Jonathan Kantrowitz

George Jepsen, the Democratic candidate for Attorney General, said today he is “pleased and grateful” for the endorsement of the political action committee of Love Makes a Family because it is “recognition of my long-standing advocacy of civil rights issues.”

“It is very important to me,” Jepsen said of the endorsement. “I take civil rights very seriously.”

Jepsen was chosen because of his record of legislative support on equality issues affecting gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people and for his responses to a detailed questionnaire about his current views.

“George has been with us right from the start. As Senate majority leader, he stood with us and beside us. As Attorney General he will continue to represent us,” said Martin L. Heft, chairperson of the Love Makes a Family Political Action Committee. The PAC, formed in 2002, is dedicated to electing candidates to state office who support equal rights for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people in Connecticut.

During his 16 years in the state legislature, Jepsen was a leader in passing milestone social and civil rights laws, such as banning discrimination based on sexual orientation, strengthening hate-crime laws and expanding state laws governing living wills.

Jepsen said the detailed questionnaire was a reflection of the complex issues facing our society. “Prejudice on the basis of sexual orientation is very deep-rooted, although the situation has improved substantially in 20 years,” he said.

But some parts thrown out of each as unconstitutional

The Second Circuit Court of Appeals has issued its long awaited decision on the constitutionality of the Citizens’ Election Program. The legislation was found not to discriminate against minor parties, but the so-called trigger provision, providing additional funds to opponents of independently financed candidates, was, as I expected, invalidated.

The decision had multiple parts. First, the Second Circuit lifted the injunction that would have halted the entire program that Judge Stefan Underhill had put in place when he issued his decision. The parties had agreed to a stay of that decision back in August of 2009 pending an expedited appeal of the district court decision. It is very significant that the 2nd Circuit court lifted the original injunction.

Second, the Court upheld the constitutionality of the minor party provisions, which leaves intact the qualification requirements for candidates under the Citizens’ Election Program.

The court striking down the trigger provisions did not come as a big surprise given recent legal developments around Arizona’s trigger provisions in their own public financing law. About two months from the Arizona primary election and five months before the general election, the Supreme Court of the United States blocked the state of Arizona from providing qualified candidates with so-called trigger funds. The Court, ruling on an emergency motion, offered no explanation with its three-sentence order.

Ina separate decision, the Court upheld the state contractor contribution ban, but struck down the lobbyist contribution and solicitation ban. The Court clearly pointed out that there are many avenues open to the state legislature to reign in the undue influence of lobbyists and we believe that the legislature can enact a fix to deal with these issues.

“We are extremely disappointed by the Second Circuit’s decision that comes less than a month from the state’s primary election because the decision at this late date threatens to create chaos in our elections by invalidating a portion of the law that is being used right now by several candidates,” said Karen Hobert Flynn, Vice President of Common Cause. “But State Senate President Don Williams, Speaker Chris Donovan, Governor Rell and many state lawmakers are on record saying that they are willing to enact a fix to ensure the continued success of this groundbreaking reform. It is time for the legislature to fix it before any additional judicial harm is done to our elections.”

“The enactment of Connecticut’s reform was one of Connecticut’s proudest moments,” said Tom Swan, Executive Director of the Connecticut Citizens Action Group. “It is time for the legislature to act. This late in the election cycle it is important for the legislature to clarify the rules under which people are running in the fall. We call on the legislature to come into special session to enact a fix.”

“Connecticut voters overwhelmingly support the landmark Citizens’ Election Program”, said Cheri Quickmire, Executive Director of Common Cause. “The legislature and the Governor should act quickly to amend the program to comply with the court ruling. Candidates are mid-stream and the primary is weeks away.”

A Zogby International poll commissioned by Common Cause found that 79% of Connecticut voters support the Citizens’ Election Program. The poll found that support for the Citizens’ Election program crosses all traditional demographic groups – Republicans (84.4%), Independents (80.9%), and Democrats (74.2%).

Senate President Donald E. Williams, Jr. (D-Brooklyn) and Senate Majority Leader Martin Looney (D-New Haven) made the following statement:

“Today’s 2nd Circuit Court ruling confounded those who presumed to know what the court would do and what changes needed to be made in our Clean Elections laws. The ruling upholds some of the basic principles that form the basis of the state’s landmark law. Unfortunately, it also reverses key parts of the campaign finance reform law designed to eliminate the influence of special interests.

In the next few days we will be reaching out to caucus members, discussing our policy options with our colleagues in the General Assembly, and working with Gov. Rell to determine the next steps, which include setting a date for a special session within 30 days. We are committed to addressing the court’s concerns and maintaining Connecticut’s Clean Elections system. “

All three of New England’s Republican members of the US Senate — Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine and Scott Brown of Massachusetts — have indicated their support for the Wall Street reform bill pending in the US Senate. Linda McMahon and Peter Schiff, however, the Republican candidates for US Senate in Connecticut, have both voiced opposition to the Wall Street reform plan.

Connecticut’s activists point out that McMahon and Peter Schiff are taking a position far to the right of their fellow New England Republicans:

“If Linda McMahon or Peter Schiff were in the Senate today, that one vote would kill the reforms we need to protect our economy from another collapse,” said Jon Green, Executive Director of the Connecticut Working Families Party. “By opposing Wall Street reform, McMahon and Schiff are showing themselves to be out of step not just with Democrats and Independents, but even with New England Republicans.”

“Why Linda McMahon thinks Connecticut wants a Mitch McConnell Republican in the Senate is beyond my grasp,” said Tom Swan, Executive Director of Connecticut Citizen Action Group.

“Connecticut voters want a Senator they can count on to put the Main Street economy’s health ahead of the demands of the Wall Street wheelers and dealers who got us into this mess,” said Paul Filson, Director of Connecticut’s SEIU State Council.

The Wall Street Reform legislation, which could come to a vote as early as Thursday, would create new consumer protections to regulate dangerous financial products like subprime mortgages and high interest pay day loans, end taxpayer bailouts and ‘too big to fail’ by giving the federal government the authority to wind down failing financial institutions rather than propping them up indefinitely, and shine a light on the risky derivatives market which has threatened to destabilize our entire economy.

The US House of Representatives voted to pass the Wall Street reform bill on June 30th with a margin of 237 – 192, with all 22 members of the House of Representatives from New England voting in favor.

Citing his pledge to rebuild the state’s struggling economy and his strong record of supporting public services, CSEA/SEIU Local 2001 is endorsing Dan Malloy as Connecticut’s next governor. Leaders representing the Union’s diverse membership, from bridge safety engineers, to classroom paraprofessionals, to criminal justice inspectors, made the decision late last week to get behind Malloy’s candidacy on the August 10 Primary Election ballot.

“CSEA members have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to elect a governor who will be a true partner,” said Catherine Osten, a correctional lieutenant with 20 years of service in the State Department of Correction, in an internal Union announcement on Monday. “Dan is the best candidate running, the best candidate for Connecticut, and the best candidate for our members,” said Osten, the President of CSEA/SEIU Local 2001.

Leaders and staff began organizing a program late last year to engage and mobilize the full spectrum of active and retired public servants that comprise the Union’s nearly 25,000 members in 2010. With their endorsement of Malloy for governor, the top priority is internal outreach activities to assure he is victorious in securing the Democratic Party’s nomination in the Primary Election and prevails in the General Election on November 2.

“Dan understands what it’s going to take to get us out of this recession,” said Mike Dayton, who has served the people of East Hartford for more than 25 years, currently as town planner. “The state and local municipalities are facing serious economic problems. Dan’s track record as mayor shows that he’s got the right approach, which is all about creating jobs and preserving vital services,” Dayton, a member of the Union’s Executive Council, said.

Dayton’s comments refer to the challenges Connecticut’s next governor is predicted to inherit, from exploding classroom sizes for students, to permit delays for small business owners, to dwindling long-term care options for seniors. Dayton and his fellow members endorsed Malloy because they believe he has the experience and vision to avoid the slash-and-burn approach of current Governor M. Jodi Rell’s Administration, which has already cost the state over 50,000 private sector jobs by some estimates.

“Dan believes that scaring voters into blaming seniors for our economic problems is politics at its worst,” said Ed Daly, who retired from the State Department of Environmental Protection after 34 years of working to preserve Connecticut’s open spaces. “He knows that more workers with retirement security, not less, is what we really need. That’s why I’m voting for Dan,” said Daly, the President of the Union’s 12,000-strong retiree council.

Daly’s comments refer to statements made by some of the gubernatorial candidates that demonize early education providers, public safety professionals, and health inspectors by blaming benefits they’ve earned for Connecticut’s fiscal woes. Malloy garnered the Union’s endorsement in part because he understands that pitting middle-class families against one another is irresponsible and a failure of leadership.

In March, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Connecticut State Council mailed questionnaires to Malloy and the other candidates seeking the support of its six affiliated unions, which includes CSEA/SEIU Local 2001. Malloy was then invited to attend a gubernatorial forum SEIU coordinated in April to make a more direct and personal appeal for the support of the Council’s combined membership of over 55,000.

Members of the New England Healthcare Employees Union, District 1199/SEIU and Connecticut District/SEIU Local 32BJ endorsed Malloy’s candidacy in May.

Malloy and his running mate Nancy Wyman, who is seeking the Democratic nomination for Lieutenant Governor, have appeared in front of members of CSEA/SEIU Local 2001 on several occasions since last fall. The process of earning the Union’s organizational support culminated last Thursday when its Executive Council members cast their endorsement vote.

On July 7th 2010, the CT Jewish Ledger reprinted a a CT Jewish Ledger editorial from October 2006 (not 2008) questioning Ned Lamont’s possible anti-Semitism. The editorial was based on particularly extreme 2006 comments on posts from Daily Kos and HuffPo as evidence.

It’s complete bullshit to attribute views of one’s most extreme, demented, and anonymous supporters to a candidate. Ned Lamont is, to my personal knowledge, no anti-Semite, nor would he countenance any expression of anti-Semitism connected in any way to his campaign.

Two weeks earlier, on June 23rd 2010 ,the CT Jewish Ledger had published a long, friendly interview with Dan Malloy . The interview was conducted by the editor by Judie Jacobson,

Judie Jacobson is a member of the Malloy campaign’s “Women’s Leadership Stands with Dan” team, as listed on Malloy’s own website:

Women’s Leadership Stands with Dan
Posted by Team Malloy @ June 4, 2010 – 12:08p

…# Judie Jacobson, Editor, West Hartford

I’m calling on Dan Malloy to denounce this contemptible bullshit in the strongest possible terms. Or has his campaign stooped to a new low in attacking a fellow Democrat?

CT Blue says it best:

Kevin Lembo needs a few more dollars to qualify for public financing. The race for comptroller is the only one that features a Democratic primary candidate, Mike Jarjura, who is wholly objectionable.. Jarjura is the guy who gave John Rowland a do nothing job for the City of Waterbury, and Rowland is, of course, actively campaigning against Lembo in league with his ultra right gay baiting friends at the Family Institute.

And from My Left Nutmeg:

Kevin Lembo has already been Assistant Comptroller for six years. He needs no time learning the office, and the next Comprtoller has a matter of weeks to analyze the budget and advise the new governor.

Nancy Wyman has said “This could be the easiest turnover this agency has ever seen… [Kevin Lembo] has always been a sounding board for me throughout the years, even after he left,” which he did to become CT’s Health Care Advocate.

He is a nationally-recognized expert on government health care expenditures. He has testified before Congress and was invited to the White House to share his expertise. The next governor needs someone with that expertise in the Comptroller’s office, as health care costs continue to effect budgets and as the federal health care law goes into effect.

Kevin’s values comport with mine, and I assume those of any progressive Democrat reading this. He is pro-choice. He is pro-marriage-equality (that’s putting it lightly). His opponent in the primary is pro-life, and anti-gay rights.

You can contribute to Kevin here. I already have (twice.)