Comments(4)

|

E-mail

|

Print

Responding to a new report by the Auditors of Public Accounts, Democratic nominee for Governor Dan Malloy said today that Connecticut needs to “end the years of secrecy surrounding taxpayer dollars and how they’re being spent on the state’s economic development strategy,” and said the report highlights the need for change in Hartford.

Said Malloy (links added):

“I talked about this more than a year ago, and here we are again. This report is only the latest in a long-running saga of secrecy that has surrounded the State’s economic development agencies for years. For too long, we’ve allowed two of the state’s economic development agencies – Connecticut Innovations Inc. and the Connecticut Development Authority — to break the law by refusing to make public critical information that taxpayers have a right to see. It’s time we make state government more accountable.

“The reason we need to have this information is simple: if the companies receiving this money aren’t doing what they’re supposed to be doing, then they shouldn’t be receiving that assistance. And that will help us cut government spending at a time when we need to find every nickel and dime we can.

“According to Connecticut state law, these agencies are required to report the names of the companies that receive taxpayer dollars, the number of jobs each of those companies creates, and how those companies compensate their employees. But they don’t, and under the watch of recent governors, millions of taxpayer dollars have been handed out to a lot of companies. Taxpayers have a right to know if that money was put to good use. Right now, they have no idea. Each of those companies, in turn, promised to create jobs, and pay their workers decent wages with benefits. But because the state has allowed these agencies to shroud the programs in secrecy, we have no idea which companies kept their promises, and which ones didn’t.

“The bottom line is that there is no accountability here. None. We only know what they tell us, and the information they’re required to provide by law they’re not providing. It’s a slap in the face of every taxpayer, and it will change when I’m Governor.”

Comments

|

E-mail

|

Print

Working Families Party votes a factor, especially in Governor’s race

With less than two weeks left in the 2010 election cycle, Connecticut Attorney General and Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate Richard Blumenthal (57 percent) has opened up an 18 point lead over Republican candidate Linda McMahon (39 percent) in the Connecticut race for U.S. Senate, according to the latest Suffolk University poll. Connecticut for Lieberman candidate John Mertens has 1 percent, Independent Warren Mosler has 2 percent, while just 2 percent of likely voters remain undecided.

Blumenthal is listed twice on the ballot for U.S. Senate – once as the Democratic Party nominee and once as the Working Families Party nominee. This fusion or cross-endorsement process allows total votes cast for both the Democratic and Working Families nominees to be counted for Blumenthal. Blumenthal was the choice of 54 percent as the Democratic nominee and 3 percent as the Working Families Party nominee.

“It doesn’t appear that voter fusion will cause too much confusion in Connecticut on election day,” said David Paleologos, director of the Political Research Center at Boston’s Suffolk University. “Blumenthal, at this point, doesn’t even need the Working Families Party votes to secure a win – he just needs Republican Linda McMahon to continue her negative ad campaign, as voters have viewed McMahon’s campaign as the more negative between the two.”

When asked who has run a more negative campaign in the U.S. Senate race, 62 percent of likely voters said Republican Linda McMahon, while only 20 percent said Democrat Richard Blumenthal, and 18 percent were undecided. And, when asked specifically about McMahon’s ads stating Blumenthal lied about serving in Vietnam, 33 percent of likely voters said it made no difference as to who they would vote for on Nov. 2, 30 percent said it made them more likely to vote for Democrat Blumenthal, 25 percent said Republican McMahon, 5 percent stated it made them more likely to vote for another candidate, and 6 percent of likely voters remain undecided on the issue.

In the race for governor, Democrat Dan Malloy (49 percent) leads Republican Tom Foley (38 percent) by 11 points. Malloy also benefits from the cross-endorsement votes garnered as the Democratic and Working Families Party nominee. As the Democratic nominee, Malloy only led Foley by 7 points. Independent Thomas Marsh received the support of 4 percent and 8 percent of likely voters were undecided.

Republican for Governor Tom Foley scores a 32 percent favorable – 36 percent unfavorable rating, while his Democratic opponent Dan Molloy scores a 41 percent favorable – 29 percent unfavorable rating. In the U.S. Senate race, frontrunner Democrat Richard Blumenthal scores a 56 percent favorable – 34 percent unfavorable rating, while his opponent Republican Linda McMahon scores a 33 percent favorable – 52 percent unfavorable rating.

In the races for the Constitutional offices of secretary of state, treasurer, comptroller, and attorney general, all Democrats are listed separately as Democratic nominees and Working Families Party nominees, and lead their respective Republican opponents. For secretary of state Democrat Denise Merrill (32 percent) leads Republican Jerry Farrell (22 percent), Republican Jeff Wright (20 percent) trails Democrat Denise Nappier (43 percent) for treasurer, and Republican Jack Orchulli (16 percent) trails Democrat Kevin Lembo (33 percent) in the race for comptroller. Finally, in the attorney general race, Democrat George Jepsen (40 percent) leads Republican Martha Dean (28 percent). All of the above statewide offices carry high undecided counts signaling fluidity in all races.

Few believe that the recession is over in Connecticut. Only 8 percent indicate it is, while 87 percent say it’s not over. And when likely voters were asked if the job situation will improve in the next six months, only 34 percent indicate yes, while 58 percent said no.

The Suffolk bellwether, the town of Plainfield, is further evidence that the Democrats may win both the Senate and governor races in Connecticut. In the Senate fight Blumenthal leads McMahon 46 percent to 42 percent, while in the race for governor, Malloy leads Foley 45 percent to 36 percent. In the 2006 general election in Connecticut, the town of Plainfield was within one percentage point of the state totals for all gubernatorial and U.S. Senate candidates.

Methodology

The statewide survey of 500 Connecticut likely voters was conducted with live telephone interviews Oct. 19-20, 2010. The margin of error is +/- 4.4 percent at a 95 percent level of confidence. The town of Plainfield bellwether included 300 likely voters polled 10/19-10/20. Bellwethers are designed to predict outcomes, not margins. Marginals and full cross-tabulation data here.

Comments

|

E-mail

|

Print

I’ve written before about Martha Dean’s nutty legal views.

But as a NRA guns for everyone advocate, she has some nutty policy views as well:

Comments(1)

|

E-mail

|

Print

The Torrington Register-Citizen actually wrote this:

While it is unclear whether Wright would have the authority to veto a budgetary decision of the Legislature by refusing to sign his name on the actual borrowing, he is promising to try, and in general, to inject the treasurer’s office into more state budget and policy issues.

While it is unclear? Republican Wright’s “cash cop” campaign for State Treasurer is built on a threat to violate state law, and to act illegally in areas where he has no authority whatsoever. Even he acknowledges that if he tries to do any of this it will lead to lawsuits.

No responsible newspaper would print this nonsense.

Comments(1)

|

E-mail

|

Print

TEXT OF FEC COMPLAINT FOLLOWS:

October 20, 2010

Christopher Hughey, Acting General Counsel
Office of the General Counsel
Federal Election Commission
999 E Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20463

Dear Mr. Hughey:

By this letter, we hereby submit a formal complaint regarding the Linda McMahon for Senate[i] campaign and its violation of federal election laws by coordinating with and using the corporate resources of her family’s company, World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. (“the WWE”).

We have previously submitted a complaint regarding the WWE’s illegal in-kind contributions to the McMahon campaign.[ii] Since that time, the WWE has continued to use its resources to increase political support for Linda McMahon in a manner which may involve illegal coordination.

Prior to her announcement as a candidate for U.S. Senate, Mrs. McMahon was the CEO of the WWE. Her husband, Vince McMahon, is currently Chairman and CEO of the WWE, responsible for oversight and coordination of day-to-day activities within the company.[iii] Her children and their spouses served as executives or talent in the company. Although WWE is publicly traded, Mrs. McMahon and her immediate family control 88% of the company’s voting shares and, according to the WWE, in its annual 10-K filing with the SEC, “Mr. and Mrs. McMahon can effectively exercise control over our affairs.”[iv] She has made her association with the company a cornerstone of her Senate campaign, and her name is synonymous with the WWE.

There are at least three major examples of possible improper coordination between Mrs. McMahon and WWE. These include WWE’s new political campaign and ‘rapid-response’ news operation on behalf of Linda McMahon’s Senate campaign, WWE’s scheduling of the first-ever “Fan Appreciation Day” the Saturday before Election Day in Hartford, and WWE’s potential interference with voting on election night in Bridgeport.

Improper Coordination between McMahon and WWE

After Citizens United, a corporation can only spend money on a campaign in the form of an uncoordinated independent expenditure:

No expenditure shall be considered independent if the person making the expenditure allows a candidate, a candidate’s authorized committee, or their agents, or a political party committee or its agents to become materially involved in decisions regarding the communication as described in 11 CFR 109.21(d)(2), or shares financial responsibility for the costs of production or dissemination with any such person.[v]

Mrs. McMahon, along with her husband, continues to own an 88% controlling voting share in the WWE, implying she continues to retain ultimate “financial responsibility” for WWE events.

Furthermore, an expenditure is coordinated if it is “made in cooperation, consultation or concert with, or at the request or suggestion of, a candidate.”[vi] Coordinated expenditures must be considered as “an in-kind contribution to…the candidate…with whom or with which it was coordinated and must be reported as an expenditure made by that candidate.”[vii] An in-kind contribution must “be reported as a contribution in accordance with 11 C.F.R. §104.3(a),”[viii] but it is illegal for corporations to make direct campaign contributions, in-kind or otherwise, to candidates for federal office.[ix]

WWE’s Political Campaign and Rapid-Response News Media Operation to Reinforce Linda McMahon’s Candidacy

Throughout the campaign, Linda McMahon has consistently dodged questions and charges directed at her regarding the WWE. Questions raised to her political campaign were answered by her corporate public relations office. The company itself has directly engaged with the news media on Mrs. McMahon’s behalf throughout the campaign on a variety of issues, from McMahon’s involvement in the production of a pornographic television event[x] to the deaths of wrestlers formerly employed by her company.[xi]

On Monday, October 18, 2010, WWE dropped all pretenses and launched a massive rapid-response campaign to reinforce Linda McMahon’s political campaign and defend against attacks. News reports are that “the company, to which Linda McMahon’s campaign has referred many questions about its operations, is taking a bigger role in the campaign.”[xii] In a videotaped message, WWE Chairman and CEO (and Linda McMahon’s husband) Vince McMahon stated:

[The] United States senatorial campaign in Connecticut involving my wife, former WWE CEO Linda McMahon, and Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, has quite frankly put the spotlight on WWE, and has resulted in some negative and inaccurate attacks on our company. So we’re reaching out directly to you, the WWE universe, our fans, to provide the real facts about WWE. And we ask you to join us in responding to these malicious attacks against the company and you, our viewers. We’ve initiated a new campaign called “Stand Up for WWE.” We’ll be posting videos regularly on WWE.com to set the record straight. And we ask you to utilize Youtube, Twitter, Facebook, as well as WWE.com to correct biased and inaccurate media reports. We encourage you to sign on to WWE’s facebook page and upload your videos, your pictures, and your stories on Youtube, voicing your support for WWE. Let’s show the world the power of World Wrestling Entertainment. Let’s stand up for WWE. Thank You.[xiii]

As part of this initiative, WWE has purchased commercial broadcast time in Connecticut extolling the company’s work with the “Make-a-Wish” foundation. These ads prominently include the likeness of Linda McMahon, and may also violate FEC rules regarding coordinated communication.[xiv]

Through this new initiative, spearheaded by her husband, the Republican U.S. Senate candidate in Connecticut is directly marshaling the resources of her family’s billion dollar corporation to defend her flagging campaign against legitimate questions. It is inconceivable that this major, comprehensive, and public effort aimed directly at those news organizations currently covering the election was not undertaken in coordination with Linda McMahon’s Senate campaign. As such, it may represent illegal coordinated campaign expenditure.

“Fan Appreciation Day” Rally to Bolster the McMahon Campaign

In a news release on September 30, 2010, the WWE announced it would hold its first-ever “Fan Appreciation Day” in Hartford, Connecticut’s capital city, on October 30th – three days before the midterm elections.[xv] This is the first such event ever in the history of the WWE. Paul Levesque (better known by his ring name “Triple H”) – Linda McMahon’s son-in-law and a prominent surrogate for the campaign[xvi] – is returning to WWE for a one-night only appearance at the event.[xvii]

Asked about the curious timing of the event (in an article discussing WWE’s public actions during the campaign defending attacks on Linda McMahon’s stewardship of the company), WWE spokesman Robert Zimmerman said, “WWE wanted to thank our fans for the support and putting up with everything that’s been said about the company and sticking by us and putting on a fan appreciation show.”

This statement, combined with the timing and location of the event, raises serious questions about whether this first-ever “WWE Fan Appreciation Day” is little more than a thinly-veiled attempt to rally support for Linda McMahon’s candidacy less than 72 hours before the polls open on Election Day. Given Linda McMahon’s controlling familial interest in the company, and her husband’s role in orchestrating the major actions of the company, the event may represent illegal coordinated campaign expenditure.

Potential Interference with Voting in Bridgeport

WWE also has scheduled a taping of its ‘Smackdown’ program in the heart of the heavily Democratic city of Bridgeport on election night, suggesting intent to suppress voter turnout in the area.[xviii] Recent news reports have described the event and its potential to adversely affect voter turnout for Democrats:

The show will begin at 6:45 p.m., a full hour and 15 minutes before the polls close in a district that went 60-40 for President Obama in 2008. The venue can hold up to 10,000 people. And Democrats are worried that — whether they’re stuck in traffic or watching a large man in tights get bodyslammed — a significant number of voters might not make it to the polls in time to vote.[xix]

Despite being based in Stamford, CT, WWE has not taped a ‘Smackdown’ program in the state in the last six months – and has no plans to do so for the rest of the year.[xx]

The WWE’s decision to schedule the filming of a major event in a Democratic stronghold at precisely the time that many area voters will be leaving work and attempting to vote in the final hours the polls are open raises serious questions about whether this event is simply an attempt to suppress voter turnout among constituencies that would not be expected to favor McMahon’s candidacy. Given Linda McMahon’s controlling familial interest in the company, and her husband’s role in orchestrating the major actions of the company, the event may also represent an illegal coordinated campaign expenditure.

Conclusion

LindaMcMahon maintains a close personal, familial, and financial connection to the WWE, and is relying upon the resources of that company to advance her campaign in an apparently coordinated manner. We assert that the information provided in this letter provides a sufficient basis for the FEC to find a reason to believe that the McMahon campaign has violated federal election law. We therefore request that the FEC open an investigation into these WWE events and broadcasts occurring just prior to and during the upcoming election and impose any appropriate civil penalties.

NANCY DINARDO

/s/

CHAIRWOMAN
CONNECTICUT DEMOCRATIC STATE CENTRAL COMMITTEE

[i] Linda McMahon for Senate, 973 Farmington Ave, West Hartford, CT 06107.
[ii] Conn. Democrats, CT Dems File FEC Complaint Against Linda McMahon, Campaign, WWE (Press Release) (Nov. 2, 2009), http://www.ctdems.org/releases.php?id=154.
[iii] WWE Executive Officers (last accessed Oct. 18, 2010), http://corporate.wwe.com/company/executive.jsp.
[iv] WWE 2009 Annual 10-K Report, http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1091907/000120677410000348/wwe_10k.htm
[v] 11 C.F.R. §100.16.
[vi] 11 C.F.R. §109.20(a).
[vii] 11 C.F.R. §109.20(b).
[viii] 11 C.F.R. §104.13.
[ix] 2 U.S.C. §441b(a)
[x] Maggie Haberman, Linda McMahon’s WWE Teamed with Porn Show, The Politico, Oct. 3, 2010, http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/43041.html
[xi] Susan Haigh, Anti-Steroid Group Fears Senate Win by Ex-WWE Exec, The Associated Press, Oct. 14, 2010, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/13/AR2010101304413.html
[xii] Ted Mann, “Stand Up for WWE” – the Corporation Jumps Into the Campaign, Oct. 18, 2010, http://www.theday.com/article/20101018/INTERACT010403/101019641
[xiii] Stand Up for WWE (last accessed Oct. 18, 2010), http://www.wwe.com/inside/standupforwwe/
[xiv] WWE Supports The Make-A-Wish Foundation, at 0:05 (2010) (online at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7fmdsZbP98).
[xv] WWE will hold Fan Appreciation Day Oct. 30 in Hartford (last accessed Oct. 18, 2010), http://www.wwe.com/inside/news/fannappreciationday.
[xvi] Jordan Fabian, High-profile wrestler campaigns for McMahon, The Hill, Oct. 2, 2010, http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/122213-high-profile-wrestler-campaigns-for-mcmahon.
[xvii]XL Center of Hartford, WWE Presents Fan Appreciation Day (last accessed Oct. 18, 2010) http://www.xlcenter.com/default.asp?xlcenter=30&objId=384.
[xviii] WWE Live Events (last accessed Oct. 18, 2010) http://www.wwe.com/schedules/events/
[xix] Brian Beutler, Smackdown! How The WWE Might Bodyslam Voter Turnout In Connecticut, Talking Points Memo (Oct. 14, 2010) http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/10/smackdown-how-the-wwe-might-bodyslam-voter-turnout-in-connecticut.php
[xx] Friday Night Smackdown! 2010 (last accessed Oct. 18, 2010), http://www.pwwew.net/tv/smackdown/index.htm

Comments(3)

|

E-mail

|

Print

Republican Gubernatorial Candidate Tom Foley was dealt another blow yesterday by a fellow Republican who was supposed to be his friend. Republican Lieutenant Governor Mike Fedele told Kevin Rennie that he was still thinking about who to support for Governor. Even though the Republican primary between Foley and Fedele was less than genial, for the sake of party unity one would expect Fedele to at least muster something of an endorsement for his old foe.

Comments

|

E-mail

|

Print

The Connecticut Commission on Educational Achievement is a volunteer, bipartisan and privately funded commission composed primarily of business leaders and includes several other professionals. The Commission was established by Governor Rell. The group has researched why Connecticut has one of the largest achievement gaps between low-income students and their more affluent peers. I will report its findings and recommendations over the course of several posts.

What is the Gap?

It’s the difference in educational performance between Connecticut’s low-income and non-low-income students. This gap disproportionately affects minority students, primarily African-American and Latino children. In national progress tests given to 4th and 8th graders, results showed that low-income students in Connecticut performed at dramatically lower levels than non-low-income students—sometimes up to three grade levels behind.

* The gap between low-income and non-low-income students on the 4th grade reading test is 3.05 grade levels
* The gap between low-income and non-low-income students on the 8th grade reading test is 2.89 grade levels

Comments

|

E-mail

|

Print

I guess she’s letting Vince do the talking: