Comments

|

E-mail

|

Print

Former Gov. John Rowland cited as an example of who the bill would target.

Republican Senator Scott Brown, of Massachusetts, has joined Conn. Senator Richard Blumenthal in sponsoring a bill that would strip members of Congress of their federal pensions if they commit corruption, even if they have left the Capital.

The bill, called the Congressional Integrity and Pension Forfeiture Act, is also sponsored by Republican Senator Mark Kirk of Illinois. It would add 20 new corruption offenses that could be used to deny pensions, including bribery of public officials, making false claims to a government agency and offering expenditures to influence voting, the Associated Press reported.

An example of who the bill would target is former  Republican  Gov. John Rowland, who served in Congress from 1985 to 1991 as the representative of the state’s fifth district.

While it’s too late to take Rowland’s pension away, the bill’s sponsors hope to prevent any future Congressmen who are convicted of crimes from receiving federal pensions.

Rowland and Blumenthal were political foes in the 1990s while Rowland was governor and Blumenthal attorney general. However, they never faced off for the state’s top position.

Another example cited is former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich. The Democrat was convicted of corruption this year.

In a press release issued in late June when Blumenthal and Kirk introduced the bill, Blumenthal said, “Corrupt public officials convicted of federal felonies should not receive public pensions at taxpayers’ expense,” said Blumenthal. “This legislation, which builds on the law we passed in Connecticut, will close loopholes in existing federal law, and will help ensure that officials think twice before committing unlawful acts that betray their constituents and violate the public trust.”

Connecticut Post staff writer Anne M. Amato explored the issue of pensions for corrupt politicians in a June article that can be read here.

Correction: In an earlier version of this post, it said Rowland and Blagojevich could lose their federal pensions if the bill was passed. The bill would not apply to them, only to future cases similar to theirs.

Comments

|

E-mail

|

Print

Democrat Jim Himes co-hosting “Squawk Box” from 8 to 9 am with NJ Republican Scott Garrett, fellow House Financial Services Committee member.

Andrew Ross Sorkin, author of “Too Big to Fail,” also to appear on the show.

Comments

|

E-mail

|

Print

Well, it’s not exactly a super-primary. Still,  now that New York has moved its 2012 presidential primary to April 24, 2012 — joining Connecticut, Pennsylvania and Delaware — that date might have a little more appeal to presidential candidates.

Of course, it also means that New York, with a rich supply of delegates, will be the big draw for candidates on that day.

Here’s the news release from Secretary of the State Denise Merrill’s office about the primary date:

New York Joins Connecticut for Regional Presidential Primary

Merrill:  “Good News for Voters”

 Hartford:  Connecticut’s neighbor, New York, has moved its 2012 presidential primary to April 24, 2012, joining Connecticut and setting up a regional primary with Pennsylvania and Delaware.

 “This is good news for Connecticut voters,” said Secretary of the State Denise Merrill.  “New York and Pennsylvania are big states.  Their sharing our primary date will increase the importance of that day on the election calendar and, most importantly, greatly improve the chances that candidates will put Connecticut on their campaign schedules.”

 She added, “After all, campaigns are about ideas and people.  The more direct exposure Connecticut primary voters can get to presidential candidates during this critical time in our nation’s history, the better.”

 During the recently adjourned regular session, the General Assembly moved Connecticut’s presidential primary from the first Tuesday in February to the last Tuesday in April in response to recent rules changes adopted by the national Democratic and Republican parties.  Secretary Merrill supported the move.  The changes are designed to roll back recent front-loading of the presidential primary calendar that resulted in primaries and caucuses taking place in early January.  Under the new rules, only Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada can hold their primaries or caucuses before March 1 (and not before February 1).  The parties enacted incentives to encourage the state parties to hold their primaries later in the year.

Comments(2)

|

E-mail

|

Print

Christie

Malloy

The ongoing TV feud between Gov. Dannel Malloy and his New Jersey counterpart Chris Christie took yet another entertaining turn Friday, when Malloy took an apparent swipe at Christie’s weight.

Malloy appeared on the show Friday at 9:30 to talk about the state’s budget deal, which passed the state legislature at 2:30 a.m. and gave Malloy the authority to unilaterally make additional spending cuts.

After the show’s producers played a clip of Christie ripping Malloy on Monday and saying the unions took it to him by rejecting a $1.6 billion concessions package, Malloy went back on the offensive.

“People say things that sometimes don’t make any sense,” Malloy said. “This is a debate that’s more important than who has the bigger belt. It’s about policy.”

The line was a not-so-subtle jab at Christie’s weight, which became an issue in Christie’s 2009 run run against incumbent Democratic governor Jon Corzine, who ran a TV spot suggesting that Christie was “throwing his weight around” to get out of traffic tickets.

The spot featured unflattering images of Christie and was ripped by Christie, who told a New York radio host the secret was out that he was a little over-weight.

Malloy’s comment drew instant laughter from the Morning Joe co-hosts, with host Joe Scarborough proclaiming “oh, it’s on” and co-host Mika Brzezinski laughing and saying “it’s just silly.”

Malloy went on to defend his handling of the budget crisis, laying blame on what he called an “arcane” process that led to four of the state’s 15 public employee unions rejecting a proposed deal between the Malloy administration and SEBAC leaders.

“I actually reached an agreement with labor leaders, and that agreement was actually passed by 57 percent of the members of the unions that were represented in that coalition, but because of some arcane rules that the unions themselves set up, 57 percent  doesn’t win an election, and quite frankly, that can’t be tolerated.”

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy