ctblogger Posts

Ken Dixon has the latest

Sources with knowledge of Friday's meeting among leaders of the state's Working Families Party say that Speaker of the House Chris Donovan, once the shoo in for the Democratic nomination for the 5th Congressional District seat, will abandon his scandal-plagued campaign next Wednesday, the 29th, if not sooner. On the 30th, the small 171-member party with the important extra line on the ballot because of its big turnout in recent elections, is scheduled to endorse Democrat Elizabeth Esty, the former one-term state House member from Cheshire who's the wife of state DEEP Commissioner Dan Esty.

Image via CTNJ

So let me see if I have this correct.

Someone who is quite arguably one of the most unpopular Governors in the country who threw unions and public employees under the bus did a "kumbaya" photo-op with the Democratic Congressional candidate who was labeled "Republican-Light" and  linked to Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan due to her proposals to cut services for women seniors, children and the poor. Oh, what was the theme of this borderline lame "union unity" event...to attack the Romney/Ryan budget plan that proposes massive cuts in the area of services for women, seniors, children and the poor (is your head spinning yet).

Opps, I forgot, all that stuff said about Esty in the past doesn't matter anymore and everyone should rally behind the former one term State Rep because she has the D after her name.

BTW: I wonder if it's a coincidence that no one from American Federation of Teachers (AFT), AFSCME, UAW, SEIU 1199, SEIU 32BJ seemed to be sat this "unity" event (paging Sal Luciano, Julie Kushner, Matt O'Connor, Larry Dorman, etc). If you're having a union "unity" rally, you would think the most recognizable unions in the state would be an attendance as opposed to  the same Teamsters who supported Dan Roberti.

...Could it be possible that you didn't see the most notable unions, which make up the largest portion of the AFL-CIO, were not at Esty's staged event because it's rumored that those groups voted AGAINST Esty at the meeting on Wednesday.

Flashback: July 27th

Under the Democratic alternative budget plan that Elizabeth Esty supported, women on Medicare would have lost coverage for preventative dental care," said [director of UAW Region 9A, Julie] Kushner. "Worse, numerous hospitals across the state would have been closed, making it harder for women and their families to get emergency and specialized care."

Flashback: Aug 18th

While some Democrats ask what choice labor has other than Esty, at least a couple of prominent state labor representatives were still criticizing the newly anointed nominee at week's end. They brought up an April 2010 Courant column in which, as a state legislator, Esty expressed reservations on union priorities such as mandatory sick-time rules for employers, "longevity payments" for state workers and state pension costs. "The center is not being heard," she said in that piece, by columnist Rick Green.

"I wonder which 'middle' she's talking about. Is she talking about middle management at a Wall Street hedge fund?" said Matt O'Connor, the Connecticut political director for SEIU Local 32BJ, which represents about 4,500 workers in the state, most of them custodians.

"This gives us pause," O'Connor said. "She claims to be speaking for folks in the moderate middle," he said, but "I don't think wanting to go to the doctor when you're sick is a 'fringe' issue. ... She voted against paid sick leave" as a legislator when the bill failed in 2009.

[...]

"We have to assess what we're going to do next, because Chris [Donovan] was a real, true fighter for the working class and right now we're not convinced Elizabeth Esty is interested in, or willing to be, that kind of fighter," said Council 4 spokesman Larry Dorman.

He also harked back to the 2010 Courant column: "Based on Green's column, she seems to think that having retirement security, having a decent paycheck, having paid sick days are fringe positions, and we don't consider those fringe positions, we consider them to be essential for having a decent standard of living in this state."

In other words, take the bullshit John Olsen is spewing with a grain of salt...the kumbaya between RANK AND FILE union members and Esty is for the most part spin created to place pressure on Donovan to withdraw his name off the Working Families Party ticket.

And of course this is possible because our reliable media allowed Olsen to do his spinning by taking copying and pasting his bullshit press releases at verbatim without questioning the stooge about what really happened at his meeting (e.g., which groups voted against Esty, who spoke out against Esty, would Ety won the support if the vote was based on membership as opposed to a vote by board members).

Food for thought.

Because it's been a while...

• Better late than never (I guess).

  Esty's record is not as extensive - she served only a single term as a state representative - but both candidates have changed votes or reassessed their positions on specific issues when push came to shove.

  [...]

  Senior Care

  She says her record demonstrates strong support of seniors, saying on her website, "I believe how we treat our parents and grandparents reflects on our values as a country."

  "I first ran for local office after helping lead a grassroots effort to protect elderly residents from rising property taxes.  I helped design and pass a local budget that ensured strong schools and protected lower-income seniors from untenable increases in their property tax," she says on her website.

  But a 2009 alternative budget championed by Esty, among other Democratic legislators, sought to reduce funding for several senior-focused programs. That alternative budget, according to the state's Office of Fiscal Analysis, would have halted a rate increase for adult day care providers, "require dually eligible clients to be responsible for paying up to $20 per month in Medicare co-pays for Part-D covered drugs," eliminated rate adjustments for nursing homes and eliminate $452,965 for the state Department on Aging.

  Education

  "As the mother of two children who have graduated from public schools in Connecticut, and another who is in high school, I know that our schools and teachers need our full support," Esty writes on her website, but that same alternative budget proposed cuts to two public schools, one in her own House district.

  That budget would have cut additional funding for Meriden's Thomas Edison Middle School and Cheshire's Wintergreen School for a savings of $1.5 million over two years.

  The Democratic alternative budget proposed a total of $119 million in cuts to higher and lower education, including a 10 percent reduction in special education funding, the elimination of funding for Early Reading Success and After School programs, a reduction in the reimbursement for healthy foods in schools, and a reduction in funding for the American School for the Deaf.

  Paid Sick Leave

  Esty has made paid sick leave one of her centerpiece issues under the health care banner. On her website, she says "In Congress I will fight for a national law requiring paid sick leave," and uses Connecticut's 2011 paid sick leave bill as a model.

  But when, as a state representative in 2009, a similar bill came up, Esty voted against it. She has said that the 2011 bill improved on its predecessor by exempting manufacturers, "and many of the manufacturers in central and northwest Connecticut are small businesses."

  It's unfortunate that the media was focused on Donovan 24/7 as opposed to reporting on the candidates' positions versus their record. When it comes to Esty, what the Register-Citizen reported is nothing new for people who read this site.

• Well that was fast!
  

  Republican U.S. Senate candidate Linda McMahon's top spokesman, Tim Murtaugh, left the campaign Tuesday a little more than month after arriving in Connecticut.

  Murtaugh replaced McMahon's first communications director, Erin Isaac, who left McMahon's 2012 campaign in July for family reasons.

  "Tim Murtaugh is no longer with the campaign and we wish him nothing but the best," Corry Bliss, McMahon's campaign manager, said Wednesday.

  The reason for Murtaugh's abrupt departure is uncertain.

  Murtaugh, whose aggressive style rubbed some members of the media the wrong way, was unable to be reached for comment Wednesday.

• Yet another political stunt from the GOP
  

  A new rift opened this week in the ongoing partisan dispute over a state program that allows prison inmates to shorten their sentences by participating in education, counseling and other re-entry programs.

  Minority Republicans on the legislature's Judiciary Committee announced they would conduct a Sept. 18 informational meeting at the Legislative Office Building on the risk reduction earned credit program.

  What they will learn at that hearing is in doubt though, since both the committee's Democratic majority and Gov. Dannel P. Malloy's administration have opted not to participate.

• Accurate!
  

  McMahon's ad focused on Murphy's low attendance rate at committee hearings. In response, Murphy states in his ad that "My voting record is 97 percent." That's true.

  According to GovTrack.us, a non-partisan group that tracks Congressional votes, Murphy missed 131 of the 5,034 votes taken since he joined Congress in 2007. That's a voting record of 97.4 percent, in line with the ad's claim.

  A year ago, Murphy's cumulative record was even higher - 98.5 percent. But that has slipped recently, and in the weeks since the end of the July Fourth recess - which were also the weeks leading up to last week's primary - Murphy missed nearly a quarter of the 105 votes cast, according to GovTrack.us. But for his entire Senate candidacy since his announcement in January 2011, Murphy has maintained a 96 percent voting record.

  In any event, the ad is accurate in saying his overall voting record is 97 percent.

  Most of the ad cites Murphy's work to secure funding to clean up the Waterbury Industrial Commons, a 29-acre site operated for decades by the Chase Brass & Copper Co.

  "I'm focused on creating jobs," Murphy says in the ad. "Like when I convinced Congress to invest in cleaning up this industrial site, putting 75 people to work."

  During World War II, the metals plant operated around the clock manufacturing war munitions, but after the company vacated the property in 1980, Waterbury was left with an environmental mess.

  In 2009, Murphy and Sen. Joseph Lieberman sponsored an earmark to the Defense Authorization bill to include $15 million for the Waterbury Industrial Commons Redevelopment Project. The bill passed with the funding intact and was signed by the president, and Murphy can fairly take credit for it. Of course, one man's "investment" may be another's wasteful earmark, but while the McMahon campaign has suggested the $15 million wasn't worth it, that doesn't change the accuracy of the ad.

  As for the claim of "putting 75 people to work," there is an ample record that the remediation and demolition work has involved that many people and more. These are not permanent positions, but Murphy's language - "putting ... people to work" - is sufficient to make the assertion accurate.

What else is new?

Wonder how long members had to hold they voted to endorse the person they demonized just a couple of weeks ago...

UPDATE: The Chris Murphy campaign released the following statement re: the latest poll from the right leaning Rasmussen Reports:

Any poll is a snapshot in time, and November is a long way away. We knew this was going to be a competitive race-McMahon has spent over $65 million trying to buy two elections now. But in the end, money doesn't buy elections and voters know that McMahon is only out for herself, while Chris has been fighting for middle class jobs in Connecticut.

In honor of the latest poll from the right leaning Rasmussen Reports, courtesy of Talking Points Memo, here's poll tracking data in the Senate race as well as the Presidential race and Gov. Malloy's job approval.

Really?

A YoutTube video showing a fight between two Hartford women has city leaders looking for constructive ways to address violence.

In a video shot by a camera phone, the women are outside of two buildings at 222 S. Marshall St. and one man even tries to break up the fight. According to neighbors, the fight started after one woman threatened to kick the other's pit bull if it bit her.

The most disturbing part of the video is when a child kicks one of the women in the head.

Mayor Pedro Segarra was upset with the footage.

"I do not want to shock people to try to get them to move and to move that moral compass," he said.

Looks like someone hasn't been paying attention.

April 2012 (left) Asylum and Trumbull Street, 10 months ago (right)

May 2011 (left), Albany Ave, May 2011 (right)

As someone who was raised in the North End section of Hartford, this level of violence is nothing new and until people get real serious about addressing the problems in the North End, except more videos like the ones above to go viral on YouTube.

If members of the AFL-CIO bailed on James Lawlor in 1992 because of his HORRIBLE progressive and women's rights track record, twenty years later, when it comes to those same matters, what makes Elizabeth Esty any different?

Remember what you said in the past...Jul 30 2012:

"I thought Emily's List was a cool thing - women supporting women - but not anymore," said Julie Kushner, a Danbury resident and director of UAW Region 9A. "I'm standing up with women of the 5th Congressional District and questioning Emily's List's  endorsement of Elizabeth Esty. Esty's record on women's issues falls short -- and doesn't compare to Chris Donovan's stellar support of issues important to women."

"In 2010, when Esty had an opportunity to help school paraprofessionals, most of whom are low-wage working women, she turned her back on us and voted against legislation1 that would have allowed us to earn family and medical leave benefits," said AFT Connecticut member Jane Blakeman, a paraprofessional in Watertown. "That's not the kind of representation we need in Washington."

During her only term in the General Assembly, Esty was among a group of legislators to propose an alternative budget that would have drastically cut public services, including healthcare coverage for women and domestic violence prevention.

1 SB 300 An Act Concerning Family and Medical Leave Benefits for Certain Municipal Employees. www.cga.ct.gov/2010/TS/S/2010SB-00300-R00APP-CV129-TS.htm

2 Synopsis of the Democratic Alternative Budget Plan  www.cga.ct.gov/2009/ofarpt/2009OFA-1956.htm

If it was good enough to withhold support for Lawlor 1992 then why isn't it good enough to do the same in 2012 when you have a candidate who, in the minds of many progressives, makes the winner of the Democratic primary twenty years ago look like a saint?

It should be simple...no deal, no dice.

Although EVERY media outlet knows that only Chris Donovan can remove his name from the Working Families Party line, leaders of the political group's State Committee felt the need to release the following statement )in order to pacify those who are still happily feeding on Donovan's post-primary carcus).

When Chris Dononvan returns from vacation, we'll have a conversation with him about remaining on the Working Families ballot line. State law leaves the decision in Chris Donovan's hands. If he chooses to give up the line, the Working Families Party will go through our regular, democratic process to determine how to fill the vacancy in the next few weeks.

While at best, Esty can hope that Donovan removes his name from the ballot and WFP decides to sit out the general. I would be stunned that the Party would endorse someone with a horrific record when it comes to progressive/working families values like the current Democratic candidate for the 5th CD.  

Recently, Chris Murphy for Senate campaign released a new ad that addressed Linda McMahon's silly charge that the Congressman was AWOL from his job.

PRESS RELEASE:

On Friday, the Chris Murphy for Senate campaign released their latest ad: "That's Real." In the ad, Murphy addresses McMahon's false and misleading attacks on his record. Murphy points out that McMahon will say and do anything to become Connecticut's next Senator, even if it means lying to voters.

Murphy has spent his career fighting for our middle class and bringing jobs back to Connecticut. In the ad, Murphy stands in front of an industrial site in Waterbury that he secured funding to clean up, creating 75 new jobs. Murphy explains that when the clean-up is complete, companies will be able to expand on this site, allowing for hundreds more Connecticut jobs to be created.

At the end of the ad, Murphy presents his record versus Linda's record to voters, telling them that the work he has done on behalf of Connecticut is "not just a plan" it's "real."

FACT CHECK:

For those of us who understand how Congress works, Linda McMahon's latest ad is laughable at best. Hopefully this slight of hand from McSteroids will not fool the public.

AFL-CIO President John Olsen, CTNJ today:

AFL-CIO President John Olsen told WDRC Host Brad Davis that he plans on calling House Speaker Chris Donovan Monday and asking him to get out of the race.

[...]

Olsen said he thinks it's not realistic for labor, which makes up a large segment of the Democratic party in Connecticut, to wait for somebody who is "pure" and will vote in favor of their agenda all of the time.

Olsen is advocating for party unity? That's not the same Olsen I remember...

Olsen has worked hard behind the scenes to deliver the endorsement for Lieberman.

[...]

Olsen said that the federation, if it endorses Lieberman, would stick with him even if he loses the primary and runs against the Democrats as an independent in November. "We endorse individuals," he said. "We don't endorse the party."

Although Lamont won the primary and Olsen faced mounting pressure to think about party over loyalty, Olsen opted to sit our the general and not hurt Lieberman's feelings as opposed to embracing the whole party unity theme.

You can't have it both ways John, and it's hypocritical for you to tell unions members to get behind a individual who many believe has a history of hostility towards principles shared by working families and labor.

Elizabeth Esty, a lawyer and mother of three turned state legislator from Cheshire, called to say she'd had it.

[...]

I grabbed my notebook and headed over to the Capitol, hoping to catch her before she recovered her party-approved talking points.

"The center is not being heard," Esty told me, launching into a lengthy list, from intractable unions to a misguided sick leave proposal and tax cuts for the wealthy. "What is happening in politics such that neither party is producing and supporting moderates?"

How so? She hears business leaders complain about how difficult this state can be, then watches fellow Democrats push for new mandates, such as state-imposed sick time rules...

If it was okay for Olsen to vote his conscious in 2006, why isn't okay for labor to vote their conscious in 2012?

Cross post from JOn Pelto's Wait, What?

Over the weekend, a reader wrote to ask why I often refer to Paul Vallas as Bridgeport's "part-time," superintendent of schools.

The reason is that, by comparison, Connecticut's other superintendents approach their jobs as full-time leaders.

Like a ship's captain, they see their duty as being on the bridge, at all times.  They believe their duty is to ensure that students, teachers, administrators, staff and parents know that there is one person at the top of the chain of command.

Back on June 26, 2012, Team Vallas responded to concerns about the Superintendent's schedule by posting on their "Questions Forum" Paul Vallas' schedule from January till June.  They marked what days he worked in Bridgeport, and what day he was "out of the district."

We know Vallas has a private consulting business.  His company signed a $1 million deal to work in Illinois, and the joint venture he has with The Cambium Learning Group out of Dallas, Texas, recently signed an $18 million contract to work in Indianapolis.  He also continues to consult in Haiti.

The response that Team Vallas put up on the Questions Forum claimed that, "in total, from January 1st to June 21st there were 119 working days in the District.  When balanced out with any complete weekend days worked, the Superintendent has worked a total of 112 of those days."

Now that would make it appear that Paul Vallas WORKED 112 of the 119 working days, but needless to say, that isn't true.

There is more below the fold...
When you look at his schedule, there were 17 days that teachers worked, but the captain of the ship wasn't around.  And because he "works" on many weekends, there were more than a dozen weekend days that Vallas got paid for working, but there were no students or teachers around.

That means that more than 25 percent of the time, there was a crew on deck, but no captain, or a captain at the helm, but no crew.

In addition, over those twenty-five weeks, Vallas took at least 11 paid vacation or paid time-off days.

You can be sure that no other Connecticut superintendent was absent that much of the time.

And, of course, few make $229,000 (only Wilton and Westport pay more.)

So, combine all those two facts, and Vallas gets labeled Bridgeport's, part-time, superintendent of schools here at Wait, What?

Unfortunately, Team Vallas hasn't updated the Superintendent's schedule since June 21st, but rumors had him off consulting in Haiti, Dallas and elsewhere over the past 2 months.

At this point, if the general election was today, there is no way Elizabeth Esty would come out victorious against Andrew Roraback. Between countless conversations I've had with union members, progressive groups, state lawmakers, and fifth district DTC members, Esty is in DEEP trouble.

With most of the grumblings are happening behind the scenes, the intense opposition towards Esty is starting to boil over into the public and Jon Lender's piece in the Courant only scratches the surface when

Recently, Universal Health Care Foundation of Connecticut President Juan Figueroa sent this message to supporters.

On Tuesday, bold progressive Chris Donovan congratulated opponent Elizabeth Esty for her victory in the Democratic congressional primary. But he's not technically out of the race yet.

That's because the Working Families Party has a line on the November ballot, and Chris won the Working Families Party nomination. This ballot line is reserved for candidates who have a real commitment to the issues of importance to working families -- the issues that Chris has successfully championed for years.

One local activist was quoted this week as saying Chris should give up the Working Families Party nomination.

But the real issue is that whomever takes on Republican Andrew Rohrbach this November will have no chance of winning unless they campaign on popular, progressive principles -- like promising no cuts to Social Security and Medicare.

Click here to thank Chris Donovan for a lifetime of fighting for working families, and urge him to stay on Working Families Party line until Elizabeth Esty publicly campaigns on the popular progressive issues needed to win.

On many of core issues of importance to working families, Elizabeth Esty's position is unclear -- hurting Democrat's chances in November.

Chris clearly opposed any cuts to Medicare and Social Security benefits, including raising the retirement age and means testing. He addressed our broken democracy by supporting a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United and a federal version of Connecticut's Clean Elections law. And he stood up for unions and pledged to support the Employee Free Choice Act.

In order for Democrats to win this seat in November, Elizabeth Esty needs to address these issues of importance to working families.

Join us in thanking Chris for standing on principle, and ask him to hold on to his Working Families Party ballot line until Elizabeth Esty proves she will fight for working families.

Thanks for being a bold progressive,

Juan Figueroa

As I stated here and on Twitter, one person is responsible for this mess and it's NOT Chris Donovan. Elizabeth Esty would had probably won the primary WITHOUT trashing Donovan's progressive principles...the same principles a majority of Democrats in the 5th believed in (e.g., state budget, Paid Sick Leave).

If the adults in the room don't get together and make the deal, you will definitely see a repeat of 1992 and the amazing coalition Chris Murphy formed in the district will be shattered.

...I think I'm going to be sick.

Ha ha!

The Democratic nominee for the open seat in the Fifth Congressional District told Face the State host Dennis House on Thursday that she has not read the blogs for months and months. House asked Esty to comment on a quote from My Left Nutmeg, comparing her to Pinnocchio and that pesky nose that would grow whenever he told a lie. Princess Elizabeth, Duchess of Cheshire, knew nothing of it. She does not read blogs.

Hmm...Is this the same Esty I interviewed at the convention? The same Esty whose campaign flooded my email inbox with press releases and stuff until I jumped off ship when they decided to attack Democrats who stood up for working families during the bitterly fought state budget battle?

Look, I'm not bother in the least with Esty's answer. I've seen my fair share of campaigns in my time so I (and just about everyone else in the know) get the deal as it would be unwise to appear defensive in the eyes of public who will be voting in the general election.

What should be paramount on Esty's mind (and that of her campaign team) is mending ways with the groups she pissed off during the primary and getting everyone on board for the common good of the party.

I know Esty is a very intelligent individual and knows that she needs to get together with Donovan, do the right thing, and make a deal. Not doing the right thing could very well result in kissing an important voting bloc goodbye (e.g., good luck winning the general with people in cities such as Meriden and New Britain sitting the general out).

You think Kristen Gillbrand would be senator of New York without agreeing to make a change in direction in certain matters?

The whispers of "Mary Glassman for Congress 2014" from some circles are real and should be of great concern to those who worked their asses to do chance the district from red to blue. I don't want to endure two years of my district under Republican rule so I'm hoping the adults in the room will start acting like adults before it's too late...hopefully my message won't fall on deaf ears.

Cross post from Jon Pelto's Wait What?

A controversy has developed surrounding a proposed August 22, 2012 candidate forum, at which Bridgeport's Board of Education candidates, would have an opportunity to debate and discuss the issues prior to the September 5th special election that will finally ensure that Bridgeport's citizens are represented by a democratically elected Board of Education.

Yesterday, the two candidates from the Working Families Party, Barbara Pouchet and John Bagley, announced that they would not participate in the forum because it is being co-hosted by Excel Bridgeport, Inc.

The Working Family candidates said that participating would "serve to legitimize an organization whose objective is to eliminate the right of Bridgeport's parents, taxpayers and citizens to cast ballots for members of our Board of Education."

There is no doubt that Excel Bridgeport was a leader in the effort to convince the State of Connecticut to take over the Bridgeport School System and remove the democratically elected members of Bridgeport's school board.  In addition, Excel Bridgeport actively lobbied on behalf of Governor Malloy's "education reform" bill and the organization has also spent significant resources in support for Mayor Bill Finch's efforts to change Bridgeport's Charter, by eliminating the elected board of education and replacing it was an appointed board that would allow stronger mayoral control over the education budget and school issues.

In response to the news that the two Working Family candidates were not going to participate, Maria Zambrano, Excel Bridgeport's Executive Director, maintained their stance that they are simply seeking "to provide Bridgeport voters and community members an opportunity to hear directly from all Board of Education candidates before the September 4th election. All BOE candidates were invited and encouraged to attend."

But of course, that argument misses the point.

Read more below the fold...
No one should deny Excel Bridgeport the right to hold as many candidate forums as it wants, inviting and encouraging whomever they want to attend.

The real issue is whether the League of Women Voters should be co-hosting a candidate forum with a group like Excel Bridgeport.

According to their history and mission statement, "The League of Women Voters is a citizens' organization that has fought since 1920 to improve our government and engage all citizens in the decisions that impact their lives...The League is nonpartisan, which means we don't support or oppose candidates for public office. However, we are well-known for hosting candidate debates and forums.  We undertake this, and other important election work, because we believe deeply that the public should hear different views on the issues facing our communities and our nation. An honest and respectful sharing of ideas is vital to the functioning of American democracy."

The League's dedication to its mission is so great that in 1988, the League actually took the unprecedented step of "withdrawing sponsorship of the presidential debates."  At the time, Nancy Newuman, the League' president, said they were taking this action because; "the League has no intention of becoming an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American public."

Reasonable people can disagree about whether the Working Family Party candidates should or should not attend a forum co-sponsored by Excel Bridgeport, but there is simply no doubt that Excel Bridgeport has played a leadership role in Connecticut's "education reform" movement, an effort that is systematically anti-teacher, anti-union and anti-democratic, and instead, dedicated to promoting the corporatization and privatization of public education.

Not only has Excel Bridgeport spent tens of thousands of dollars seeking to persuade public officials to take particular actions, but during the recent Supreme Court on the Bridgeport takeover, Excel Bridgeport submitted a legal brief urging the Supreme Court to allow the state's illegal takeover to stand, thereby preventing the people of Bridgeport from having democratically elected representatives.

While Excel Bridgeport's participation is the candidate debate is objectionable and I too would refuse to participate if I was a candidate, the real shock is that the League of Women voters would lower its standards and co-host a public forum with a group that is diametrically opposed to the legacy that has always guided the League and its actions.

The controversy is that the League has yet to withdraw as a co-sponsor or ask Excel Bridgeport to withdraw so that a true League of Women Voter's based forum can go forward.

For more background check out The Only in Bridgeport blog: http://onlyinbridgeport.com/wo...

Remember this guy?

As someone from Danbury, I know a thing or two about the fifth Congressional District and when it comes to Elizabeth Esty's chances in winning the seat if Chris Donovan's name appears on the Working Families Party line, you only need to look at recent history...

NYT 10.24.92

Even supporters of Representative Gary Franks, the first black Republican elected to Congress since the 1930's, describe his first term as inauspicious. But the 39-year-old former alderman from Waterbury is now considered the front-runner in his re-election bid -- helped, oddly enough, by his most vitriolic opponent's decision to stay in the race.

Mr. Franks, who won his nomination through something of a fluke in a six-way race, is benefiting from Connecticut's three-party politics. A Connecticut Party, Gov. Lowell P. Weicker Jr.'s independent vehicle, has provided a home for State Representative Lynn Taborsak, a 49-year-old plumber from Danbury and the unexpected loser in a bitter Democratic primary fight.

Ms. Taborsak and the Democratic nominee, James Lawlor, a Waterbury Probate Court judge, now seem to be splitting the large anti-Franks vote in this diverse district, which stretches northwest from the bucolic northeastern suburbs of New York City through the conservative, working-class Naugatuk Valley to the old brass-making city of Waterbury.

[...]

Ms. Taborsak's liberalism and environmentalism gives her a solid base, but it alienates swing and conservative voters. And Mr. Lawlor's opposition to abortion has led some of Ms. Taborsak's supporters to make Mr. Franks their second choice. A Lawlor poll of 401 likely voters taken three weeks ago showed him trailing Mr. Franks by 16 points, 41 percent to 25 percent. Ms. Taborsak had 17 percent in the survey, which had a margin of error of 4 percentage points.

Because of Taborsak appearance on the A Connecticut Party line, the Democratic Party vote was split and we lost a golden opportunity to unseat a man who had no business being a Congressman.

The past presents the future...food for thought.

Remember when I said this about Chris Donovan and Elizabeth Esty:

...these two people better place their attack dogs back in the kennel and patch things up or else we'll be saying Congressman Roraback in Nov.

Well, recent developments doesn't give me any optimism when it comes to the district staying blue.

Here's the problem...

As of now, Donovan's name will still appear on the November ballot under the Working Families Party line and Donovan is the only person who can remove his name from the ballot.

It didn't go unnoticed that Donovan didn't mention Esty's name in his concession speech nor did it go unnoticed that he did not give any indication on whether or not he would remove his name from the general election ballot.

On Wednesday afternoon, the Working Families Party released this statement:

US Senate candidate Chris Murphy and several State Senate and Assembly candidates backed by the Connecticut Working Families Party have made it through their primaries to the general election in November.

"Congratulations to Chris Murphy for winning his primary today" said Lindsay Farrell,  Executive Director of the Connecticut Working Families Party. "We're already geared up to elect Murphy to the Senate in November. In the House, Chris Murphy fought for an economy that works for everyone. That's what we need in the Senate."

"While it doesn't look like Chris Donovan will win the Democratic nomination, we are proud of the work we've done for working families champions in a hectic and crowded primary season. We've worked hard for both Chris Murphy and Chris Donovan, and built a stronger grassroots movement. Going forward, we'll look at all the candidates and stand by the one who can best fight for working families, as we always do."

It didn't go unnoticed that the WFP didn't mention Esty's name or call for Donovan to remove his name from the ballot, which is why Connecticut Democratic Party Chairwoman released her unity statement.

Then comes this...

Chris Donovan may not have received the Democratic nomination Tuesday, but his name will still appear on the ballot in November under the Working Families Party line.

Donovan has not said whether he would support the Democratic nominee Elizabeth Esty and it's unclear if he will take his campaign any further.

"Chris is going to go on vacation and the campaign will not have any comment until he returns," Gabe Rosenberg, Donovan's campaign spokesman, said Wednesday evening. He's expected to be gone for a week or less.

[...]

Democratic party leaders have privately expressed concern about the potential for another three-way race. It's thought that Donovan could siphon off enough votes from Esty to cost the party a seat they've held for the past six years under U.S. Rep. Chris Murphy.

Make no mistake about it, Donovan's name on the ballot will ABSOLUTELY result in the Democrats losing the  district. After trashing a state budget that was supported by the Democratic establishment and casting votes which were extremely unpopular among progressive groups, and giving the green light to her attack dogs to viciously smear Donovan's leadership as Speaker of the House, Esty is going to have a hard enough time swaying Donovan supporters to jump on her bandwagon and assist in her desperately needed GOTV operations...and she'll need their support if she has any chance in coming close to beating Andrew Roraback.

If Donovan's name remains on the ballot, Esty is toast. While I can't see Donovan playing the role of the spoiler, his silence regarding removing his name from the ballot has a LOT of people at Democratic Headquarters concerned. If Esty and Donovan don't come together for the good of the party, we might as well start recruiting Mary Glassman to run against Congressman Roraback in 2014.

Too funny!

On the first day of what will be an endless, epic and costly U.S. Senate battle, Chris Murphy demanded a debate next week on what has become the centerpiece of Linda McMahon's campaign - jobs.

"We are not exactly sure what her plan is," Murphy said in Wallingford.  "I have a suggestion on how to solve this: I think Linda McMahon should get together [with me] next week and debate her record on jobs against my record on jobs ... Let's not wait until September or October."

"I am sure her schedule is busy, but I'm also sure she can find and hour and a half of her time any day next week to get together and debate where Linda McMahon wants to bring this state on jobs and where I want to bring this state."

At a Fairfield deli Wednesday, McMahon rejected Murphy's request for an immediate debate on jobs. She termed his plan a work in progress that wasn't ready for prime time.

"When he decides to come forth with his [jobs plan] we will have a debate about jobs," McMahon said.

Ahem...Murphy PRESS RELEASE, June 18th 2012

ROCKY HILL-Chris Murphy today launched his statewide Getting to Work Tour, which will take him across Connecticut on a jobs tour with a new twist: along with meeting local business owners to talk about how Connecticut's next U.S. Senator can help spur job creation, he'll also work alongside employees at each stop.  The focus of the tour is to hear from both business owners and workers to get their ideas and perspective on job growth and the future of Connecticut's economy.  

Murphy kicked off the tour at AdChem Manufacturing Techonologies in Manchester, where he spoke with employees and supporters on the shop floor. He later visited Total Image Beauty and Barber in Stamford, where he swept the floors and discussed jobs and hiring with barbers and barber students.

"We've all seen politicians taking a top-down approach, telling business owners and workers what they need, but our Getting to Work tour is different," said Murphy. "Listening has become a lost art in government-I got into public service in the first place because I just thought that my government wasn't listening to me anymore. That's why I hold my office hours in supermarkets and shopping plazas, and why I go door to door even when it's not an election year. There are five basic ideas that are the root of my jobs plan, but I will constantly seek input from people across the state to help grow Connecticut's economy by leaps and bounds."

Simplify the tax code - The current complexity of our tax code puts small and medium sized businesses and their employees at a disadvantage, while big corporations that can employ an army of accountants are too often able to get around paying their fair share. We should get rid of the loopholes, the credits, and deductions in the business tax code, and use the savings to lower the rate. It also doesn't make sense that many employees are paying a higher effective income tax rate than their employer. We should extend the Bush tax cuts for 99% of Americans, but instead of keeping taxes at a 60-year low for the richest 1% percent, let's take that money and use half of it to pay down the deficit, and half of it to help pay for college for the middle class and job training for the out of work.

Promote and strengthen American manufacturing - Our economy just can't survive if we don't make things here.  The good news is that factory jobs are slowly but steadily coming back to America.  In the last three years, the United States has added a quarter million new manufacturing jobs.  And here are two things we can do to help this trend continue: first, make purchases of new machinery tax-free.  In the last few years, Congress has temporarily expedited the depreciation of new equipment, but we should say once and for all that we are not going to tax investment in factory floors.  Second, the quickest way to bring manufacturing jobs back is for the federal government to buy more things from U.S. companies. This idea came from listening to Connecticut manufacturers, and from there helped build the Buy American movement in Congress. Though we've made progress, we know we could create 600,000 jobs alone if we just closed up the most egregious loopholes in the current Buy American laws.

Reinvest in our transportation infrastructure - It's time to rebuild America's roads and rails. While China spends 9% of its wealth on infrastructure, Europe spends 5%, and the U.S. spends 2.5%. If we can't move people and goods efficiently across and out of our country, our economy will suffer. Here in Connecticut, federal spending on roads and rails is especially important, and our state does better than most when it comes to how federal transportation dollars are allocated. We get $1.60 back from every dollar we send to Washington. That means we could put a lot of out of work construction workers back on the job, at a discount to Connecticut taxpayers.

Make education a priority - We know that our country is never going to be the cheapest place in the world to make a widget, so instead we need to be the smartest place. Cutting funding for education and job training would be a disaster for job creation. Education is the lifeline for thousands of kids and workers who know that the only way to compete globally is be smarter and better trained than workers overseas. We should take half the money we'd save from not extending tax cuts for the wealthy, and invest it in making college cheaper and job training more accessible.

Lead the way in renewable energy - Renewable energy is the next big global industry, and we have to ensure that America leads the way in order to keep those jobs in the United States. Continued reliance on oil will leave us in the dust, but if we are able to create new technology in this emerging field, strong job growth will follow. The market-not the government-should decide which technologies win or lose in the effort to meet this standard.  If we do this now, we can help grow millions of jobs in renewable energy here in America.

No wonder Linda avoided talking to the media during the primary...keeping her blunders to a minimum is critical if she expects anyone to take her seriously.

In an effort to being priamry fractions together for the common good, Connecticut Democratic Party Chairwoman Nancy DiNardo issued the following statement:

"Now that the primaries are over, I'd like to congratulate our candidates on their victories. I'm proud of the hard work and well run campaigns that all Democrats waged this primary season. Now it's time to come together.  There are distinct differences between our party and the Republican Party; different visions for future of Connecticut and the country.  Now it's time to unite around the ideas that bind us together: policies that give the middle class a fair shot at attaining the American dream---a roof over one's head, the ability to educate one's children, and access affordable healthcare. Now it's time to work together to get our message out to the voters of Connecticut."

Hopefully, this won't fall of deaf ears...

Press release from the SOTS office:

Secretary of the State Denise Merrill today notified Registrars of Voters and Town Clerks in New Haven, West Haven, Hartford and Windsor they have until August 21, 2012 to conduct recounts after close votes in General Assembly primaries in their municipalities that took place on Tuesday August 14th.  The recounts will be conducted in for the General Assembly district 116 in West Haven and part of New Haven after the count on primary night showed Democrat Lou Esposito receiving 548 votes while his opponent David Forsyth received 537, a margin of 11 votes.  There is also a tie vote in General Assembly district 5 in Hartford and Windsor, where Democrats Leo Canty and Brandon McGee each received 774 votes after the initial count on Tuesday August 14th.

"At this point only 11 votes separate the candidates in the hotly contested Democratic legislative primary in West Haven and New Haven so by law that race will be automatically recounted by local Registrars of Voters," said Secretary Merrill, Connecticut's chief elections official.  "We also appear to have a tie vote in the 5th legislative district primary in Hartford and Windsor, and one of the candidates has requested a recount.  If that recount still results in a tie vote, we will have an adjourned, tie-breaker primary on September 4th for registered Democrats in the district to choose between the three candidates on the ballot for that seat.  This should serve as a good reminder why it is so important that everyone who is eligible cast a ballot - since every vote truly does count!"

According to state law, automatic "close vote" recounts are triggered by election results where the margin for a particular seat is either within 0.5% of the total votes cast or within 20 votes.  The defeated candidate also has the ability to waive their right to a recount if they so choose.  There are also discrepancy recounts that can be called for by election moderators if there is a discrepancy in the results.  Pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes 9-311 and 9-311a, recounts are to be conducted by election moderators and supervised by Registrars of Voters.  The recounts for the 2012 Primary Elections must be complete by Tuesday August 21, 2012.

For a tie primary vote, Connecticut general statutes 9-446 allows the chair of the political party or either of the affected candidates to ask for a recount of votes from that district, or they can agree to forego the recount and hold an adjourned primary to be held on Tuesday September 4, 2012.

In Hartford's primary for General Assembly District #5, initial tabulations had Democrat Leo Canty receiving 774 votes - the same as his opponent Brandon McGee.  In the Assembly District #116, the initial count on primary night had Democrat Lou Esposito leading opponent David Forsyth by a count of 548-537 votes, a margin of 11 votes.

First off, let me apologize if this write-up isn't polished. I've been dealing with a terrible illness in my family and I haven't had any productive time to express my thoughts regarding the primary into words. If this post rambles a bit, my apologies...trust me, you would be off your game also if you were in my shoes right now. I'll clean up this post throughout the day, I just felt that it was important to get my thoughts out there as soon as possible. -ctblogger.

I have to admit, I had a good chuckle reading the Monday night quarterbacking by the so-called analysis regarding last night's primary in the 5th CD.

I'm going to make this short and to the point.

From one reporter's laughable claim that labor is no longer a factor in campaigns (funny how they were so important in Gov. Malloy's victory just two years ago) and a columnist claiming that the state party is to blame for Donovon's loss, to people claiming that last nights victory was a resounding defeat for progressive principles, it seems like most people are missing the big picture.

Elizabeth Esty win had less to do with Elizabeth Esty campaign for Congress and had more to do with the fact that she wasn't Chris Donovan (plus his baggage).

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that the scandal the engulfed Donovan's campaign (and some argue his refusal to be more forthcoming in terms of answering lingering questions regarding elements of the investigation) all but torpedoed his candidacy.

Lets be honest, before the FBI investigation, both Esty and Dan Roberti were nothing more than blips on the screen; two candidates who should be blessed that they were able to "persuade" enough convention delegates switched their votes in order for them to get spot on the ballot. If anyone believes that one term State Rep with abre bones voting record would had won the primary if the FBI investigation that snagged Donovan's campaign never occurred, then you're simply being delusional.

Regardless of the spin from Esty's camp, it's clear to most people in the know that Donovan's troubles sealed his defeat and Esty made wisely took advantage of the former House Speaker's troubles with a barrage of mailers and statements that highlighted the FBI investigation.

...and the constant headlines regarding the scandal Donovan endured didn't help things for him also.

Pat Scully nailed it when he said...

In the end, the dark cloud of federal investigations spelled doom for two candidates seeking their party's nomination for hotly contested offices. In Connecticut's 5th congressional district, state Speaker of the House Chris Donovan's campaign crashed and burned after months of news coverage about alleged wrongdoing in his campaign fundraising and alleged legislation fixing (Donovan is not charged or accused).

In short, Chris Donovan lost because of Chris Donovan. Some would argue that his fall from grace started when he refused to relinquish control of the House as Speaker. Others will argue that, at best, Donovan demonstrated poor management as top people in his camp allegedly took money in exchange to torpedo a bill. There are others who could also argue that Donovan's handling of the scandal was ill-advised. One thing is for certain, in a state that has seen it's fair share of political scandals, voters get REAL turned off if there is even a hint of political corruption. Realists would consider Esty "underdog" victory as more a win by default because in simple terms, in the minds of voters, the so-called front-runner had egg on his face.

That being said, with the primary in our rear view mirror, what should be a real concern on the minds of Democrats in the 5th district is how will the party move forward and win in November. Here's my answer: Based on what I've seen and read from Donovan and Esty supporters, I haven't a fucking clue.

The back and forth between the two candidates was ugly to say the least. Although I tried to stay neutral, even I jumped ship (and admittedly at time off the deep end) once Esty's camp gave Emily's List and supporters the green light to attack the the Democratic state budget. The smearing of progressives and activists who fought to protect services from receiving the chopping block left a real bitter taste in my mouth and the mouths of progressives who stood by Donovan....and the same bloc of supporters Esty will need in order to have a chance against Andrew Roraback.

Bigelow nailed it (complete with maps!)

Esty's challenge will be to win over Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents in the cities after a nasty primary, and to make sure the coalition of voters that elected U.S. Rep. Chris Murphy in three successive elections stays together elsewhere.

And there lies Esty's problem: attracting progressive supporters and organizations (a.k.a. the people who played a key part in Murphy's victories) to get past the mudslinging during the primary on board her bandwagon and work for the common good of the Democratic Party.

From his victory in 2006, and re-election victories in 2008 and 2010 Chris Murphy knew that the a main contributor to his victories were due to his strong popularity among progressives, labor groups, as well as moderates. These are KEY groups that Esty will desperately need if she is to have a remote shot in defeating Roraback. Given that Donovan didn't mention her name in his concession speech and hasn't withdrawn his name from the Working Families Party line, if Democrats are to have a shot in winning against a Nancy Johnson-like moderate Republican who will EASILY appeal to independents, Esty better start reaching out and making peace ASAP.

Remember, were now in the general election mode, the arguments made during the primary no longer apply...or will be as effective. For instance, let me put on my GOP hat show you how the far right will possibly go after Esty.

GOP: Esty is a tax and spend liberal who can't be trusted.

Esty: I fought against my party's leadership and called for fiscal responsibility.

GOP: Esty said she voted against Donovan's budget when in fact she VOTED IN FAVOR of Donovan's budget that became law...Esty is a tax and spend liberal who can't be trusted.

Esty: "but..."

GOP: Esty also voted to for tax and spend Donovan as Speaker of the House!

Esty: "but..."

GOP: Esty didn't see a tax increase she didn't like...she even voted in favor of higher taxes on hotels!

Esty: "but..."

GOP: TAX AND SPEND!!!!!!

That's just a VERY small glimpse in what Esty should expect as she attempts to persuade independents...while having to worry about something I heard one too many times over the last couple of weeks: elements of the Democratic base possibly deciding to sit the general election out and look towards 2014 (paging Mary Glassman).

As I said last night, for the sake of keeping the 5th District blue, I hope Esty and Donovan can act like grown ups, put their primary mud slinging behind them, get their supporters to work for the common good...or else we'll be saying Congressman Roraback in November.