Comments

|

E-mail

|

Print

As I type this at 5 p.m. Friday, these final two weeks of June have generally been good for Chris Donovan, particularly compared to how the month began for the 5th District candidate.

On May 30 federal authorities arrested the retiring House Speaker’s congressional campaign finance director for alleged fundraising misdeeds. Donovan subsequently fired Robert Braddock Jr. as well as his deputy finance director and his campaign manager, long-time political ally and friend Joshua Nassi.

Then Donovan took some lumps for waiting until June 3 to meet with the press and failing to answer questions to critics’ satisfaction when he did.

Donovan recused himself from presiding over the June 12 special legislative session because a roll-your-own cigarette measure up for a vote was related to the arrest. It was an embarrassing situation for a retiring politician whose career was celebrated by legislative colleagues a few weeks earlier.

But, as I said at the start of this post, things have since been looking up.

News broke that the feds had not just singled out Donovan’s campaign but were eyeing alleged Republican shenanigans in the 5th District involving former Gov. John Rowland. 

Donovan’s union and progressive friends continued to show they have his back with endorsements from the Service Employees International Union, the AFL-CIO and MoveOn.org.

Then today the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, which also backs Donovan, released a poll by Public Policy Polling showing Donovan ahead in the 5th District primary:

———-

The poll was conducted by Public Policy Polling (PPP) on June 22-24, 2012 for the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC).  400 Democratic primary voters, MOE of +/-4.9%.

Which Democrat do you think would be the strongest candidate in the general election: Chris Donovan, Elizabeth Esty, or Dan Roberti?

Chris Donovan …………………………………………  45%

Elizabeth Esty ………………………………………….  25%

Dan Roberti……………………………………………..  12%

Not sure ………………………………………………….  17%

In general, do you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of Speaker of the House Chris Donovan, who is running for Congress?

Favorable………………………………………………..  51%

Unfavorable …………………………………………….  24%

Not sure ………………………………………………….  25%

———-

In Donovan’s own words, issued in a fundraising email to supporters, “What a week.”

Of course the federal probe continues to dog Donovan.

A probable cause hearing is pending on Braddock’s arrest.

We in the media will continue to pressure Donovan to release the findings of an  independent investigation of campaign finances the campaign commissioned in the wake of the scandal.

Oh, and just in time to wrap up this blog on Donovan ending June better-off than he began the month, The Hartford Courant is reporting one Donovan supporter has decided to postpone a fundraiser because he wants to learn more about what happened.

Comments

|

E-mail

|

Print

Ex-Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz’s campaign just provided the media with a preview of an advertisement the campaign will begin airing Saturday morning.

Bysiewicz is competing with fellow Democrat  U.S. Rep. Chris Murphy in their party’s August primary for U.S. Senate.

She’s been attempting to portray Murphy as a friend of Wall Street executives and millionaires. According to the latest poll from Quinnipiac University, that line of attack hasn’t been working.

The ad makes no mention of Murphy, Wall Street, a primary or Linda McMahon, the GOP’s endorsed candidate for U.S. Senate.

It instead focuses on mastectomy legislation Bysiewicz co-sponsored in 1997 as a member of the General Assembly, two years before she became Secretary of the State.

Bysiewicz’s campaign manager, Jonathan Ducote, in a statement said, “Tomorrow morning, our campaign will be launching its first television ad to highlight Susan’s record of getting things done and show how her advocacy has impacted the lives of so many people around Connecticut in real and meaningful ways.”

Susan Bysiewicz – “Proud” from Susan's Plan on Vimeo.

Comments(1)

|

E-mail

|

Print

Linda McMahon’s campaign is accusing GOP Senate rival Christopher Shays of having selective amnesia.

In 2008, which was his final year in the House, Shays co-sponsored the American Health Benefits Program Act of 2008 (H.R. 5348).

The bill, introduced by Rhode Island Democrat James Langevin, was intended to be a catalyst for universal health care.

“Let’s start to do the groundwork for what a presidential candidate who then as president will recommend,” Shays told The Hill newspaper in a 2008 video interview that was circulated by the McMahon campaign.

That legislation, which never made it out of the House subcommittee on health, set forth an individual mandate.

Scroll down to the bottom of the blog post for the actual text from the bill.

UPDATE: Here’s the rebuttal from Shays’ campaign spokeswoman Amanda Bergen

“No one should lose sight of the fact that we wouldn’t have to repeal Obamacare if Linda McMahon hadn’t helped elect Nancy Pelosi Speaker of the House in 2006 and keep her there in 2008 with her generous donations to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

Having gone through that process, its clear to him that most healthcare decisions should be made on a state level rather than the federal level. That’s why Christopher supports the repeal of Obamacare.”

(b) Requirement of Coverage-

`(B) the individual’s acceptance of medical treatment covered by such a plan would be inconsistent with the individual’s sincere religious beliefs.

Comments(1)

|

E-mail

|

Print

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of Calif. relays the breaking news to her staff that the Supreme Court had just upheld the Affordable Care Act, Thursday, June 28, 2012, on Capitol Hill in Washington. Pelosi, the former speaker of the House, was instrumental in helping to pass health care reform in Congress and was at President Obama's side when he signed it into law. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

Christopher Shays, a member of the House from 1987 to 2008, says some of the blame for “Obamacare” rests with his GOP Senate primary opponent, Linda McMahon.

Reacting to today’s Supreme Court ruling, Shays sought to paint McMahon as an enabler of Democrat Nancy Pelosi, who went from House speaker to minority leader in the 2010 midterm elections.

“If she hadn’t helped make Nancy Pelosi speaker of the house in 2006 and keep her as speaker in 2008 by her very generous contributions to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, we wouldn’t have to repeal Obamacare, it wouldn’t have passed.”

McMahon gave $10,000 to the DCCC in September 2006, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

She also gave $2,300 to then DCCC head Rahm Emanuel in 2008 after donations of $1,000 each in 2004 and 2005.

McMahon, of course, also gave to Shays during that time period.

McMahon’s campaign swiftly pointed out that Shays co-sponsored a bill in 2008 that would have created a similar individual insurance mandate as Obamacare.

Comments

|

E-mail

|

Print

Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., right, accompanied by Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., speaks on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, March 28, 2012, as the Supreme Court, rear, heard closing arguments regarding the health care law signed by President Barack Obama. (AP Photo/Haraz N. Ghanbari)

Richard Blumenthal, who made the transition from activist attorney general of Connecticut to U.S. senator, has a message for all his former red state counterparts: I told you so.

The first-term Democrat balked two years ago at joining a multistate lawsuit against the feds over “Obamacare.”

In an interview with Hearst Connecticut Newspapers, Blumenthal said Thursday that today’s Supreme Court decision validates that decision.

“From the very beginning, even Governor Rell conceded this measure would be good for Connecticut and should not be challenged constitutionally,” Blumenthal said of the former GOP governor.

A former Supreme Court clerk who has argued four cases before the panel, Blumenthal attended oral arguments in the landmark case in late March.

“I predicted, actually from the first day, that they would uphold the law,” Blumenthal said. “I just thought the law is plainly constitutional. People may disagree on the policy and the wisdom, which is a legitimate perspective or point of view, but the constitutionality of the law is clear. There’s a very strong presumption of constitutionality for an validly approved act of Congress.”

Here’s the background on Blumenthal’s decision to keep Connecticut on the sidelines of the case:

Staff writer Neil Vigdor can be reached at neil.vigdor@scni.com or at 203-625-4436.

Comments

|

E-mail

|

Print

Joe Lieberman, who is hardly a BFF of President Obama, had a somewhat favorable reaction to today’s Supreme Court decision on the Affordable Care Act.

I say somewhat, because a statement issued by Lieberman’s office was nowhere near as gushing to the same degree as other supporters of “Obamacare.”

Read for yourself:

“I am pleased by the Supreme Court’s decision upholding the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which I supported,” Lieberman said. “Now that the constitutional debate surrounding the ACA has been resolved, Congress should closely monitor the implementation of the law to ensure that it is fiscally sustainable in the future. There are many outstanding issues surrounding this law that will demand Congress’ attention in the years ahead, including the accommodation of religious concerns and sticking to commitments to cut health care delivery costs. Finally, it is imperative that we take the extremely important steps that are necessary to bring our nation’s spiraling debt under control and reform critical health care programs like Medicare to ensure that the benefits they provide remain available to future generations of Americans.”

Comments(6)

|

E-mail

|

Print

Candidate for the 5th Congressional District Justin Bernier speaks befor voting begins for the nomination for the 5th District at the state Republican convention at the Connecticut Convention Center in Hartford, Conn., on Friday, May 18, 2012. Jason Rearick/Staff

Some strong comments out of the campaign of 5th District GOP Congressional hopeful Justin Bernier on today’s Supreme Court ruling.

“While I haven’t had the opportunity to read the entire Supreme Court decision yet, I have some initial impressions.

The first is that, with the ruling focused on the ability of Congress to tax the American people, this decision essentially makes a liar out of President Obama, who promised to never increase taxes on the middle class.

Secondly, it seems to me that the issue has been returned to the legislative branch. The next Congress will have the opportunity to repeal this burden on the American people and that’s the first thing I will be fighting for as Representative to the people in the 5th District.”

Comments

|

E-mail

|

Print

Tea Party supporter William Temple of Brunswick, Ga., protests against President Barack Obama's health care law outside the Supreme Court in Washington, Thursday, June 28, 2012. Saving its biggest case for last, the Supreme Court is expected to announce ruling on President Barack Obama's health care law. (AP Photo/David Goldman)

Will today’s landmark Supreme Court ruling galvanize Republican foes of “Obamacare” in Connecticut and around the country?

Republicans on the ballot are already recrafting their message in the wake of decision, which they say opens the door to higher taxes on small businesses without fixing the ills of the health care system.

And so resumes the talk of repealing the controversial legislation.

Here’s what they’re saying:

U.S. Senate candidate Linda McMahon:

“Today’s decision by the High Court is extremely disappointing. The American people were told that this legislation would lower costs. It hasn’t. They were told that it would not increase taxes. It does.

The tax increases that finance this will devastate small businesses and middle class families.

Our choice this November is all the clearer. The majority of Americans oppose the President’s health care plan because it raises taxes on small businesses, cuts Medicare by $500 billion and increases costs. I opposed it because Connecticut small business owners have told me about the negative impact it has had on their ability to create jobs. But now the real work begins, and that’s why it is so important for Connecticut voters to send someone to Washington who will implement common-sense, market-based solutions that increase patient choice, control costs, and expand access to coverage for all Americans.

I know what it’s like for the millions of Americans who lie awake at night worried about what they would do if, God forbid, something happened to a loved one and they couldn’t afford the medical care they need, because I’ve been there. When I found out I was pregnant with my son Shane, we didn’t have health insurance because we couldn’t afford it. As we reform our health care system, we should always remember those Americans, including many here in Connecticut, who every day face the uncertainty and fear of being without insurance or access to quality care.”

Former Congressman Christopher Shays, also a candidate for Senate:

“The Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the constitutionality of the individual healthcare mandate just reaffirms the need to send someone to the United States Senate who has the ability to repeal this destructive law. Obamacare is the single greatest infringement on our individual liberties and personal freedoms that we have seen in my generation. This was a power grab of the U.S. health care system by Chris Murphy, a Democratic Congress and the Obama Administration.

The Supreme Court ruled that the President’s healthcare plan is constitutional based on the fact that the individual mandate is a tax, in spite of the fact that the Democrat-controlled Congress and the Administration repeatedly insisted it was not a tax. This hypocrisy is why Americans have a right to be fed up with Washington.

Obamacare is increasing health insurance premiums, reducing patient choice, threatening the quality of care, and impeding medical progress. On top of that, six years of Obamacare ‘benefits’ are paid for with ten years of taxes.

Obamacare takes $500 billion away from Medicare, a vital program for our senior citizens that was already heading for insolvency, and uses it for other purposes.

Now more than ever we need experienced leaders who can navigate the process so that we can repeal the President’s so-called ‘Affordable Healthcare Act.’ “