ctblogger Posts

Cross post from Jon Pelto's Wait What?

Recalling that the greatest barriers to academic success, as measured by standardized tests, are poverty, language barriers and special education needs, what do the Connecticut Mastery Tests Mean?

For that we turn to the experts;

"We're pleased to see that there are signs of progress in our schools.  That said - while schools are moving more students into proficient and goal-level performance, significant gaps in achievement continue between economically disadvantaged students and their peers."

-Stefan Pryor, Governor Malloy's Commissioner of Education

"This year's results reveal noteworthy achievement gains in many districts..."our neediest students continue to perform significantly worse than their wealthier peers, especially at the high school level. Clearly, there is more work to be done."

--Patrick Riccards, education reform lobbyist and CEO of ConnCAN, a charter school advocacy organizations created by Achievement First Inc., which is Connecticut's largest charter school management company.

Late yesterday, the Malloy Administration released the full results of Connecticut's 2012 Mastery Tests.

Initially the Administration told Connecticut's school districts that the Connecticut Mastery Test results were "embargoed" until Friday, meaning towns weren't supposed to talk about them, especially not with the media.

Whether it was due to a change in strategy, or something else, the Administration decided it was time to release the scores.

There's more below the fold...
The summary;

Higher-income students perform at or above the "goal" level more than lower-income students

Suburban students score much higher on the standardized tests than urban students

White students score significantly higher than black and Hispanic students

The "achievement gap", that is the difference between the wealthiest students and poorest students, remain the largest-in-the-nation. In Avon, for example, 91.5 percent of students scored at or above goal.  In Hartford, only about 33 percent of the students scored at or above goal.

However,the results indicate that over the last six years, the test scores for poorer students increased much more than did the scores for wealthier students.

While the overall scores improved in urban areas, CT Newsjunkie also reports that, "the data released Thursday showed a widening of the achievement gap between students who speak English and those who are just learning it. Students just learning to speak English made smaller gains at scoring "proficient" and at or above "goal" than their native English-speaking counterparts in all grade levels and content."

Meanwhile, Governor Malloy's 2012 education law includes a new teacher evaluation system that will be used to determine whether teachers should be retained or fired.  A core component of that system relies on whether teachers can improve their student's standardized test scores.

The teacher evaluation portion of the law has been hailed as the most significant education reform module.  For example, the Hartford Courant's Rick Green observed that "finally, we may be able to clearly and fairly assess good teachers....teachers must demonstrate they are effective. Regular evaluations will be based, in part, on whether students are learning."

And that returns us to the single most important, but unanswered, question of them all.

When it comes to a teacher's capabilities, how do we interpret change in test scores?

If the percentage improvement was better in urban areas, does that mean teachers in those poor communities are doing a better job educating and improving their student's skill levels than teachers in the wealthy suburban districts?

Take Example #1:

Let us say that in City "M", where test scores are low due to poverty and language barriers, there is a 5 percent improvement in the number of 4th grader that score at goal on the Connecticut Mastery Test in reading.  Meanwhile, in nearby City "A," a wealthy suburban town, where the number of students at goal is three times higher, there was actually a .5 percent drop in the number of students at goal.  Which teachers did better?

Or take Example #2

In City "H," there are two 4th grade classes.  "Mrs. K has a class of 25 students, all of whom come from poor households.  6 aren't fluent in English, 10 others speak English but come from homes that don't use English as their primary language and 5 students have special education needs.   Nearby Mrs. R has a class of 22 students.  Her students also come from poor households, but all speak English and 9 have special education needs.  In this case, the test results come in and, both classes see a 2 percent increase in the number of students at goal.  Which teacher has done a better job?

For more on the 2012 Connecticut Mastery Test results check out the following articles.

http://www.ctnewsjunkie.com/ct...

http://ctmirror.com/story/1696...

http://www.courant.com/news/ed...

The gloves are off...

You mostly hear excuses from politicians, especially when their campaign's been caught breaking the law by the FBI.

Ouch.

Here's what Susan Bysiewicz had to say about Chris Murphy in her latest ad.

The Bysiewicz campaign also provided the following fact sheet to back up their claim about Murphy in the ad.

He's taken more hedge fund money than any Democrat in Congress.

Source: Murphy Contributions from Securities and Investments, Center for Responsive Politics.

NOTE: This ranking comes solely from 2008 hedge fund donations.

There's only one problem...it's not true.

Here's a listing of the Congressmen who took money form hedge funds in 2008, 2010, and 2012....for each of those election cycles, Murphy is no where near the top of the list in terms of Democrats.

Smelling blood in the water, in a press release entitled "Another Bysiewicz Disaster" the Murphy camp had this to say...

Adding to a series of political missteps, Susan Bysiewicz today began airing an ad that takes aim at her rival for the Democratic nomination for the U.S. Senate, Congressman Murphy. The problem is, Bysiewicz is actually attacking former Congressman Scott Murphy (D-NY).

The new ad accuses Chris Murphy of taking "more hedge fund money than any Democrat in Congress." In fact, Chris Murphy has never been the top Democratic recipient of hedge fund contributions in Congress. Ever.

[...]

In 2010, the top Democratic recipient of hedge fund contributions was Congressman Scott Murphy (D-NY), but not Congressman Chris Murphy (D-CT) as the ad falsely claims.

In addition, Bysiewicz's ad scrolls a list of so-called "Wall Street" firms that includes Comcast, a cable and internet provider, Shipman and Goodwin, a well-known Connecticut law firm, and Wilson Development, a local real estate company.

Bysiewicz also launched an accompanying website called WallStreetMurphy.com, which purports to list contributions to Murphy from Wall Street firms. That list includes the United Brotherhood of Carpenters (a carpenters' union), the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare (an organization that seeks to preserve Social Security and Medicare), and Arethusa Farms (a farm).  

"This is as embarassing as it gets for a political candidate," said Murphy campaign spokeswoman Taylor Lavender. "This ad, on so many levels, is so clearly wrong, and Susan Bysiewicz should take the ad down herself. It's bad enough that she mixed up Chris with a different Murphy, but didn't she at least watch the ad before it went on the air to see that she was naming cable companies and law firms as "Wall Street" donors?"

Bysiewicz's camp first responded by not acknowledging the error...

"The fact remains that Chris Murphy has taken over $700,000 from Wall Street more than any other House Democat. We did not confuse the Murphys. In 2008 Chris Murphy was the 4th largest receipient of hedge fund contributions. If Chris Murphy thinks being the 4th largest receipient of hedge fund donations in Congress is alright then it clearly shows he has gone Washington."

...then Bysiewicz sent this follow-up.

"It is absolutely accurate that Chris Murphy took over $700,000 from Wall Street sources.  He also took more money in 2008 from hedge funds than all but four other Democrats in Congress according to the Connecticut Post.  He then voted with 34 other Democrats in the next Congress to keep the hedge fund loophole the one time the New York Times said it could have been eliminated.   Mr. Murphy is looking for any technicality possible to attack my ad because he cannot defend these facts."

Finally Susan's team admitted the obvious.

Only hours after launching the first TV attack ad of her U.S. Senate campaign, Democrat Susan Bysiewicz was in the uncomfortable position of having to back away from some of her allegations against target and rival Chris Murphy.

[...]

Then came a concession from Bysiewicz's campaign manager, Jonathan Ducote: "Obviously, the research team could have been a little more thorough."

I think it's fair to say that this is not the feedback Bysiewicz wanted from her ad.

Well, that was one hell of a response...here's the breakdown.

"More of Bysiewicz's campaign contributions come from Wall Street..."

For some time Susan Bysiewicz has tried to make the case that Chris Murphy is beholden to Wall Street and today she repeated her stance with a new website and TV ad.

It didn't take long for Murphy's campaign to respond by calling the former Secretary of State a hypocrite.

The ad is largely based on false claims and hypocrisy: despite her claims, Susan Bysiewicz has actually taken more money from the financial sector as a percentage of her overall contributions than Chris Murphy.

"Bysiewicz has been running misleading campaigns since the 1990s, so her hypocrisy comes as no surprise," said Murphy spokeswoman Taylor Lavender. "The truth is that nobody in Connecticut is buying the attack because it's made up out of thin air. Chris has been fighting for Wall Street reform for years-Bysiewicz seems to have simply brought up this issue in the last 18 months because she thinks it polls well. And it's no secret that Susan is down on Wall Street begging for contributions to her campaign while she runs TV ads and sends out press releases attacking those same people. If Bysiewicz were really the candidate fighting Wall Street, why hasn't a single grassroots progressive group in Connecticut stood up and supported her? The answer is simple: AFL-CIO, CCAG, AFSCME, SEIU, the Working Families Party and many others support Chris because he doesn't just talk about reform, he's actually fighting for it."

The Murphy campaign provided a detailed listing of Bysiewicz's contributions from "Wall Street" interests (pdf file).

Susan Bysiewicz vs. The Truth

Susan Bysiewicz: Chris has "more than $500,000 in campaign contributions [from Wall Street/the financial services industry]"

WNPR Where We Vote, May 9, 2012

If that's true, that represents 11.49% of Murphy's total raised over the course of the cycle ($4,353,000 through the pre-convention filing, the last publicly available fundraising period).

When Dankosky asked Susan if she's ever taken money from the financial services industry: "Not much in the investment banking industry"

WNPR Where We Vote May, 9, 2012

That's false. As the data linked above very clearly shows, Bysiewicz has taken at least $232,360 from Wall Street/ the financial services industry (through the pre-convention filing). When compared to her total raised for the cycle ($1,944,503), you get 11.93%.

Put simply:

Murphy: $500,000 out of $4,353,000 = 11.49%

Bysiewicz: $232,360 out of $1,944,503 = 11.93%

Calling Bysiewicz out as a hypocrite on her Wall Street attack is nothing new. During Murphy's endorsement from the CCAG, Tom Swan echoed the same thoughts regarding the attack.

Register-Citizen has the latest.

A Super PAC could be poised to enter the race for Connecticut's 5th District Congress seat, backed by wealthy contributors to the campaign of Democrat Dan Roberti.

Roberti has spent more money on his campaign than any other 5th District candidate to date and is low on cash as the Aug. 14 Democratic primary approaches.

But he has tapped out maximum donation support from dozens of out-of-state friends, clients and contacts of his Washington, D.C., lobbyist father, Vin Roberti.

Enter "New Directions for America," a "Super PAC" that is allowed to exist because of the Supreme Court's "Citizens United" ruling. It allows third-party groups to raise and spend unlimited amounts of money on behalf of political candidates. These efforts are technically not supposed to be "coordinated" with the candidates themselves, but the rules governing coordination are notoriously weak, allowing close associates of the candidates to remove a "campaign" hat and put on a "Super PAC" hat.

New Directions for America raised $95,000 in the Federal Elections Commission period ending in June and reported no expenditures to date.

That money came from just five donors - ATCO Properties and Management of Glendale, New York, $10,000; the Hemmerdinger Corp. of Glendale, New York, $10,000; David Bohnett of Beverly Hills, California, $5,000; Morris B. Pearl of New York City, $20,000; and George J. Tsunis CEO of Chartwell Hotels, Huntington, New York, $50,000.

Bohnett, listed in one report as a "self-employed philanthropist" and on another as an investor in Baroda Ventures LLC, gave $1,000 to Roberti on March 30.

Barbara Pearl, listed at the same Park Avenue address as Morris Pearl, gave Roberti $5,000 on March 25.

Morris Pearl was an early Roberti donor, giving $5,000 in March 2011.

So were George and Olga Tsunis, who gave him a combined $15,000, also in March 2011.

The treasurer of New Directions for America, which lists a New York City P.O. Box as its address, is Edward C. Sweeney, a managing member of Pius International Trading in New York, who has donated $6,000 to Roberti's campaign.

Coincidence? Only time will tell but given Roberti's high burn rate, I wouldn't be shocked to see this PAC Get behind his candidacy.

Using an campaign ad from Chris Murphy's 2006 campaign against Nancy Johnson, Susan Bysiewicz unveiled a new website dedicated to the Congressman's connections to Wall Street.

Press release:

Over the course of this campaign Chris Murphy has told primary voters that the best way to evaluate him is to review his record as a member of Congress. When primary voters look at his record they will find that he has taken over $700,000 from Wall Street and voted for Wall Street's agenda at the expense of the middle class. While Chris Murphy might have run to change Congress his record clearly shows Washington changed him.

You can view Bysiewicz's listing of Murphy's "Wall Street" contributors by clicking here...  

Lisa Wilson-Phoney 2010.

As an entrepreneur, I see the new health care law as an opportunity to create jobs, in medical technology, robotics and telehealth.

Lisa Wilson-Phoney email to supporters 07.19.12.

As someone who has spent their life as a health care professional I know first-hand that Obamacare is bad medicine for our health care system.

Maybe I'm being a tad too harsh...it's not like Wilson-Phoney has a long history of political contributions to Democratic candidates or Democratic PACs that supported health care reform.

Reading material.

• Free ride.

  None of New Haven's state legislators needs to "run" for re-election this year-because no one has emerged to challenge them.

  At least as of now.

  All six state representatives and two state senators based in New Haven-all Democrats-have decided to seek new two-year terms in the elections this year.

  The deadline has passed for Democrats to challenge them in primaries. Not a single challenger has emerged. (In single-party New Haven, primaries are usually tantamount to general election.)

  The deadline has also passed for Republicans to secure spots on the November general election ballot. Not a single Republican candidate has signed up, either.

  Technically, a third-party or write-in candidate could still emerge by an Aug. 8 filing deadline. None has been spotted. (The Greens are running a candidate for New Haven registrar of voters, under a system in which the Republican and Democratic incumbents cannot lose. Green party town chairman Charlie Pillsbury confirmed that the party will run no candidates this year for any New Haven state legislative offices.)

  So as long as state Sens. Martin Looney and Toni Harp and state Reps. Pat Dillon, Gary Holder-Winfield, Juan Candelaria, Roland Lemar, Toni Walker, and Robert Megna remember to show up to vote for themselves on Nov. 6, they're in. No need to print flyers or bumper stickers, raise money, or ask anyone else to vote for them if they don't feel like it.

• Well Linda, we're still waiting...
• Why am I not shocked?
  

  Republican congressional candidate Steve Obsitnik agreed Tuesday to refund some campaign contributions because he didn't have to use the funds to win a primary election to oppose Rep. Jim Himes in the Nov. 6 election.

  Himes' campaign had accused Obsitnik of "padding" his fundraising totals by including contributions that were intended for his primary election campaign but that now must be used in a different manner because the Republican avoided a primary to become his party's nominee for Connecticut's 4th Congressional District.

  [...]

  In his second-quarter campaign finance report filed last weekend with the Federal Election Commission, Obsitnik, a businessman from Westport, said he had raised $236,169 in the second quarter. On Tuesday, his campaign said it would refund $42,500.

  Obsitnik campaign manager John Puskar said Tuesday that "up until last month we were planning for a primary. Now that we do not face one, we will obviously return the money we raised for it."

  Justin Myers, campaign manager for Himes, had accused Obsitnik's camp of trying to "make it look as if his fundraising numbers are more spectacular than they are" by including primary contributions that must be returned to the contributor.

• Interesting news regarding active voters in the 5th.
  

  The 5th district is an open seat with seven candidates running. You might think that would bring new people into the process, new registered voters, generating excitement about a highly contested election.

  But the number of active voters in the 5th Congressional District is actually shrinking.

  According to the Secretary of the State's office, there are 45,000 more active voters in the state as compared to the same time last year. But over the last few months, the 5th Congressional District has seen a decrease in active voters.

  Numbers issued in April showed a total of 399,441 active voters in the 5th district. As of today, that number has dropped by 2,294, or 0.57 percent, to 397,147.

  Democrats, Republicans and unaffiliated voter numbers all saw a decrease in registration since April, though Democrats saw a far more significant drop.

  Three months ago there were 129,219 active Democratic voters - with a drop of 1,075, or 0.8 percent, to 128,144, currently.

• Christine Stuart's write-up on the upcoming primary is a must read.
• We needed a report to explain the obvious?
  

  Utility regulators concluded in a draft decision Tuesday that Connecticut Light & Power was "deficient and inadequate" in its preparation and response to the two storms that caused prolonged blackouts last year.

  The report by the Public Utility Regulatory Authority says the state's largest power company should face unspecified financial sanctions "as a penalty for poor management performance and to provide incentives for improvement."

What else is new?

A Bridgeport high school teacher spoke of scrambling to find chalk, and of not having enough paper to give students during their final exams.

In another school in Bridgeport, there are not enough books, so teachers must copy as much as they can before they reach their quota of paper.

In Norwalk, librarians in a school ran an after-school program to help children whose parents do not speak English with homework. Facing a huge budget gap, those librarians' jobs were eliminated.

This evening Dan Roberti announced that his campaign raised 92k for the second quarter, far less than Elizabeth Esty and Chris Donovan.

WATERBURY, CT (July 15, 2012) - The Dan Roberti for Congress campaign committee today filed its second quarter Federal Election Commission finance report, showing it has raised  nearly $1.2 million for the campaign to date.

The campaign has raised a total of $1,195,326. In the second quarter of 2012, the campaign raised $92,940, and it has $288,413 cash on hand, according to the FEC report.

"I am thankful for the many generous donations that I received during the last quarter, and throughout my campaign," said Mr. Roberti. "With this generous support, I will continue a vigorous campaign to win the Democratic primary in August and the general election in November."

With only a weeks till the primary, coming in third in fundraising (including falling behind a candidate who fired his finance director and is still in damage control mode) has to be seen as a disappointment for the Roberti camp.

Although the Chris Donovan campaign have yet to file their latest finance report with the FEC, in an interview with Susan Haigh, campaign manager Tom Swan provided some details regarding the House Speaker's fundraising efforts for the last quarter.

Swan acknowledged that the controversy has affected Donovan's continued fundraising efforts. He said the campaign raised $149,715 over the past three months. That's compared to $340,000 over the same period raised by former state Rep. Elizabeth Esty, one of Donovan's three Democratic rivals in the Aug. 14 primary.

Donovan has raised nearly $1.1 million in total and has $570,515 in cash on hand.

Esty has reported raising $1.5 million and has $900,000 in cash. The third Democrat, Daniel Roberti, has not yet announced his figures.

"There's no doubt that we had additional challenges during the month of June," Swan said. However, he said the campaign has hired a new finance director. He said an assistant finance director and chief operating officers will also be on the job soon.

Despite the controversy, Swan said Donovan, who is still being strongly supported by organized labor, expects he can rely on his supporters to keep making contributions.

"We have thousands of low donor contributors and their pattern is to give over and over again," he said.

There's no question that Donovan's troubles has effected his fundraising efforts. When you add the yet released tab of Donovan's independent investigation into his campaign, as long as the FBI investigation continues, the harder it will be for the House Speaker to match the war chest of his competitors.

Today, the Susan Bysiewicz for Senate campaign announced that the former Secretary of State raised over $355,000 for the the second quarter with 920,000 cash on hand.

Press release:

Statement Below from Jonathan Ducote, Campaign Manager Bysiewicz for Senate:

"Over the past two weeks we have been on television communicating Susan's message of successfully standing up to powerful special interests and lobbyists. We have the resources we need for the primary and will continue to make smart investments in order to communicate Susan's message across Connecticut."

The latest...

• Not guilty.

  It took about 10 minutes for Chris Donovan's former finance director to plead "not guilty" to the corruption charges which threw a U.S Congressional race into turmoil.

  A grand jury Wednesday indicted the finance director, Robert Braddock Jr., 33, on three counts of conspiring to hide the source of nearly $30,000 in campaign donations to his former boss' campaign on behalf of a group of smoke shop owners looking to defeat legislation. Braddock worked for Donovan's campaign for Connecticut's 5th U.S. Congressional District seat.

  Braddock, who is out on a $100,000 bond, seemed relaxed prior to his arraignment Thursday in U.S. District Court in New Haven. He was seen laughing with his attorney Frank Riccio II shortly.

  Asked in the hallway how he was doing, Braddock reluctantly smiled, threw up his hands and said, "as good as I can be."

• Looks like Danbury Mayor Mark Boughton's former secretary is about to expose his skeletons...
  

  It looks like the chickens have finally come home to roost...and this is DEFINITELY not good news for the mayor and others at City Hall.

  If this lawsuit doesn't end in a settlement, and if the allegations in the complaint are proven to be true, then it's fair to say that Boughton's political career is in SERIOUS jeopardy...if not finished.

  I have a feeling that if this case moves forward, Boughton might have to answer questions regarding this matter under oath. More later.

• Good riddance.
  

  Candidate for the Connecticut General Assembly and longtime democrat, Louis A Bevilacqua, has announced that he has filed the appropriate paperwork and has registered as a member of the Republican Party.

• More from New Haven...
  

  When two city cops pulled over two sisters who made a midnight visit to Hudson Street, the cops did so because of the color of their skin-and because of a systemic failure to address racial profiling in the police department, a new federal suit charges.

  The suit, filed in federal court Tuesday by Lashunda and Ronda Adkins, stems from charges that came from what they called a fishy traffic stop-charges that a prosecutor later decided not to pursue. The plaintiffs claim they were charged because of the color of their skin, as the result of the city and police union's failure to properly train cops on how to avoid racial profiling.

  The suit, filed by Attorney Michael Deem in U.S. District Court, names Mayor John DeStefano, city cops Jason Jemiola and Christopher Cacela, the local police union and its parent union, AFSCME Council 15, and the city of New Haven as defendants.

• PELTO: "Attention Grows About "Education Reformer's" Faux Technique to Push Up Test Scores"
  

  The CTMirror ran a story yesterday about how some school districts have figured out that if you shift lower performing students to a Modified Assessment Test instead of the Connecticut Mastery Test, your test scores will go up, and people will think that you are" improving the quality of education" in that community.

  Readers will recall that about four months ago, we examined how Hartford's former Superintendent of Schools, Steven "where is my pension" Adamowski  had used this very technique from 2006 to 2011 to push up Hartford's test scores.

  As the CTMirror story indicates;

  "One of every 20 students in Connecticut is being directed to take standardized tests created for children with either severe or moderate disabilities, a significant increase in the past five years."  See http://ctmirror.com/story/1688...

  Although the state-wide average is now one in 20, in Adamowski's case, he moved 9.8 percent of Hartford's lowest performing students off the Connecticut Mastery Test and to the Modified Assessment Test in just four years, thereby setting up a situation in which he could claim that he had dramatically improved test scores in Hartford.  See March 21, 2012 Wait, What? post: http://jonathanpelto.com/2012/...

  Unfortunately, the CTMirror story doesn't highlight Adamowski's record on this very topic, it does show how standardized test taking can be manipulated to make it appear that test scores are going up when, in fact, the change is being driven by changing who is actually taking the tests.

With the anouncement of a federal grand jury indicting Chris Donovan's former campagin manager with conspiring to conceal campaign donations, Dan Roberti called on the House Speaker  to end his campaign for Congress.

PRESS RELEASE:

"The indictment of Robert Braddock clearly demonstrates the seriousness on the part of the government in investigating and prosecuting alleged illegalities in Chris Donovan's campaign finance operation. However, it is a sad situation for the members of the 5th District's Democratic Party who will go to the polls in about one month to select a candidate for Congress - without any explanation from Chris Donovan as to what happened.

It is time for Chris Donovan to withdraw from the primary race for the good of the Connecticut Democratic Party and to protect the seat. He has hidden behind lawyers and never stepped up to explain how members of his campaign staff could have arranged conduit contributions without his knowledge. New revelations in the indictment show Chris Donovan just a breath away from the questionable activities of his campaign staff. We will lose the seat if Chris Donovan is the nominee, so he must remove himself from the primary race."

UPDATE 5:30 PM: Here's a copy of the indictment (h/t to Christine Stuart at CTNJ)

UPDATE 5:20 PM: Press release from the US Dept of Justice:

David B. Fein, United States Attorney for the District of Connecticut, announced that a federal grand jury sitting in New Haven today returned a three-count indictment that charges ROBERT BRADDOCK, JR., 33, of Meriden, with participating in a conspiracy to conceal the source of contributions to the campaign of a candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives on which he worked.

The indictment alleges that BRADDOCK, while employed as the Finance Director for the campaign of a candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives, conspired to accept conduit campaign contributions, which are contributions made by one person in the name of another person.  The purpose of the conduit contributions was to conceal the fact that the individuals who were actually financing the payments had an interest in legislation that was expected to be introduced, and eventually was introduced, before the Connecticut General Assembly during the 2012 legislative session.  The candidate is also a current member of the Connecticut General Assembly.

"This indictment details an extensive conspiracy to corrupt the electoral process," stated U.S. Attorney Fein.  "The U.S. Attorney's Office and the FBI continue to investigate not only this matter, but all illegal behavior that corrupts our system of government."

According to the indictment, Roll Your Own ("RYO") smoke shops are retail businesses that sell loose smoking tobacco and cigarette-rolling materials and offer customers the option of paying a "rental" fee to insert the loose tobacco and the rolling materials into a RYO machine, which is capable of rapidly rolling large quantities of cigarettes.  Customers do not pay a tax on the RYO cigarettes when rolled by the RYO machines, in contrast to cigarettes purchased over-the-counter.  In August 2011, the State of Connecticut applied for an order permanently enjoining the RYO smoke shops from operating RYO machines, which the State argued were tobacco manufacturing devices under Connecticut law.

The indictment alleges that, in 2011, certain RYO smoke shop owners and others began to discuss the possibility that the Connecticut General Assembly would enact legislation harmful to RYO smoke shop owners' business interests during the 2012 legislative session.  In November 2011, the RYO shop owners arranged to meet with the member of the General Assembly to discuss their concerns.  Also in November 2011, the RYO shop owners and others began to deliver to BRADDOCK and the campaign checks in the amount of $2,500, which were, in fact, conduit contributions.  Typically, the contributors were reimbursed with cash from one or more of the RYO shop owners.  In November and December 2011, BRADDOCK accepted a total of four $2,500 conduit campaign contributions.

The indictment further alleges that, on April 3, 2012, the Connecticut General Assembly's Joint Committee on Finance, Revenue and Bonding voted in favor of Senate Bill 357, legislation that would deem RYO smoke shop owners to be tobacco manufacturers under Connecticut law, a designation that would have subjected RYO smoke shop owners to a substantial licensing fee and tax increase.  Approximately one week later, BRADDOCK accepted an additional four $2,500 checks in the names of conduit contributors.

On May 9, 2012, the legislative session ended, and the legislation had not been called for a vote by either chamber of the General Assembly.

The indictment alleges that, on May 14, 2012, a co-conspirator who helped to arrange the previous eight conduit contributions delivered $10,000 to the campaign in the form of three $2,500 conduit contributions made payable to the campaign, and one $2,500 conduit contribution made payable to a political party.  After BRADDOCK was informed by the co-conspirator the next day that one of the contributions was in the form of a bank check provided by one of the Roll-Your-Own shop owners, BRADDOCK arranged for the check not to be deposited into the campaign's bank account.  On May 16, 2012, the co-conspirator and another co-conspirator, who was an aide to the campaign, met at a restaurant in Southington.  At that meeting, the co-conspirator provided the campaign aide with a replacement $2,500 check in the name of a different conduit contributor who was not affiliated with any Roll-Your-Own shops.

The investigation of this matter has included numerous recorded conversations, as well as an FBI Special Agents acting in an undercover capacity.

The indictment charges BRADDOCK with one count of conspiracy to conceal federal campaign contributions, a charge that carries a maximum term of five years and a fine of up to $250,000.  BRADDOCK also is charged with one count of accepting federal campaign contributions made by persons in the names of others, a charge that carries a maximum term of imprisonment of two years and a fine of up to $250,000.  Finally, BRADDOCK is charged with one count of causing false reports to be filed with the Federal Election Commission, a charge that carries a maximum term of imprisonment of five years and a fine of up to $250,000.

U.S. Attorney Fein stressed that an indictment is not evidence of guilt.  Charges are only allegations, and each defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

This matter is being investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorneys Christopher M. Mattei and Eric J. Glover.

UPDATE 5:15 PM: CTNJ is on the case..

A federal grand jury returned a three-count indictment Wednesday against Chris Donovan's Former Finance Director Robert Braddock Jr. for conspiring to conceal the source of donations to Donovan's congressional campaign.

The indictment makes similar, but much more detailed allegations, than the federal complaint Braddock was arrested on at the end of May. It alleges that Braddock concealed the identity of the donors, who were seeking to influence roll-your-own cigarette legislation before it even existed, as far back as November 2011.

The indictment alleges that roll-your-own smoke shop owners and co-conspirator 1, identified in media reports as Ray Soucy, began to discuss the possibility the General Assembly would enact harmful legislation that would impact their businesses. The RYO business model was built on exploiting a tax loophole, which allows customers to roll 200 cigarettes in about 10-minutes at a cost about $30 below retail cigarette prices.

In November 2011, the RYO shop owners and others began to deliver to Braddock and the campaign checks in the amount of $2,500, which were, in fact, conduit contributions.  Typically, the contributors were reimbursed with cash from one or more of the RYO shop owners. Braddock accepted a total of four $2,500 conduit campaign contributions in November and December 2011, according to the indictment.

Braddock and Soucy arranged for Donovan to meet with RYO owners on Nov. 16, 2011, but instructed them not to talk about a bill during that meeting because, "there is always people following this guy around, watching what he's doing . . .."

The RYO owners expressed concern they were doing something wrong by trying to influence legislation through congressional campaign donations. RYO Owner 2 said, "something happens, they say why the fuck did these guys donate ten thousand to this campaign."

But they made their donations Dec. 8, 2011 at a fundraising event in Waterbury where they handed them off to Braddock, who told them "You're gonna be fine. I wouldn't go repeating what I just said, but I think you're gonna be fine."

Courant's Chris Keating was the first to break the news via Twitter.

...post will be updated as the story develops.

Cross post from Jon Pelto's Wait, What?

Hundreds, even thousands of groups successfully follow Connecticut's ethics and lobbing laws, so why do Excel Bridgeport, Inc. and some of the biggest corporate leaders in Fairfield County have such a hard time complying with the rules the rest of us have to live by?

Since it was incorporated, much of what Excel Bridgeport has been doing could be considered lobbying.

Beginning in January 2011, Meghan Lowney actively worked to persuade the Connecticut State Board of Education to attempt its illegal takeover of the Bridgeport School System.  In fact, over the six months leading up to the State Board of Education's illegal takeover, Lowney engaged in numerous communications with state officials and yet neither Lowney, Snow or Excel Bridgeport ever registered to lobby Connecticut state government, as required.

During the recent 2012 legislative session, Excel Bridgeport, as well as its leadership and staff worked hard to pass Governor Malloy's "education reform" bill, as well as more targeted efforts to help the Bridgeport's illegal Board of Education.  Despite that, Excel Bridgeport, its directors and its staff failed to register in January, February, March, April and most of May.

More than two weeks after the end of the 2012 Legislative session, Excel Bridgeport finally filed the required papers, listing Jorge Cabrera as the organization's lead lobbyist.  The initial paperwork also identified that the group's executive director, Maria Zambrano, was going to file the necessary paperwork, but so far she has failed to complete the necessary paperwork and her application is listed as "still pending."

Although the group registered, it has still failed to fill out the required reporting documents.

Furthermore, neither Meghan Lowney nor Nate Snow has registered, although they were the two who had the most significant contact with state officials.

Read more below the fold...
For the record, the Bridgeport Partnership for School Success, Inc. was created in December 2010 and then changed its name to Excel Bridgeport Inc. in September 2011.

According to its incorporation papers, Meghan Lowney, the Executive Director of the Zoom Foundation (the personal foundation of a Fairfield County billionaire) was registered as Excel Bridgeport, Inc.'s founding president and Nathan Snow, the Executive Director of Connecticut's Teach for America Chapter served as the organization's founding vice president.  Lowney's work and home addresses, in Fairfield, were used as the organization's legal address.

Although they apparently didn't take the time to properly amend their legal documents, at some point over the last couple of years, Nathan Snow became Excel's president, Jonathan Hayes (Executive, Meetinghouse Productions) became treasurer and Joel Green (Partner, Green & Gross, PC) became secretary of Excel Bridgeport, Inc.

Meanwhile, the company's directors became Robert Francis (Executive Director, RYASAP), Carl Horton, Jr. (Consultant, Accenture), Scott Hughes (City Librarian, Bridgeport Public Library), Meghan Lowney (Executive Director, ZOOM Foundation) and Joseph McGee (Vice President, Fairfield County Business Council).

Even after repeated columns about this issue, Excel Bridgeport Inc. continues to engage in activities that a reasonable person would consider lobbying.

Earlier this summer, Excel Bridgeport Inc. and the Bridgeport Public Library announced the "Great Bus Tour for Better Bridgeport Schools."  The effort, which included at least five sessions around the City, included one and a half hour "education" programs and refreshments.

According to Jorge Cabrera, Excel's community organizer, Excel Bridgeport co-sponsored the event with the Bridgeport Library saying "We are very excited about this tour as we engage Bridgeport parents regarding improving the public schools. We firmly believe that change can happen and that our schools can be a model of success. We anticipate a vigorous discussion around the issues of education change but know that if parents have an honest facilitator who can help them carve out a "space" in which they can grow as leaders, learn to advocate for their children and city and are supported that they can achieve significant, systemic, long-term change in their schools that can transform a generation. Our bus tour is a piece of that larger vision we are working toward every day!"

The publicity material failed to note that Bridgeport's City Librarian is also a Director of Excel Bridgeport or where the money for the effort was coming from.  Under Connecticut law, if the bus tour included any discussions about persuading the state, then Excel Bridgeport could have violated the law by not properly reporting those expenses.  In addition, if lobbying did take place, it raises significant ethical and legal issues if the City Librarian, the City Library or any public resources were used during the "bus tour."

Since the Office of State Ethics cannot comment on ongoing investigations, it is not clear if Excel Bridgeport is or is not under investigation for lobbying violations leading up to the State Department of Education's illegal takeover, whether they engaged in illegal lobbying during the recent legislative session or whether Excel Bridgeport Inc., its board of directors or its staff continue to violate the spirit and the letter of Connecticut law.

And violations do not come cheap.  Failing to follow Connecticut's lobbying law can result in fines of up to $10,000 per violation.

And perhaps the biggest question of all remains the mystery.

Why do these people appear to believe that they are above the law?

>In response to Elizabeth Esty's first TV ad in which she took a shot at Chris Donovan's leadership as House Speaker, the endorsed Congressional candidate's campaign manager, Tom Swan, shot back.

In Elizabeth Esty's first campaign ad, she highlights her support for a Republican-like budget that attacked the very values Democrats believe in. As a legislator, Esty tried to protect tax breaks for millionaires by cutting funding for classroom education and gutting health care for seniors and Connecticut's poorest children. Esty didn't take on party leaders, she took on the values of the Democratic Party with a Republican-like plan to protect millionaires on the backs of seniors and children.

The Donovan campaign provided a link to Link to an breakdown of Esty's alternative budget done by the Office of Fiscal Analysis, which can be viewed here.

The Chris Murphy for Senate campaign released their fundraising figures for the second quarter...and to say the figures are impressive would be an understatement.

Press release:

Chris Murphy's campaign for U.S. Senate raised more than $1.2 million in the second fundraising quarter of 2012, bringing the campaign's fundraising total to over $5.45 million. The campaign will report over $3.1 million cash on hand.

"With over 1,700 new contributors just this quarter, our campaign is growing fast,"said Murphy. "This was our most successful quarter ever, and we did it through the power of thousands of small donations-82% of our contributions were $250 or less. I'm so proud that our campaign has contributors in every single city and town in Connecticut, and while I can't write myself a $50 million check, the power of our grassroots fundraising operation shows an enthusiasm for our campaign that McMahon just can't match."

Murphy's vast grassroots network continues to grow: a whopping 1,728 new donors contributed to the campaign in the second quarter of 2012. With 1,590 new donors in the first quarter, Murphy's campaign has received contributions from 8,190 people, 80% of whom live in Connecticut.

With primary day around the corner, Elizabeth Esty is the latest candidate to start airing ads on TV...which includes a little jab at the Chris Donovan (highlighted in bold within the transcript).

Press release:

Former state representative and Congressional candidate Elizabeth Esty released the first ad of her campaign for Connecticut's 5th District today. The ad, titled "Shoes," will air on both broadcast and cable TV stations - reaching voters across the entire 5th District.

The ad highlights Esty's record of stepping up to hold government accountable to middle class families - going door to door to protect school funding as a community leader, balancing the budget and protecting seniors from higher property taxes as a member of her town council, and taking on her own party leaders to fight for honest budgets and cutting her own pay as a State Representative.

"We're excited to begin a new phase of the campaign," said Esty Campaign Manager Julie Sweet. "Elizabeth has been getting out and meeting with folks all across the district since beginning her campaign over a year ago. Our field team and volunteers have already knocked on thousands of doors and made tens of thousands of phone calls to voters in our grassroots effort. This ad will ensure that Elizabeth can reach as many new voters as possible with her message of accountability and commonsense problem solving to fix Washington."

TRANSCRIPT:

Announcer: Elizabeth Esty's worn a lot of shoes.

As a community leader, she went door to door for better school funding.

On the town council, Esty worked to balance the budget while protecting seniors from higher property taxes.

And as a legislator, she took on her party leaders to fight for honest budgets - even cutting her own pay.

And in Congress?  

Elizabeth: It may take combat boots, but I'll do whatever it takes to get things done for the middle class. I'm Elizabeth Esty and I approve this message.

Paz picked up on the remark:

In the first TV ad of her congressional campaign, former state Rep. Elizabeth Esty, D-Cheshire, indirectly criticizes a rival, House Speaker Christopher G. Donovan, D-Meriden, with a line saying she "took on her party leaders to fight for honest budgets -- even cutting her own pay."

Donovan was speaker during Esty's only term in the House, beginning in January 2009. But the jab at unnamed leaders is a subtle one, and Esty's first 30-second spot is mainly an upbeat biographical piece, introducing her as a fiscal moderate who supported school funding, while concerned with higher taxes.

Esty took a voluntary 10-percent pay cut during her one term in the General Assembly, beginning in April 2009, according to her campaign. Rank-and-file legislators are paid $32,500 annually, a $28,000 salary and $4,500 in unvouchered expenses.

Today, the Susan B campaign released a new TV ad which is a response to comment that the former Secretary of State can not win the senate primary.

Press release:

Today we started running a new ad. The ad highlights some of the key issues Susan worked on while in state government. In each case Susan worked to build a coalition of advocates, legislators, and everyday people to ensure that the bill would become law. It is a message that speaks to Susan's willingness to take on the tough fights based on what's right - not what's easy.