Political Capitol

I wrote a story in today’s Advocate/Connecticut Post about questions surrounding Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz’s decision to put herself in charge of honoring the state’s World War II veterans.

Some critics, both her fellow Democrats along with Republicans, see the ceremonies as a way for Bysiewicz to drive around the state, meet lots of potential voters and explore running for Governor in 2010 on state time. She is, after all, not the U.S. Secretary of State. Bysiewicz’s office has nothing to do with the military or military/foreign policy. Her job is to oversee elections and register commercial entities.

But she sure does hold plenty of these ceremonies. I attended one event in Suffield Tuesday afternoon – the 126th since 2007 – and on Wednesday she honored veterans in New Haven.

Bysiewicz argues the events are bi-partisan and Republican legislators frequently attend.

GOP Chairman Christopher Healy, one of the people questioning Bysiewicz’s motives, argues those Republicans should know better.

But which elected official is going to turn down an opportunity to appear at a photo op with veterans because they don’t believe Bysiewicz should be the one arranging these events? Someone who doesn’t want to get re-elected, that’s who.

Appropriate or not, Bysiewicz has a good thing going here.

UPDATE: For anyone who is interested, I have a bit more information on the non-profit Bysiewicz uses to hold these ceremonies. Check this out.

Fellow capitol reporter Chris Keating of the Hartford Courant wrote a story that is deservedly garnering plenty of attention today. Keating interviewed Billy Graham, a wrestling superstar from the 1970s and 1980s who does not have nice things to say about his former boss, Linda McMahon.

McMahon, head of Stamford-based World Wrestling Entertainment, earlier this year stepped into the public arena when she joined the state Board of Education and is currently seeking the GOP nomination to take on Democratic U.S. Sen. Christopher Dodd in 2010.

Graham told Keating he is outraged by “recent attempts to sanitize the wrestling mega-enterprise (and) graft a family-friendly face” onto the WWE in order to, he alleges, make McMahon a more palatable candidate.

One of the best examples of McMahon’s working to improve her image came during her confirmation hearings for the Board of Education, during which she faced similar questions about whether it was appropriate for her to be a candidate for the position considering the sexual and violent content of WWE programming.

The WWE and Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell’s office gathered several letters of recommendation from a variety of bi-partisan sources, male and female, who clearly either had no clue about the WWE or didn’t think it should be an issue.

And chances are most, particularly the Democrats, had no idea McMahon would just months after being confirmed to the board take on Dodd.

Here are some of those names. This list is worth holding on to as McMahon’s Senate candidacy moves forward and the debate over her professional wrestling background heats up.

1. Stamford Mayor and potential Democratic gubernatorial candidate Dannel Malloy

2. Secretary of the State and potential Democratic gubernatorial candidate Susan Bysiewicz

3. U.S. Congressman John Larson, a Democrat from East Hartford

4. Anthony Cernera, President of Sacred Heart University in Fairfield

5. Kay Maxwell, a past president of the League of Women Voters of the United States and, like McMahon, a Greenwich resident

6. Kenneth Gammill, a partner at Stamford-based Robinson & Cole, a very prominent state law firm which represented the WWE for several years

7. Lawrence Gilgore, General Director of the Connecticut Grand Opera

8. Scott Mitchel, a Greenwich businessman and director of Stamford-based SoundWaters environmental and educational charity

9. Robert Wolf, President of Stamford-based UBS Investment Bank

10. Dannel Malloy and Susan Bysiewicz (I just think those two names are worth repeating since the state Democratic Party has been particularly eager to challenge McMahon’s qualifications for U.S. Congress based in part on the content of WWE programming.)

The legislature’s Banks Committee, co-chaired by Sen. Bob Duff, D-Norwalk, is meeting at 1 p.m. tomorrow (Tuesday) at the Capitol to “discuss the potential impact of legislation passed by the General Assembly that will apply state and municipal real estate conveyance taxes to foreclosed properties that are sold on or after Jan 1., 2010.”

The Advocate back in late September wrote about how this proposal was slipped into the two-year budget the General Assembly’s Democratic-majority passed Sept. 1. Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell allowed the budget to become law without her signature.

Details of the proposal were lacking at the time and some critics argued it deserved a public hearing to gauge the impact, if any, on cash-strapped folks struggling to remain in their homes.

Some have likened the conveyance tax extension to continued hikes in the state cigarette tax. Lawmakers have established and funded a variety of programs to help smokers quit but at the same time are eager to balance their books on the backs of those who buy cigarettes. Similarly the state wants to cut down on the number of foreclosures in Connecticut but in this case needs them to continue in order to bring in new revenue.

Sen. Eileen Daily, D-Westbrook, a chairman of the legislature’s Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee in an interview at the time told me it is possible the new tax will somehow be passed along to those residents who stand to lose their homes.

The Banks Committee spearheaded some foreclosure programs and Duff back in September said he was unaware of the conveyance tax extension and hoped to examine the idea further. Tomorrow’s hearing is the result, although it seems to come too late since the tax is now law.

Here’s our full report from Sept. 22:

State conveyance levy expanded  to foreclosures
HARTFORD — Even as state lawmakers create programs aimed at keeping cash-strapped residents from losing their homes during the recession, the just-approved two-year budget will cash in on a new mortgage foreclosure tax to help get Connecticut’s government out of the red.
Much of the summer’s debate over closing the budget deficit focused on income taxes.
But the spending plan that passed, mostly along party lines, in the early hours of Sept. 1, also quietly extends the existing conveyance tax on real estate transactions to foreclosures.
The new foreclosure tax goes into effect Jan. 1 and, according to the nonpartisan Office of Fiscal Analysis, will raise $8.5 million in the second half of this fiscal year and $16.2 million in the 2010-11 fiscal year.
But details, particularly whether banks are expected to pay the tax or to pass it along to homeowners and/or bank customers, are lacking.
Democratic leaders, including the co-chairs of the General Assembly’s Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee, could not be reached to explain the proposal.
Other Democrats said they are in the dark.
“You don’t want the homeowners who are already in bad shape to have to pay,” Sen. Bob Duff, D-Norwalk, said.
Duff, as co-chairman of the legislature’s Banks Committee, has worked to establish loan and court-mediation programs tailored to help financially stressed owners remain in their homes and avoid foreclosure.
He said he was not consulted on any proposal to extend the conveyance tax to foreclosures and would like the idea examined further.
“It certainly warrants having a hearing and learning more about how the technical aspects will work and if it affects families under dire and stressful conditions,” Duff said.
A spokesman for Sen. Eileen Daily, D-Westbrook, a Finance Committee chairwoman, said the idea came from Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell’s administration; a spokesman for Rell’s budget office did not recall that being the case. Daily could not be reached for further comment.
Two Republican state senators — Len Fasano, R-North Haven, and Tony Guglielmo, R-Stafford Springs — said they had suggested applying the real estate conveyance tax to foreclosures earlier in the year.
“My initial position was, and still is, I’d like to get rid of the conveyance tax, but it doesn’t seem to be happening,” Guglielmo said.
So he submitted a bill in January to extend the tax to foreclosures so banks would pay their share.
“You have a little old lady who may be going into a nursing home (and selling her house). She pays it, but Bank of America doesn’t?” Guglielmo said. “Most people would consider that unfair — the banks had a special privilege.”
The bill never got a public hearing.
Fasano said he floated a similar idea this summer, during closed-door budget talks at the governor’s mansion, and was surprised to learn it was embraced in the final spending plan passed by the Democrats and allowed to become law by Rell earlier this month.
“No one said ‘Hey Len, how will that work? Who pays it?’ ” Fasano said.
The conveyance tax on foreclosures was briefly questioned during the late-night budget debate in the Senate Aug. 31.
According to the debate transcript, Sen. Andrew Roraback, R-Goshen, directly referred to Duff and his efforts to stem foreclosures and said: “I’m fearful that with this bill the left hand may be undoing what we tried to do with the right hand, which is get people from out under the mountains of debt which they’ve incurred.”
“If I’m a homeowner that’s had my house foreclosed on, and the bank came and they auctioned off my house, is this tax now going to be added to my debt?” Roraback asked.
Possibly, according to interviews with Erin Kemple, head of the Connecticut Fair Housing Center and Fritz Conway, a lobbyist for the Connecticut Bankers Association.
“Most of the costs to a lender are passed on to the consumer,” Kemple said. “When the borrower is trying to figure out how much they need to be able to save their home, the cost of anything is going to be included in that.”
“Obviously the person being foreclosed upon would be on the hook,” Conway said.
But he acknowledged there are only so many costs that can be reimbursed by financially hurting homeowners.
“You can’t get blood from a stone,” Conway said, adding many banks will likely either “wind up eating” the conveyance tax or possibly increase customer fees.
Conway did not recall a lot of discussion about the idea before it got “flopped out there” in the budget and said his clients do not favor the conveyance tax extension.
“Clearly, they’re not happy about it, but I think when the foreclosure crisis comes to an end and we don’t have the type of situation we’re currently in, there may be an opportunity for us to go back to the old way of thinking,” Conway said. “But, given the state’s budget situation and the amount of foreclosures out there, I don’t think we’re going to be able to reverse it.”

Today the Connecticut League of Conservation Voters released its annual scorecard, which graded individual lawmakers on how they voted on 19 key environmental bills.

I found out about this because Sen. Bob Duff, D-Norwalk, sent out a press release touting his overall score of 100 percent.

Duff said: “This year, we took on a number of initiatives that will not only preserve public health but also will improve our environmental quality while, in many instances, either saving money or helping to boost our local economy. These are smart measures, and I was very proud to support them this year.”

It is a noteworthy achievement.

But Duff’s press release failed to specify the grading system favors those legislators who have fewer opportunities to cast votes. Of the 19 bills, Duff only had the opportunity to vote for 11 of the proposals, earning a 100 percent score each time and thus, his total 100 percent ranking.

On the other hand, the co-chairmen of the legislature’s Environmental Committee – Sen. Edward Meyer, D-Guilford and Rep. Richard Roy, D-Milford – received lower marks even though you’d assume they’d be high scorers alongside Duff. But unlike Duff, Meyer and Roy by the nature of their leadership positions were faced with casting more votes and in some cases were docked points for being absent.

Meyer, who cast votes for 17 bills, earned a 93 percent score and Roy, who cast votes for all 19 bills, scored 96 percent.

Then there is Rep. Terry Wood, R-Darien, who was faced with acting on all 19 pieces of legislation. Wood scored an 86 percent grade, even though she cast pro-environment votes on 14 bills – three more than Duff. But Wood was docked points for a couple of absences and for one anti-environment vote.

There are also stories behind some of the bills which lead one to question whether the pro-environmental vote was the way to go.

For instance, Duff voted in favor of legislation establishing a Marine Sport Fishing License intended to help fund the state Department of Environmental Protection during these tough budget times.

Duff’s fellow Norwalk Democrat – Rep. Christopher Perone – voted against the proposal and subsequently saw his overall League grade drop to 92 percent.

But as the League’s report notes, despite the intent behind the new license, the money is likely to instead be absorbed into the state’s General Fund, where it can be spent on anything. So one could argue at the end of the day Duff cast the pro-environmental vote and got credit for it, but the vote has since been rendered meaningless.

Overall the League report card is fascinating and interesting reading. Just dig beyond the scores to get the fullest understand of what the numbers mean.

Reading about Attorney General Richard Blumenthal’s responses when asked Tuesday if he was considering entering the governor’s race now that incumbent Republican Jodi Rell is retiring in 2010 got me thinking.

Specifically, if Blumenthal can get away with announcing in February he had no plans to run in 2010, then months later hedge a bit and string the media and other potential contenders along with some vague answers about his plans, why can’t the rest of us?

So, no one has asked, but just in case, I have no current plans to seek any party’s nomination to run for Governor in 2010.

The key word being “current.” My mind could change, perhaps by the time I finish typing this sentence.

Nope. I still have no current plans to run for anything.

But maybe – just maybe – some unspecified people have suggested to me that, with Rell out, this is my best chance and I should get my name out there as a potential gubernatorial candidate.

These are unspecified people that I’ll never name, and perhaps they don’t really exist. But maybe they do.

And if these people do exist, well, then, as Blumenthal said, “I’m listening.”

Maybe their words are going in one ear and out the other – if these people really exist and if they are really suggesting I run.

This might just be a sarcastic blog post poking some fun at Blumenthal, who for years has been open to running for Governor but never done it but always kept everyone guessing, even, as is now the case, after saying he is not running.

But do you really want to take the chance, Ned Lamont, that I’m joking and ignore more potential competition for the Democratic nomination? Do you think I’m serious Dan Malloy? Can you afford not to at least try to find out if I’m serious? Maybe have some staffer who works for another staffer who works for another staffer call me to “feel me out”? What if I’m eyeing the GOP nod, Mike Fedele? How do you know I’m not?

What I can assure you all is that Rell privately told me I have her endorsement should I decide to run. She won’t admit it and will say it’s too early, but trust me, I’ve got it.

The news on today’s Quinnipiac University poll is all over  the place, but it’s worth highlighting here because of what it means for the gubernatorial prospects of Dannel Malloy, the outgoing mayor of The Advocate’s hometown of Stamford.

According to the Q-poll, were Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell running for re-election in 2010, 52 percent of respondents would vote for her versus 33 percent for Malloy.

In a Democratic primary Malloy would only garner the support of nine percent of respondents.

I’d venture this is one of those “hurdles” Malloy told capitol reporters yesterday he needs to overcome before he decides to turn his exploratory committee into a full blown campaign.

Yesterday more than one capitol reporter pressed Lt. Gov. Michael Fedele of Stamford on his statement that his retiring boss – Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell – privately endorsed his bid to run for her job in 2010.

And Fedele made it clear that was in fact what happened and that he was her candidate.

So when Rell, who prior to Fedele’s making his statement yesterday assured the media she had not decided on a candidate to support, appeared in New Britain today, the first question reporters asked her was about whether she is backing Fedele.

Rell said she thinks Fedele would make a swell governor but did not say she endorsed him over any other contenders.

“I think Mike Fedele would be a very, very good governor. I am heartened by the fact he is running,” Rell said.

But she acknowledged other Republicans are eyeing the GOP nomination, including House Minority Leader Lawrence Cafero, R-Norwalk and possibly Senate Minority Leader John McKinney, R-Fairfield.

“They’re all great Republicans and they’re all very competant,” Rell said.

She added Fedele has yet to formally declare his candidacy and she was not prepared to make any commitments.

Finally, on the way to her car, I asked Rell one last time if she had in fact privately told Fedele she would endorse him. She gave a quick chuckle and that was that.

So the lesson here is don’t say someone has endorsed you if they’re not prepared to tell the press and the public that they have endorsed you.

In an interview this morning for a piece to be published later this week, M. Lisa Moody, Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell’s powerful, sometimes headline-generating Chief of Staff, said she plans to exit the capitol with her long-time friend.

Rell on Monday announced she will retire when her term ends in 14 months.

“I could not do this for another Governor or individual,” Moody said.

The mention of Moody’s name elicits strong emotions from those who know her and have worked for/with her. Either they understand, like and respect her as Rell’s strong right arm or fear, loathe and mock her as Rell’s strong right arm.

Moody has been tied to Rell since the latter began her career in the state House of Representatives 25 years ago and Moody’s support and work behind-the-scenes has to have contributed in some way to the Governor’s continued popularity.

And at least according to today’s Quinnipiac University Poll, voters, while continuing to be skeptical of ethics in state government, are not focused on the most recent controversy surrounding Moody and whether she politicized a tax-payer funded study of streamlining state government by University of Connecticut Professor Ken Dautrich.

So it would not be completely absurd for a new Republican administration to try to find a government post for Moody and make use of her experience.

But she doesn’t want it.

“When Governor Rell leaves, Lisa Moody will leave,” Moody said.

There had been speculation that Rell would not seek another term if Moody was not up for it.

Was Moody interested in serving for another four years?

“I don’t know,” she said. “It’s a terribly taxing position, as it is to be Governor. I don’t know. But I do know I’m committed to helping the Governor finish her work (and) I’ll figure out what my next chapter is.”

Moody is proud of her job performance, despite the occasional negative headlines she has garnered for the administration.

“I think I have been a very good Chief of Staff for Governor Rell and I offer no apologies for that,” Moody said.