Political Capitol

Thanks to someone (my money’s on a disgruntled candidate) leaking the list of questions, our newspaper chain’s upcoming weekend story delving into the wealth of the various Democratic and Republican candidates vying for Governor and U.S. Senate is getting some welcome free publicity here, here and here.

The responses to the idea have been very interesting to read, and some of the reactions have admittedly been less than complimentary.

Somebody named “George” wrote on one blog: “Sounds like a questionnaire Robin Leach might use to qualify guests for his TV show Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous. Sadly, this is what passes for journalism in CT today.”

So let me get this straight…

Senate candidate/Former World Wrestling Entertainment CEO/millionaire Linda McMahon of Greenwich can try to relate to voters by talking about how she and husband Vince went through bankruptcy three decades ago; gubernatorial candidate/Greenwich millionaire/cable executive Ned Lamont, when launching his gubernatorial campaign, can give a speech trying to relate to voters by recalling how he was “cook, chief bottle washer” etc. etc. etc. when he started his business; and gubernatorial candidate/millionaire Tom Foley of Greenwich can don his barn coat and jeans in campaign ads, again to relate to average voters … and the press isn’t supposed to try and give voters a sense of what these folks are really worth and how they really live their lives?

Each of these candidates and those I did not name are concerned about their public image. They want to be seen as being able to sympathize with and understand those voters who have lost or are worried about losing a job, have lost or are worried about losing health insurance and have lost or are worried about losing a home. And those candidates with money in particular want to downplay their wealth, even as they’re paradoxically relying on their fortunes to run for office during a particularly populist, “let’s burn those high-paid, big-bonus-earning suits at the stake!” period in this country’s history.

Seems like an atmosphere that calls for digging a little deeper into the lifestyles of our rich and somewhat famous candidates, particularly when some of their opponents are going after the same issue.

Former Stamford Mayor/gubernatorial candidate Dannel Malloy recently took a shot at the financial resources of fellow Democrat Lamont and other monied candidates, stating “when you get bored with the polo ponies you run for office.” But is Malloy living pretty comfortably himself? Shouldn’t the press try to find out?

Likewise when former Congressman Rob Simmons attempts to paint fellow Republican Linda McMahon as a hollow, gold-plated candidate trying to buy herself a Senate seat, isn’t it fair to explore whether Simmons is doing quite alright for himself, thank you very much?

Is wealth the only issue in these races? Of course not. We’ve reported on candidates’ positions on various issues and will continue to do so in the run up to the May conventions, during the primaries and right on up to November’s general elections.

Even if you still disagree with our wealth/lifestyle questions, I’m sure of one thing – you know most of you are going to take a peek at what we learn when the story is published. You won’t be able to help yourselves. This is America, baby. Everyone wants to know how the other half lives … particularly when the other half wants to be elected so they can set policy for the rest of you.

A few weeks ago I wrote about concerns within Republican U.S. Senate candidate Rob Simmons’ camp that state GOP boss Chris Healy had already decided he wanted former World Wrestling Entertainment CEO Linda McMahon to walk away with the nomination at the May convention.

At the center of the controversy is the fact Healy’s wife has a high-paying job accompanying McMahon on the campaign trail.

It’s only fair that I draw readers’ attention to this story from the southeastern end of the state, published in the Norwich Bulletin, about similar issues among the Democratic candidates vying for their party’s U.S. Senate nomination.

As promised, the co-chairmen of the legislature’s Education Committee have introduced a bill they hope will improve conditions at the state’s Vocational-Technical Schools, including the shuttered J.M. Wright Technical School in Stamford.

Wright Tech was closed last summer for at least two years because of the budget crisis.

The legality of that decision – which involved the Governor, state Education Commissioner and state Board of Education – was questioned locally. Attorney General Richard Blumenthal a few days ago determined state officials did not break the law but recommended changes in state statutes to allow for greater public input.

So the vo-tech bill proposed by Sen. Thomas Gaffey, D-Meriden and Rep. Andy Fleischmann, D-West Hartford, requires a vote of the state Board of Education to close or suspend operations at a vo-tech school – something that, believe it or not, is not currently required.

But what I also found interesting was another requirement that at least two of the state ed board’s eleven-members must have “industrial, trade or technical school experience” and only one of those two can chair the vo-tech subcommittee.

“It’s important that we have members of the Board of Education that are experienced in the trades and running and business that incorporates that trade so that we have people on the board that value the vo-tech high schools and workforce development product they turn out year end and year out,” Gaffey said.

Sens. Bob Duff, D-Norwalk, Gayle Slossberg, D-Milford and Reps. Christopher Perone, D-Norwalk, Terry Backer, D-Stratford and Kim Fawcett, D-Fairfield were among the group of self-described “moderate Democrats” who today wrote their caucus leaders urging they get to work on Connecticut’s budget crisis.

Here’s their letter to Senate President Donald Williams, D-Brooklyn and House Speaker Christopher Donovan, D-Meriden:

—————-

March 9, 2010

Dear Senator Williams and Speaker Donovan:

We, the undersigned, write to you today in the hopes that our voices will help to spur action with regard to the current financial situation of our budget. According to the Comptroller’s office, the Office of Fiscal Analysis and the Office of Policy and Management, the budget for this fiscal year is over $500 million in deficit. The picture for fiscal year 2011 doesn’t look any brighter with even less good news for fiscal years 2012 and 2013. We need solutions NOW that do not exacerbate the problems that loom for the foreseeable future.

Our purpose is two-fold.

First, we respectfully request that the legislative leadership and governor’s office go to work right away on a resolution to this year’s shortfall. As you know, the governor recently unveiled her latest deficit mitigation package. While not perfect, it is a place to begin a dialogue. While no solution is easy or without pain, we all have a responsibility to the taxpayers of this state to get our fiscal house in order. The scope and proportions of our economic crisis demand urgent and coordinated action by both the legislature and the governor.

Second, and more importantly, we cannot support any further efforts to borrow our way out of the situation. On a per capita basis, Connecticut is one of the most indebted states in the nation and to continue to travel down that path is irresponsible and makes no long-term sense. Additional debt is not the answer. The only way we can responsibly address the current deficit is to immediately reduce spending.

We can no longer wait or hope for a miracle on Capitol Avenue. Times are tough. We stand, ready, willing and able to assist and provide the support for closing our deficits in a responsible way. There is no time to waste.

Sincerely,

___________________________

Senator Bob Duff

___________________________

Senator Gayle Slossberg

___________________________

Senator Joan Hartley

___________________________

Senator Paul Doyle

___________________________

Representative Linda Schofield

___________________________

Representative Kim Fawcett

___________________________

Representative Steve Mikutel
___________________________

Representative Terry Backer
___________________________

Representative Tom Drew
___________________________

Representative Elizabeth Esty
___________________________

Representative John Mazurek
___________________________

Representative Ted Moukawsher
___________________________

Representative Chris Wright

___________________________

Representative Chris Perone

___________________________

Representative Tom Reynolds

GOP Chairman Chris Healy had a great line a few years ago about 20-year Democratic Attorney General Richard Blumenthal’s ongoing flirtation with running for another political office (before Blumenthal in January decided to enter the U.S. Senate race).

Healy called it the longest political strip tease in Connecticut history.

Former Democratic Stamford Mayor Dannel Malloy has been performing his own Dance of the Seven Veils since he formed an exporatory committee to run for Governor last February.

Healy even filed a complaint with the state Elections Enforcement Commission alleging Malloy was acting too much like a candidate to be allowed to remain in exploratory phase. Exploratory committees enjoy fundraising advantages under Connecticut’s public campaign finance system.

Tomorrow at noon Malloy will drop trou and file paperwork formalizing his candidacy with the state Elections Enforcement Commission in Hartford.

Keeping with the stripper theme, what this means is that supporters of Malloy-the-candidate can only stuff a maximum of $100 worth of donations into his G-string, as opposed to the $375 allowed while he was in exploratory mode.

Hartford businessman Oz Griebel’s gubernatorial campaign today is promoting a new, bare bones web video of the candidate entitled “Divided Team.”

In it Griebel, a Republican, talks about how coaching sports teams has taught him the skills the next Governor needs to head to Hartford and get Connecticut’s “dysfunctional government” working again.

“I’ve never seen a divided team succeed,” Griebel says.

I haven’t heard/read every stump speech given by the handful of Republican gubernatorial candidates, but they often blame the Democratic-majority General Assembly for the state’s woes (retiring Gov. M. Jodi Rell is a Republican).

But Connecticut is traditionally a blue state and while the GOP has the opportunity to make gains in the legislature come November, it’s likely the Democrats will at least maintain control of that body even if they lose their veto-proof majority.

Griebel’s new ad strikes me as an admission by the campaign that this is the likeliest scenario, so they’re positioning their man as the Republican who can reach across the aisle and get something done.

After all, Griebel could have instead taped an ad asking voters to send him to the capitol AND a Republican majority to the General Assembly.

According to a display at the capitol, sponsored by the Permanent Commission on the Status of Women, while females comprise 51 percent of the state’s population, they only occupy 31 percent of the seats in the General Assembly.

Women representing lower Fairfield County in Hartford include: Sen. Toni Boucher, R-Wilton, Rep. Kim Fawcett, D-Fairfield, Rep. Livvy Floren, R-Greenwich, Rep. Lile Gibbons, R-Greenwich, Rep. Patricia Billie Miller, D-Stamford, Rep. Peggy Reeves, R-Wilton and Rep. Terrie Wood, R-Darien.

I bumped into a lobbyist at the capitol today who represents the state’s package stores.

We got to talking about the ongoing debate over whether lawmakers should allow stores to sell booze on Sundays in an effort to boost state revenues (the group he represents – the Connecticut Package Stores Association – is against the idea).

Remembering I work for the Stamford Advocate, he handed me a copy of a letter from that city’s newly-minted Republican Mayor Michael Pavia to Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell expressing his opposition to Sunday sales.

The Mayors of Bridgeport, Hartford and New Haven all recently came out in favor of Sunday sales.

Here’s what Pavia wrote:

————————-

“Sunday sales of alcohol are erroneously being promoted by its advocates as a tax revenue generator in this budget crisis. I join my colleage Mayor Giuliano in Middletown, as well as the Connecticut Police Chiefs Association, the CT Coalition Against Underage Drinking, the MADD Connecticut Chapter, CT Prevention Network, Regional Substance Abuse Councils and local Youth Directors, all of whom oppose any new legislation to expand liquor sales to Sundays.”

“As a small business owner myself, I understand the difficulty in maintaining a payroll and meeting expenses. Package store owners are small business owners that create jobs; being open another day merely taxes their bottom line and increases their costs in overhead. It will increase their operational costs and overhead by 15 percent with little or no increased sales revenue. Sales that are normally captured in six days will now spread out over 7 days. Smaller package store owners, who do not or cannot afford to open Sundays, are expected to lose some of their market share to larger outlets and chains who will open on Sundays.”

“The push by some who believe that people will drink more because of an additional day of sale is misguided and only burdens our package stores financially without substantial additional revenue for the state.”

“I appreciate you time and consdiration of the importance of oposing Sunday sales.”