ken Dautrich". Not a word about Ken Dautrich's being a paid Republican shill, not a word about Dautrich's being investigated regarding possible ethics violations at the University of Connecticut. Nada. Instead, Faith Middleton and WNPR just continue to roll out that right-wing shill as if he were an unbiased political expert.
WNPR is in the midst of a membership drive. Now is the time for all members, and those considering becoming WNPR members, to just say "No!". Tell WNPR that until and unless they pull Faith Middleton and Rell shill Ken Dautrich, not a cent to that station.
Public broadcasting is supposed to have standards. But the chutzpah of WNPR's continuing to give Ken Dautrich a platform to criticize Democrats and comment on state politics is truly a thing to behold!
Don't give them a dime until they can Dautrich! Not a dime!
Middleton says after the first break, "I can't tell you how lucky I feel to have" Ken Dautrich and Rich Hanley on her show. Really, Faith? You're lucky to have a guest who is the target of three investigations regarding a shady contract with Republican governor Jodi Rell? That makes you feel "lucky"? Give me a break!!
I listened to the first edition of WNPR's "Politics, Burgers and Beer" program recently, which featured Ken Dautrich getting grilled by everyone, including The Day reporter Ted Mann who broke the story regarding Dautrich's shady contract with Rell, and I was appalled. It is as clear as daylight that Rell's contract with Dautrich was meant as a means of paying him for political advice with taxpayer funds. Now that Dautrich has been exposed as a Rell shill, continuing to bring him on a weekly political talk show as a "political expert", as Faith Middleton continued to call him, would be a blatant conflict of interest and an insult to public broadcasting listeners.
Professor Ken Dautrich's responses made even clearer the fact that he was being paid with taxpayer funds to provide political advice to Governor Jodi Rell. Early in the broadcast he was asked why he was given a contract to help find savings in state government in order to streamline the budget when he is a specialist in opinion polling and not management. Dautrich's weak rationale was that he teaches a (single) course in state budgeting, and that makes him qualified. Yet certainly there are better qualified professors at UConn in the business school or in the economics department, or in the school of management at nearby Yale University, who would be more natural choices to search for cost savings in state government. Dautrich, however, continued to reveal that he was really brought on to offer political advice by repeatedly stating that he wanted to find out from "stakeholders", which included taxpayers, what they wanted from their leaders, what their opinions might be of particular tax cuts or tax increases, and that "respect" for political leaders was important to getting their budget ideas adopted. Indeed, the savings he claims by reducing the state's fleet of cars came about, he revealed during the program, from his gauging opinions of voters about what they dislike, and that he found out that they disliked seeing state vehicles being used for personal use.
(When will the media pick up on this story? - promoted by ctblogger)
So it turns out Lisa Moody, who apparently comes from the Palin school of executive branch governance, was withholding emails from the Courant, why doesn't this surprise me? They had to file a FOI to find a missing third email:
...it turns out that a third e-mail was missing from the stack of printouts that Rell's office provided 1½ weeks ago in response to The Courant's request.
The third one - obtained last week via a renewed FOI request, after sources said the administration withheld it - puts a new, sharper edge on the e-mail exchange.
Here's the full exchange, including all three e-mails:
•At 2:13 p.m. on Sept. 1, three hours before Rell's televised announcement at 5:15 p.m., chief gubernatorial legal counsel Anna Ficeto e-mailed Moody to say "based on a reading of the CT constitution and case law, the Governor's exercise of line item veto would require her approval and signature of the remainder of the bill."
•A half-hour later, Genuario, head of the Office of Policy and Management, e-mailed Moody to say Ficeto's message was consistent with advice he'd received from top OPM deputy Jeffrey Beckham, also an attorney. Genuario wrote: "Our two lawyers agree. Isn't that amazing?"
•"The Governor and I don't we win (isn't that amazing)" That's how Moody replied to Genuario a minute later, in the previously missing e-mail that Rell's office finally released Friday.
The third e-mail adds an element; it is consistent with the reputation of Rell's publicity-avoiding staff chief, Moody, for stubbornness and combative partisanship. Moody, who once was suspended for conducting political fundraising efforts on the job at the Capitol, is widely feared among Rell's agency commissioners.
Governor Rell takes an unprecdented hit in the newest Quinnipiac poll, falling below 60% approval for the first time ever as voters are turning against her for her lack of leadership on the budget.
Her approval rating has nosedived from 73% in May to 59% now, while her disapproval rating has gone up from 20% to 34%. Voters disapprove of how she has handled the budget by a margin of 52-42.
By an even bigger margin of 56-34, Connecticut voters think that Rell "copped out" in refusing to either sign or veto the budget.
There are wide regional disparities among Connecticut voters on Rell: she is actually in or approaching negative territory in some areas - at 48/49 in Eastern CT and 44/44 in Litchfield County - but remains very popular in Fairfield County.
The estate tax cut is particularly unpopular, even among Republicans: voters disapprove of it by a margin of 66-28, and Republicans by a margin of 52-36.
The state legislature also takes a big hit for their handling of the budget, they receive a 33/55 approval/disapproval rating from voters.
Update (ctblogger): House Speaker Chris Donovan released the following statement regarding the latest poll results:
During especially tough times it is not unusual to see a range of public opinion. I am encouraged, however, by the vast majority of people who agreed with legislative Democrats that the wealthiest in our state need to be part of the budget solution.
Many also believe the Governor abandoned her responsibilities by refusing to act on the budget. I've spent the past two days at our public libraries and Family Resource Centers and I can tell you the people there do not believe we abandoned them. In fact, the staff, parents and others who need and use these resources thought we passed a terrific budget.
Update 2 (tparty): Jon Green, Executive Director of the CT Working Families Party, released this statement on the poll results showing that raising income taxes on households earning over $1 million per year is supported by a margin of 74-24, including among Republicans:
"Today's Q Poll confirms what public opinion polling has been telling us for years: Connecticut voters overwhelmingly support a more progressive tax structure, where those who can afford it best pay a little more. And we'll keep fighting for a fairer tax structure that will protect our economy and our quality of life."
Please take a moment and go to the website right now to vote - you can see from the initial results that their misleading language is confusing to people.
Following is text of a letter I sent to Governor Rell regarding the veto of the Death Penalty bill. While I expected the veto there were other things to be disappointed about:
As a general rule, I believe that bloggers should read press releases, analyze them, and provide context and insight. However, I've been in DC for the past few days, will be in New York today and in Springfield on Saturday, so I don't have the time or energy to give the following letter from Sen. Andrew McDonald and Rep. Mike Lawlor to Gov. Jodi Rell the attention it deserves.
So, below the fold, you will find the letter, as it is. Hopefully others will have time for reflection and comments.
(Video from this important press conference added and post is bumped to the top. - promoted by ctblogger)
Randy Steidl is introduced by Attorney Edward J Gavin, President of the Connecticut Criminal Defense Lawyers Association. Steidl, Gavin, and lawyers called on Gov Rell to abolish the death penalty at a press conference at the State Capitol today. Photo by ctblogger
Hartford - Thursday afternoon, the Connecticut Criminal Defense Lawyers Association held a press conference with Sister Helen Prejean, author of the book Dead Man Walking, and Randy Steidl, the 123rd Death Row Exoneree. Many of the standard points about what is wrong with the Death Penalty were raised. It doesn't work. It risks the lives of innocent people. It is not an effective deterrent. It is too expensive. It is unevenly applied. There is racial, economic and geographic disparities in how it is applied. It is applied with impermissible arbitrariness. Yet the real question is, what kind of a State are we?
Mr. Steidl talked about how less than one per cent of murderers are given the death penalty and how it is nothing but revenge. Revenge is a hate crime, and we have laws against hate crimes in our country. He called on Americans to wake up. This isn't Russia, China, or Afghanistan. This is the United States of America. We are better than that.
Sister Helen Prejean brought the message even more closely home. She lives in Louisiana. She noted that 80% of the executions in the United States come from former slave states, but that Connecticut isn't a state driven by vengeance and hatred. She applauded the wisdom of our legislators and challenged the Governor to embrace the same wisdom.
(In this Jan. 29, 2009 file photo, Gordon "Randy" Steidl of Illinois testifies before the Nebraska Judiciary Committee about his 12 years on death row before his conviction for stabbing a newlywed couple to death was thrown out, during testimony on a measure that would allow Nebraska to put inmates to death with lethal injection, in Lincoln, Neb. Nebraska is among several states that have legislation pending that could end the death penalty. --AP)
Five years ago today, Randy Steidl walked out of the Danville Correction Center in Illinois after having spent over seventeen years in prison after having been wrongfully convicted in the 1986 murder of Dyke and Karen Rhoads.
It was a gruesome murder, two people brutally stabbed and the house set on fire in a peaceful community where these sort of outrages are unexpected. Mr. Steidl, together with Herb Whitlock where convicted of the murders on questionable testimony.
As I read about the case, I cannot help but consider the parallels and differences between this case and the Cheshire Home Invasion.
Both cases are likely to be on the minds of many this afternoon as Mr. Steidl, together with Sister Helen Prejean, author of Dead Man Walking and The Death of Innocents: An Eyewitness Account of Wrongful Executions, join representatives of the Connecticut Criminal Defense Trial Lawyers for a news conference at 3 PM in Room 1C of the Legislative Office Building in Hartford to call on Governor Rell to sign Raised Bill 6578 which would abolish the death penalty in Connecticut.
WALTER EVERETT, whose son Scott was killed in Bridgeport in July 1987, listens to state senators debating a bill to abolish the death penalty. Everett, who forgave his son's killer, is an outspoken opponent of the death penalty. He and his wife, Nancy, at right, drove to Hartford from Lewisburg, Pa. (JOHN WOIKE / HARTFORD COURANT / May 21, 2009)
This morning, at 4:11, the CT State Senate narrowly voted to repeal the Death Penalty in Connecticut and replace it with life in prison without opportunity for release. While many bloggers stayed up late to watch the debate, including some great live blogging at Gideon's Trumpet, many of us went to bed long before the vote and only heard the results via traditional media sources.
It was a narrow vote in the Senate, and I'm extremely disappointed that my own Senator, Joe Crisco, voted against the bill, as did Senator Gayle Slossberg of Milford. Other Democrats voting against the bill included Sen. Donald DeFronzo, Sen. Paul Doyle and Senator Thomas Gaffney. One of the Republican's most faithful Senators, who lists herself as a Democrat, Sen. Joan Hartley also voted against the bill.
Many of us wondered during the debate where the church was on this. It seems as if some are very eager to rally against marriage equality, or against provisions to make it easier to hold church officials accountable for misdoings, but when it comes to the Death Penalty, we don't hear much from the church.
Like Gov. Rell, I'm an Episcopalian, so I'll refer to our church's position on the Death Penalty. In 1988, the Lambdeth Conference passed Resolution 33, which "Urges the Church to speak out against...all governments who practice capital punishment". Gov. Rell should respect the position of the church on this issue and sign the bill repealing the Death Penalty. However, most people do not expect this to happen.
Our two fiscal Constitutional Officers, both Democrats, have been calling Republican Administrations out on their lack of fiscal discipline and the likely consequences for a decade.
The Office of the Governor has the ability to effect decisively the direction the government of the State takes. But we have an individual whose strong suit is affect. In fact she seems utterly incapable of leadership, no matter what the political clime or fiscal circumstance is.
Two years ago Governor Rell had a potential ally in the person of the Controller, who had by then been pushing for the implementation of a proper accounting method for a decade. Rather than use her political capital to craft a bill that would accomplish the objective more satisfactorily in 2007, M. Jodi Rell simply vetoed the bill, pitching it back to the Legislature.
When Gov. Rell called for a special session to address the rising state budget deficit, her press release said, "Some will question why I am calling the Legislature into session five days before the next regular session is slated to begin." She is right about that. I am one of those people who question this. To paraphrase a different press release from the Governor's office, "This is an overtly political maneuver by the Governor. At a time when our state faces significant economic challenges, it is unfortunate that Governor Rell is spending her time on a partisan political ploy rather than trying to help create jobs or help Connecticut families."
The second press release was actually about Secretary of State Susan Bysiewicz's proposal to discourage commerce; the trading of open U.S. Senate seats behind closed doors. Yet the concern with the how open U.S. Senate seats are filled is closely related to one of the larger concerns with Gov. Rell's call for a special session, both are about citizen participation.
Special sessions do not require public hearings. Information about the special sessions might leak out in the press, if we have any press left in the state, but bills being considered for special session do not appear on the General Assembly website with as much time for public comment as bills considered during the regular sessions.
At a special session, the bills are introduced by the Speaker of the House and the Senate President. If the proposed special session is called, the bills will be introduced by Rep. Amann, who will cease to be a member of the house five days after the session. It seems as if the only person excited about the special session other than Governor Rell is Speaker Amann.
There are the special costs of having a special session. These are compounded by having the special session in January. Lobbyists badges expire on December 31st. Either the ethics office needs to grant some sort of waiver allowing lobbyists who had registered for 2008 to lobby at the special session, or the ethics office needs to open early enough to let any lobbyists that want to register before the session to do so. I suspect that the same applies for members of the press.
If this were such an emergency, Governor Rell could have called a special session to start much earlier and provided time for citizen input. Yet it seems as if the real issue, like with how an open U.S. Senate seat would be filled, is that Governor Rell appears to distain citizen input. Perhaps that is part of the reason she is seeking to raid the Citizens Election Programs funds as part of her special session.
If you believe that citizens should be involved in our state government, if you believe we should be spending tax payer money on things other than a special session for the Governor, then I urge you to contact your state legislators and urge them to just say no to a special session starting five days before the regular session is scheduled to begin.
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.
821 temporary beds? That doesn't sound good. Toni Walker seems to be standing up for fairness and restraint, but will the rest of the Dems? (Or will the terrible Cheshire slayings become Connecticut's 9/11, subject to endless political manipulation?)
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.
POLICE STATE TACTICS
GET NATIONAL AIRING:
AND THEY STILL STINK!
www.cooljustice.blogspot.com
SPJ urges Connecticut officials
to drop charges against photographer
Wednesday, Feb. 14, 2007
INDIANAPOLIS - The Society of Professional Journalists, which works to improve and protect journalism, urges Connecticut law enforcement to drop its charges against Ken Krayeske, who was arrested while trying to take pictures of a public event while standing in a public place.
Krayeske, an independent journalist, was arrested Jan. 3 during the inaugural parade of Connecticut Gov. M. Jodi Rell. He was standing on a street median when officers stopped him.
Krayeske, who is charged with breach of peace and interfering with an officer, is scheduled to appear in court March 2.
"It's not too late for Connecticut police to stop this fiasco and embarrassment to law enforcement," said SPJ's National President Christine Tatum, an assistant business editor at The Denver Post. "Police officers should not be faulted for stopping Mr. Krayeske and inquiring about his actions if they believed he may have been a threat to the governor. But it shouldn't have taken almost 12 hours and a trip to a police station for officers to determine that a man who identified himself as a journalist and who was carrying a knapsack containing little more than his camera meant no harm to Gov. Rell."
Too much debate has focused on whether Krayeske, who has worked on political campaigns and urged political activism on his Web site, was acting as a journalist at the time of his detainment. Was he acting as a journalist? It doesn't matter. Krayeske was acting as a citizen of the United States and exercising the First Amendment rights guaranteed to everyone in this country.
The Society of Professional Journalists is one of the nation's largest and oldest journalism-advocacy organizations. SPJ is dedicated to encouraging the free practice of journalism and stimulating high standards of ethical behavior. Founded in 1909 as Sigma Delta Chi, and based in Indianapolis, SPJ promotes the free flow of information vital to a well-informed public, works to inspire and educate the next generation of journalists, and protects First Amendment guarantees of freedom of speech and press. For more information about SPJ and SDX, please visit www.spj.org
The two-year tax and spending plan Rell is set to unveil Wednesday will call for increasing the personal income tax rate half a percent over two years. The maximum 5 percent rate would climb to 5.25 percent in the first year and to 5.5 percent in the second, said the official, who requested anonymity because the governor has not yet made the plan public.
The tax increases would help pay for an additional $1.2 billion in state aid to public schools over three years, the official said.
Representatives Tim O'Brien and Evelyn Mantilla proposed HB 5415 "An Act Increasing the Income tax To Provide Funding For Education". This bill incorporated the ICEJ and UACT joint platform. Our platform calls for increased tax rates on the portion of family income in excess of $250,000. We would boost the current 5% maximum state income tax rate to 5.5% (excess over $250,000), 6.5% (excess over $500,000) and 7.5% (excess over $1 million). The proposed graduated tax increases could raise up to $500 million to support increased state educational cost sharing grants. The increased grants would help our municipalities to stabilize (or reduce) their property tax levies. Due to the short legislative session and Governor Rell's stated opposition and veto threat, this bill did not make its way of the Finance Committee. The Democratic leadership is committed to more comprehensive tax reform in next year's session.
Whatta maverick. Well at least she can learn, even if the fix she proposes this year is less than what was needed last year. At this rate we can give kids the textbooks they need in middle school... by the time they graduate from high school.
State auditors and the attorney general Tuesday received a request to look into whether Gov. M. Jodi Rell's office improperly used state resources last year to obtain addresses for use by Rell's campaign in soliciting financial contributions by mail.
An investigation appeared imminent after Democratic State Chairwoman Nancy DiNardo faxed a letter to State Auditors Robert G. Jaekle and Kevin P. Johnson, asking that they "investigate the use of state employees' time and state resources for the sole purpose of raising campaign funds for Gov. Rell's political campaign."
...
Rennie wrote in his column Sunday that last August, a lawyer in Rell's office, Philip L. Dukes, asked the state's Commission on Culture and Tourism for the lists it maintains for mailing announcements to people in arts and tourism groups. After the agency sent Dukes the lists, Dukes turned them over to Rell's chief of staff, M. Lisa Moody, and not long after that, people on the lists received letters from the Rell campaign soliciting contributions up to $2,500, Rennie wrote.
Rell's office said it had no knowledge of any campaign activities involving the mailing lists - which, it said, were used for "official business" to inform the arts committee of a new $10-million-a-year "Cultural Treasures" program Rell announced Aug. 16. [Emphasis and link added]
Using state resources to fundraise for your re-election campaign is very illegal. Rell had better cross her fingers in hopes that AG Blumenthal doesn't find any coordination between the Rell campaign and the Commission on Culture and Tourism.
MLN is powered by